Tuesday, September 11, 2012

Followers Squared. Your Follower's Followers


The whole fake follower’s thing on Twitter is so boringly, mind numbingly crass.  The concept of people buying followers is just so indicative of the worst sides of human nature that I have to pause for a minute, gather myself and calm down.

Who would buy fake followers?  Recent research is showing that many people in the public eye have and do. see Social Media Today Blog Article on Fake Followers  The people and presumably the Marketing agencies that did this must have realised that it would backfire sooner or later. What were they doing?

It was only a matter of time before the Data would show up the facts and the inconsistencies.  The blatantly obvious thing about social media is that it is all recorded on servers and the data can be examined in infinitesimal detail at any subsequent time.  Eventually the data is crunched by some clever bit of software and the Walls of Social Media Faking Jericho come tumbling down.

Surely one of the main things about Social Media is the need for reality.  Social Transparency is the key word.  That’s why you can’t be a Celebrity who two times your wife anymore, or a regime that represses it’s people and pretends it isn’t .  Social Media is about real communication, between real people and we are all getting better at using it and spotting the fakers.

Come on Guys GET REAL!

I could go on, but I won’t ………

A good way to establish influence on Twitter and to examine the reach of a Twitter user is to look at the followers of their followers.  For the sake of this article I have called this Followers Squared as in effect I am saying that we can best judge Twitter influence by multiplying Twitter users follower’s by their follower’s follower numbers.  Followerwonk is a useful tool for looking at Twitter follower statistics and here I am using figures taken from Followerwonk showing the followers of various people and how many followers their followers have (Followers Squared).

These pictures show the follower’s followers (Follower Squared) stats of two famous politicians. Although they both have staggeringly high follower counts (multi million) they perform particularly badly when you start looking at their Follower Squared stats (particularly note the average and median followers of followers) ……




The following BBC Journalistic has far fewer followers (around 6,000) but has particularly good Follower Squared stats.  Also check his Average of 1901!! His Twitter account also ranks higher than both the politicians on Google too ….. of course there is a correspondence! 




I wouldn’t dare infer that these politicians might have fake followers but I would say that the BBC Journalist doesn’t and is obviously very influential when tweeting and being re-tweeted.
And er … um …. I better come clean ……… here are my stats …..



Phew! not too bad ……. I like my average and median ….. but don’t worry I won’t be standing for President … just yet ……. I can’t …. I’m British …… but David Cameron better watch out! …

And I’m sure that I could appeal to a few ….. Twitter Moms ….. ;)

By SEO STEER

Tuesday, September 4, 2012

Twitter SEO Top 30

It's quite easy to find out who are the top Twitter users, by follower numbers, by going to sites such as twitaholic.com/ or twittercounter.com/pages/100. However for those involved in SEO, what is more interesting, is the relevant SERPs positions of Twitter users accounts.  So, to help, I have produced a Twitter SEO Top 30.  This list is interesting, as it shows that follower numbers, are not as direct a link to SERPs position as one might think.  In fact one of the top ten accounts has only around 6389 followers (Pallab Ghosh ) and is ranked higher than Lady GaGa with 29,000,971 followers.  As to why this is, I will allow readers to draw their own conclusions. I have a few ideas, but want to do more research.
Anyway I have used the Google search ........

“on Twitter” site:https://twitter.com/ 

that I used in my previous post ‘Which is best for SEO Facebook or Twitter?’ , to bring up the Google SERPs for Twitter accounts worldwide.  On checking my results, these seem to be worldwide, but from an anglicised perspective i.e. an amalgamation of English speaking countries. So here is the Twitter SEO Top 30 for 2nd September 2012....


Position                    Followers                               Account

  1                              2606286                             Tiger Woods
  2                              1695028                             Katie Price/Jordan

  3                              4756574                             Stephen Fry
  4                                382502                             The British Monarchy
  5                              7376837                             Justin Beiber
  6                                    5840                             JoomlArt
  7                                    6389                             Pallab Ghosh
  8                              3058448                             Steve Martin
  9                              1616954                             WordPress
 10                               120504                             WikiLeaks
 11                           29000971                             Lady Gaga
 12                             1398868                             Calvin Harris
 13                             1305770                             Ian Poulter
 14                             6504135                             Conan O'Brien
 15                             1129144                             Curiosity Rover
 16                             2138384                             John Cleese
 17                             3717489                             Lance Armstrong
 18                             5592135                             Jessica Simpson
 19                               799442                             Brian Cox
 20                             3328931                             Dwayne Johnson
 21                           12942873                             50cent
 22                             7105404                             Arnold Schwarzenegger
 23                             2574469                             Example
 24                             1351572                             Richard Branson
 25                             2452927                             One Direction
 26                             6299708                             Miley Ray Cyrus
 27                             8464021                             London 2012
 28                             1589777                             Tate
 29                               713562                             Tinie Tempah    
 30                             1566720                             O2

I will be continuing to research this area and will post more as I find out more.

BY SEO STEER

SEO Specialist David Steer @SEO_Steer Twitter SEO Top 30

Tuesday, August 28, 2012

Which is best for SEO? Facebook or Twitter?


How well Google can index Facebook or Twitter is dependent upon how much data is made available to it from these private networks and how full an indexing they could handle without them grinding to a halt.  One would think that Google needs to index the whole of the internet if their service is to remain valid, but Facebook and Twitter are basically private networks so can only be comprehensively indexed if the owners allow it.

Of course, there will always be private networks on the Internet, but if those parts of the Internet are as big as Facebook and Twitter, then search engines will start to have problems of validity, as Social Media grows, if they are unable to represent them properly to their search users.  Real time indexing of these Social Media services is no longer done by Google, much to the disappointment of many, but the users of both Facebook and Twitter are indexed and their SERP results will be important to those interested in SEO.

So, the practical question at hand is …… Which is better for SEO, Facebook or Twitter?  If a person or a firm has only enough time to concentrate on one of the platforms from an SEO point of view, which one should be chosen?  Here is a practical way that I used to answer this question, it may have some flaws, but I believe it gives a good indication to the answer.  So, this is what I did……..

On Google I used this search…

 “is on Facebook” site:www.facebook.com/

This search brings up all the users on Facebook that are currently indexed by Google. The number of results found was 690,000,000 which corresponds well to Wikipedia’s estimation of the number of users on Facebook.  The top five results were … The British Monarchy, Sarah Palin, Facebook itself, George W Bush and the Dali Lama.  A motley crew, but those I made the contenders for Facebook (It’ll all make sense soon, be patient).  I kept that browser window open.

In another browser window I put this search into Google

“on Twitter” site:https://twitter.com/

This search brings up all the users on Twitter that are currently indexed by Google. The number of people on Twitter is not really agreed upon, but a general estimate is 500 million.  The number of results this search found was 1,460,000,000.  The difference in the numbers, I would consider, is due to a less definitive search and a preponderance of spam bot Twitter accounts.  The top five Twitter users on my search were … Tiger Woods, Kanye West, 50 Cent, Stephen Fry and Justin Beiber.  These I made the contenders for Twitter.

Now to find out which is better for SEO Facebook or Twitter?  I took the top contender from Facebook, the British Monarchy, and pitted it against Tiger Woods for Twitter. Opened Google in a new browser window and entered this search…….

"Tiger Woods (TigerWoods) on Twitter" | "The British Monarchy Facebook"

This search was designed to find the Tiger Woods Twitter account and the British Monarchy Facebook page.  The one that is ranked highest in the SERP is of course the SEO Winner!

and the winner was ………. The British Monarchy!

I repeated the process with the losing contender facing off with the next contender down on the winning Social Media’s side. So the next search was ………

"Tiger Woods (TigerWoods) on Twitter " | "Sarah Palin Facebook"

and the winner was ………. Sarah Palin!

Tiger Woods had to face one Facebook Contender after another …. Facebook itself, George W Bush, the Dalai Lama and was beaten by all of them!  He continued squaring up to Facebook contenders until he reached search page 10 of the Facebook users, and had a face off against ….. Lee Minho?!?

"Tiger Woods (TigerWoods) on Twitter " | "Lee Minho Facebook"



and the winner was (at last) Tiger Woods!

The conclusion has to be that if Lee Minho only used Facebook and Tiger Woods only used Twitter and they both had no other internet presence. Then, as a Google user, it would seem that Lee Minho was more famous than Tiger Woods!!!

So that’s it then……

Which is better for SEO, Facebook or Twitter?

No contest…….

Facebook is better than Twitter for SEO.

By SEO STEER

Is the age of the search engine over?


When I first used the Internet in 1987 I was setting up a multi-site email system for a UK based company. Later, in 1992, I started using bulletin boards that had to be dialled into directly by modem. 1993 was my first experience of the World Wide Web, using the Mosaic Browser on Windows 3.1 through a 56K modem. The method used was to enter a URL into the browser which then took you to the Web site. Once there we had the ability to jump between pages or navigate to other Web Sites through Hyperlinks (Yes we called them Hyper in those days). Most of my early explorations were done using magazine listings of web sites which were ubiquitous at the time. It was just a case of finding a web site that interested you in the web site listings magazine, then typing the URL from the magazine into the Mosaic browser and ‘Hey Presto’ you were surfing the web! Once there, you would often see links to other web sites and so you would begin a sometimes interesting, but often a disappointing /boring /unusual /irrelevant trip around the web. The whole concept of a network of information as intended by Sir Tim Berners-Lee hadn’t yet been grasped by the users of the Internet. Probably because the whole concept of a democratic network of information, where you were both a consumer and a provider of information, was so hard for us to grasp. We were used to a top down hierarchical model of Information distribution. Initially we received information about the world through Clerics and Town Criers, then 500 years ago we had the revolution of the printing press, then much later radio and TV accelerated things once more, but they were all top down, hierarchical and broadcasted means of information distribution, a one to many model. We just weren’t used to the new paradigm of Information distribution and exchange that was the Internet when it first appeared.

 So that’s why Search Engines became successful so quickly. We had to have a way of indexing the information on the internet in a hierarchical manner so that we could begin to comprehend and navigate its growing enormity and complexity. We took to search engines like a fishes to water. I seem to remember that Alta Vista was all the rage and like so many others I made it my home page on my browser. It was the starting point at which I went off on my wondrous journeys on the web. That was almost twenty years ago now and you know what ……….. I rarely start my journeys on the internet on a search engine anymore. I’m willing to bet that you don’t either. I believe that the reason for this is that we are beginning to catch up with the paradigm of networked information and how to use it. I don’t start my internet experiences by saying I want to find so-and-so anymore, I just start. I enter and follow the paths of information that open up before me. This could be by going onto Facebook and following a link posted by a friend, or by seeing an interesting tweet, or by just coming across a web site on Stumbleupon. I can honestly say that the only times I use Google these days is to find something on Wikipedia or to check SERPs for SEO purposes.



 This change of Internet Information use has obviously been brought about by Social Media. I believe that Social Media has only become so dominant, because Internet users have found that it fits with their new and developing relationship with information. You can take a horse to water but you can’t make it drink. In my opinion Social Media is so successful on the Internet because it fits far closer to the original design brief of the World Wide Web as set by Sir Tim Berners-Lee … a network of information …. combined with the fact that people now understand the paradigm of networked information.

 So what we have with Search Engines is an imposing of a hierarchical information model upon a networked information model. It used to work when our heads were that way inclined, when we wanted things listed in order of importance , but now this way of looking at the Internet is beginning to creak. The headlong rush to be at the top of the search listings, and the amount of effort and money that is spent to be there, is a symptom of the incongruous nature of two different ways of looking at data; Pandas and Penguins won’t solve this situation. Only a new type of Search Engine will, or is the Internet a search engine in itself and we are merely becoming better and better at navigating it without the aid of Google?

BY SEO STEER

The Penguin SEO Riots


A story emerges on the Internet 4th May 2012 ……….

 “Today internet workers protested outside Google Mumbai. Google’s recent algorithm change (called Penguin) has created widespread unemployment in Mumbai, Delhi and Bangalore.  Matt Cutts (head of Google webspam team) is expected to address the angry crowds tomorrow via video link from Google HQ.” 

Did this actually happen? or is this one of the many Internet inventions / fallacies/ made up stories / memes / rumours that spread through the Internet? Researching for this article I came across one basic Internet  article that has been spun over and over again for obvious SEO (Search Engine Optimization) purposes, either by humans or through article spinning software (look for incredibly bad grammar and the tortuous use of a thesaurus). This spinning makes the story of this article even more interesting, due to the fact that the story is about….. The spinning of Web articles! (The re-writing of Web articles for the sake of increasing the search rankings of websites). The thousands of in Indian workers who make a living from the spinning of Web articles who are now loosing their jobs. Google, trying to clamp down on this way of fooling it’s search engine.  Plus, an update to Google's search engine software that brought about the change, (this is where the Penguin comes in) called the Penguin Update.

For those of you who are not SEO (Search Engine Optimization) aficionados , let me explain. One way that an SEO firm can increase the rankings of a website, is to write an article on a blog and have links from that blog go to a website that they want to promote up the SERPs (Search Engine Results Pages). This method of SEO is called link building and has been one of the main stay activities of SEO firms for the last 15years.  An easy way to do this is to take an existing, original article, rewrite it and put it on your own blog or website.  You then point the web links from the Web article to the Web sites that you want to promote. These re-writes don’t necessarily have to be good, as often no humans are going to read them, they only need to be there in order to be scanned by Search Engines such as Google. These Web articles mustn’t be exact copies of another Web article, otherwise the Google indexing robot would spot them and demote their relevance and authority.  However, if they are rewritten, then they will escape this test and reproduce the link juice that is craved by the Marketing and Advertising Industry to promote Web sites up the  SERPs (Search Engine Results Pages) . Internet Marketing and Advertising Firms from the USA and UK in particular have been outsourcing these Link Building activities to India, because, as with so many industries, this reduces their costs. Now we have a situation where 80% of this Link Building has been outsourced to India.

Here are links to this article's appearance and reappearance on the Internet. The article emerged in early May 2012.

First let’s start with the photo …….. supposedly sourced from Reuters…….

SEO Specialist David Steer  @SEO_Steer Penguin Riots Original


Is this photo genuine? Or is it a photo shop of another riot? with pictures of Matt Cutts (head of Google webspam team) from Google being put electronically onto the the placards being held aloft. To me those placards look fake, as they are all exactly the same. One would think that a really angry mob would have a variety of placards. Let’s face it they’re supposed to be angry, not coordinated! I also could not find the photo or the story on Reuters.

Now here are the links showing how the story emerged on the internet … this is by no means an exhaustive list of links …… and I have no axe to grind with any of the sites I’ve linked too ….  I'm just showing how the story emerged, how it spread, and how it was interpreted.

4th May 2012


6th May 2012 … but the story proceeds
love the use of ‘Miss Conceptions’ on this one …… does this describe an overly fertile but currently unmarried single Mother?

9th May 2012 ….. the story rumbles on

22nd May…. Less sympathetic … but still going with the story ….

You shouldn’t have trusted those Indians ….

25th May 2012 ….

If you have the time to search the theme on Google, you will see the story, or variations of the story, appearing again and again.

Technological change often brings about social disruption. The Luddites http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Luddite protested against the changes to textile production brought about by the mill owners in early 19th century industrial Britain.  Whereas the Luddites were protesting against the industrialization of textile processes, in India, link building workers are protesting against changes by Google that make their work redundant. The irony is that both the sets of workers are called Spinners, the modern ones spinning web content and the older ones spinning wool.

Modern day Google and 19th century mill owners seem very similar in this scenario. Both modernising their processes, to make them better and cheaper for their customers, but completely ignoring, or not wishing  to fully be responsible for the consequences of their actions. So much for ‘Don’t do evil’. However, to Googles credit they offered to help the workers develop new skills and practices that are more in keeping with Google’s new search algorithms. Matt Cutts the head of Google’s Webspam team talked to the angry workers via video link , trying to calm the angry crowds by pointing them in the direction of new techniques that they could use, but apparently this did not placate the angry mob.

Addressing an angry mob via a video link has to be a bit cowardly in my opinion, at least in 19th  century Britain the mill owners would appear live, as it were, standing in front of their massive factories, top hat, sideburns and cigar in mouth,remonstrating face to face with the irate Luddites.

But wait ……….. surely this story is not true …. It has just been made up and spun into existence … It is an Internet myth………

I believe that at the base of any myth, as part of the myths DNA as it were, is an archetypal truth. This is why the Greek myths have lasted so long and have been retold over and over again. This is an invented story, but the difference between a myth and a good story is indefinable, like the thin line that separates genius and madness.

So what is at the core of this little, Internet, proto myth? At the centre of this Internet myth is the archetypal truth of how industrial change has catastrophic effects upon people. It shines a light on how reliant we all are on technology for our survival. It shows how our lives can change so frighteningly fast. It was more simple in the past, we grew food, we eat food, we hunted, we gathered. We built shelters and lit fires, we kept warm and out of the rain. With the onset of the Industrial revolution, in the 17th century, we became more prosperous, but simultaneously, became totally reliant on the technology and the factory jobs that provided us with money, so that we could ‘Buy’ our food and shelter. The industrialists and entrepreneurs that ran those factories had to respond to their competitors, who would constantly be coming up with innovations and inventions that would threaten to backrupt them if not copied or bettered. So, we have all become caught up on in an industrial ‘Arms race’ of constant and worrying change. At the centre of this Internet myth of the Penguin Riots of 2012, is the fear of technological change and how it affects us all. 

BY SEO STEER


Payola SEO


In the 1950's, the world of U.S. music was rocked by the Payola Scandal. Disc Jockeys (DJs) such as Alan Freed were caught being paid money by the music industry, to play particular records instead of others on the radio, thus making them more popular. In the 1960's, the UK music industry, after identifying which record shops were being used by the BBC to judge record sales for the UK music charts, would pay people to go and buy armfuls of singles (music downloads for the younger audience) from those record shops. These records would become hits very quickly, get big exposure and then go on to sell even more based on this publicity.

Having read the article Why You Shouldn't Buy New Followers For Your Business it really made me think about the whole morality and efficacy of paying for   'likes', 'followers' and 'shares'  in Social Media. Do we really think that because a brand or person has more 'likes', 'followers' or 'shares' than another, that indicates success or kudos? Are we more likely to also 'follow', 'share' or 'like' a social media presence because it already has a large following? Apparently we are, otherwise why would people pay for 'likes', 'followers' or 'shares'  or even contemplate doing so? There are many firms offering this service on the Internet, so there must be money to be made, and people prepared to pay for it.

The Search Engines must also be fooled by this, as I cannot see how a search engine could figure out whether  'likes', 'followers' and 'shares' are fake or not. This would require A.I. beyond that which is currently available. However, as humans, we can usually identify fakes if we have time, but usually we don't have time, and we just look at, and trust, the headline figures.

So, do we live in a world of social media spin and inauthenticity? Are we all just spending our time using 'slight of hand' and 'sideshow magic tricks' to fool each other, in a massive cybernetic illusion of un-reality?

In the 50's, was Elvis Presly really that good? or were we just fooled into liking him because apparently everyone else did? Was there another great singer, much better than Elvis, left lurking on some Southern US porch, rocking his rocking chair and not the world, because he wasn't backed by Payola? Was there another Liverpudlian band, 'The Butterflies', who returned to their work on the docks, after selling loads of records in the 'wrong' record stores, only to find that their neighbours 'The Beatles' were topping the charts, being interviewed on TV and going on to conquer the world?

BY SEO STEER


The Zen of SEO


"Use your opponent's force against them" said the Master. "Do not meet excessive force head on, or you will be destroyed by it". "Step aside and let your opponent speed past you. Ultimately, smashing themselves into a nearby tree".

Unless you have massive resources at your disposal you cannot hope to compete head on for the keywords that are the most sought after. The most sought after search keywords are the most expensive PPC (paid search) keywords. These will also be the most expensive words to get promoted organically through an SEO agency. In your own field of endeavour, there will also be they keywords that all your competeitiors will be using and paying handsomely for.

So you need to think like a Zen Master when selecting the keywords to use. SEO professionals will often talk about the long tail of keywords. These are the lesser known keywords, associated with an industry or sector, but experience has shown that if the same amount of effort is put into the selection and promotion of these lessor used keywords, they can reap greater benefits in terms of customer aquisition, than just focussing soley on the the most popular keywords.

As well as this long tail approach I think that one should think far more creatively in the selection of keywords, as a means of promoting ones business through SEO. Search engine data shows that 80% of search terms used by the world population as a whole, are pretty much unique. I believe that ultimately the best SEO is all about connectivity. Connecting real people to one another in a real way. The SEO bit is about making yourself or your company visible to the rest of the world through the Internet, which for me is just one big search engine.

BY SEO STEER