Read more at http://www.phpclasses.org/package/7322-PHP-Load-class-automatically-from-multiple-directories.html
social media social networking social media marketing website development web hosting
social media social networking social media marketing website development web hosting
Posted by Tim Grice
This post was originally in YouMoz, and was promoted to the main blog because it provides great value and interest to our community. The author's views are entirely his or her own and may not reflect the views of SEOmoz, Inc.
The title of this post may come across a little contentious, however I hope by the end of it you understand where I am coming from.
Over the years, I have been privileged enough to work with some large businesses that can afford to throw big budgets at online marketing. One of the first tasks I undertake is a meeting to discuss previous strategies. As my main focus is natural search, one of the things I always find interesting is discussing link building strategies carried out by previous agencies and internal SEOs. This can be quite enlightening, but really worrying at the same time, you begin to realise fairly quickly why SEO gets such bad press.
One of the things that always makes my head spin is companies who invest in pumping out online press releases through well-known services for the sheer purpose of building links!
"So, what's your link building strategy?", "Well, we send out press releases every week and get thousands of links!” fantastic. You realise at this point the road ahead is a long one.
This is my opinion and you can disagree with me in the comments, sending out press releases through services such as PRnewswire or Marketwire is not a link building strategy, in fact paying for these services alone is nothing but a waste of time and money.
So, I did a little research as I wanted to confirm my long held belief, asking 20 different SEOs to give a rough figure as to how much each of their clients spend on Online press release distribution. I have to say even I was shocked by the figures (a quick thank you to all those who responded, cheers guys).
As you can see 40% of clients were spending £2000 - £3000 a month on press release distribution alone, even at the most expensive rates that’s 6 - 10 per month. Do you really have that much to talk about? On top of that, 2.5% were spending over £5000 per month on press release distribution, that figure is staggering!
I work with some very big brands and they would struggle to fulfill that quota. When I asked why this amount was being spent each month, the same answers came back, "The MD/CEO/Marketing Director believes it to be a solid link building strategy". I know this isn't large enough to be a meaningful sample, but it gives you a slight insight into the minds of some fairly big organisations.
I'm sure you're all aware that a good link building strategy should:
So let's go through this step by step:
You're sending the same content out to multiple hubs, with the same links in the same anchor text which automatically updates within seconds. Natural? Nah, at least not on its own.
Sure, the first time you send a press release out all your links will be from unique domains. Maybe if you use multiple distribution services you will get plenty of links from unique domains. However if you use these services month after month, all you're doing is acquiring low quality links from the same domains over and over again.
Erm... nope. The only way this could develop social signals is if someone actually read these releases and referred back to your site through twitter or Facebook etc...
So alone press releases are not a good link building strategy. To emphasise the point a little more I monitored a recent press release that I distributed:
Out of just over 300 hubs precisely 299 were in my report from the distribution service. A month later I checked OSE where I found 36 unique linking domains, out of these only 11 were indexed in Google and my Google alerts account only picked up on four of them. Personally I think this is some indication as to how Google value these types of links.
I guess I better get a little more positive before I start receiving nasty emails from some of these distribution services and press release fan boys :). I honestly believe that press releases can be used to benefit rankings!
I am sure some of you won't agree, but I am a firm believer in creating 'noise' links, but we'll go into that in a little while. Press releases can be used effectively as part of an integrated link building strategy.
Now I know there are other elements but I just want to cover a few of the basics:
So many people think link bait has to be absolutely amazing, never before seen, wonderfully awesome content. Slight exaggeration but let’s continue... Link bait in my opinion has more to do with the site publishing the content than the actual content itself. Sometimes really average content can garner tons of links simply because the site publishing it has some authority. I have seen terrible content flying around Twitter or Facebook for the simple reason that it was published on the Telegraph or New York Times etc...
So as budding SEOs, the first step to creating link bait isn't thinking up the idea, instead it is making relationships and reaching out to the right people. Getting great content on the right publication just about guarantees some decent links, of course the article published will have to refer/link back to the site you are targeting.
What's the first thing that happens when you get an article published on a well read and well respected publication? It gets scraped hundreds of times.
A very quick example:
I had a link from the White Board Friday on 'Links in Old Content' (Thanks Cyrus). My site went on that same day to receive over 50 pingbacks! Up to date it is over 100! Thanks SEOmoz :)
In my opinion all these type of links (scraped links) help to raise the link profile and authority of my site. So what is the harm in giving them a push once in a while?
Google knows these popular websites get scraped and creating more of them if you have a link from a strong site, is not going to harm you and in my opinion it helps.
So provide some unique commentary of your own on the article and publish to your favourite newswire, article directories and content hubs. My personal advice would be to use plenty of variation with your anchor text as not to upset any of the algorithms.
Yes it's old news, but a really important aspect of link strategy; you should be constantly building a list of blogs you can write for whenever you want to push a new peice of content/link bait. Be proactive in reaching out to relevant bloggers. Feed them genuine content, not just a rewritten article you copied from ezinearticles. You want to make sure that when your story goes live on Fox News you have plenty of friends who will cover it and link back to your site as well as the publication. Guaranteed link bait :)
Last but certainly not least is creating the right social signals and utilise all your resources.
As well as regularly reaching out to bloggers you should also be reaching out on Twitter and Facebook. When the time comes your new friends will be more than happy to tweet, stumble and share your ultra link worthy content.
You will also notice that content on highly authoritative resources is almost always more likely to get shared, and more sharing = more links.
So back to press releases...
Using them as a one dimensional strategy = waste of time, money and energy.
Incorporating them into an overall link building strategy, utilising them only when the content is worth sharing = winning formula.
Heading a team that builds thousands of links every month through viral and social promotions gives me some tremendous insights and I have seen the above strategy work time and time again in boosting rankings and overall organic traffic to a website.
One caveat I'll add - If you're the super industry authority and have a large readership, keep your best content for yourself.
There are lots of tools, tips and techniques out there that will help enhance a link building campaign. However we need to figure out how they fit into our overall strategy and not just throw budget mindlessly at well sold services.
Sign up for The Moz Top 10, a semimonthly mailer updating you on the top ten hottest pieces of SEO news, tips, and rad links uncovered by the Moz team. Think of it as your exclusive digest of stuff you don't have time to hunt down but want to read!
website development web hosting seo experts search engine marketing sem experts
Only a few hours left in the discount, but its a great deal. :)
From their email:
50% Off all BOTW Products on Cyber Monday!
Don't miss out on our biggest discount of the year!
Promo Code: STUFFED50
Submit TodayGet Listed at Half the Price!
A directory listing in Best of the Web is a vote of confidence for your business website. Only today can you receive all the benefits of a BOTW listing at half the regular cost. This offer is only good for Cyber Monday, so submit now to take advantage of these savings!
Submit to the Web Directory
Submit to the UK Directory
Submit to the Blog Directory�
A 50% coupon gives you the lifetime listing for only $149, which is what the annually recurring cost normally is...so by using the coupon today you pay for a 1-year listing & it stays permanent.
Source: http://www.seobook.com/botw-cyber-monday-coupon
list building article marketing affiliate marketing clickbank experts copywriting experts
email marketing building traffic list building article marketing affiliate marketing
In a previous post, "Questions to ask your SEO company", we focused on the type of questions prospective clients should ask of any professional SEO company they are considering hiring. Over time we've developed a list of crucial questions for prospective SEO clients, covering everything from website history to organizational structure. Although our lengthy check-list of questions help us screen, select and evaluate potential clients, we realized there are fundemental assumptions we make about a client's knowledge, goals and expectations that inevitably create problems down the line. Instead of trying to enroll clients as quickly as possible, we take the time to have a conversation about the relationship we'll be entering together. The questions below are an attempt to provide a focus points for that first crucial conversation.
It may seem an abrupt question to start off with, but a client’s quantity and quality of knowledge and experience is a critical and often overlooked element of engagement. We frequently field calls from prospects wanting to “get some SEO” for their website. Prospects often don’t understand that search engine optimization isn’t a “thing” that you add on after the fact, an accessory for your website. Its a fundamental strategy for online marketing. The vast majority of customers use the web, and they use search to navigate it. Appeasing the search engines requires your website to present clear, concise information and adhere to standards of compliance and accessibility. Failure to do so results in the inability to access the majority of your prospective customers. Clients need to understand the complexity involved in optimization and be educated on the difference between effective tactics and flashy tricks.
What is the purpose of your website and what are your trying to accomplish with it? Your website should be the central component of your online marketing strategy. This is not a separate endeavor from your overall marketing plan, but the digital extension of it. Not only does search expose you to the greatest amount of potential customers, but it gives you the opportunity to engage your prospects, encourage behavior and measure the outcome.
While managing client expectations can be challenging, asking for their expectations up front can make the process much easier. Its difficult to convince a prospect that they don’t want something, and finding out what they do want provides valuable insight into their vision. Clients who expect to be #1 in Google for anything and everything won’t be happy with the typical growth curve. Clients who think a bunch of links are all they need may not be aware of the complexities inherent in attracting visitors, engaging users and converting them to customers. Clients who believe SEO is a “set it and forget it” activity may not be committed to sustainable success. Those clients who do have a reasonable expectations from the outset provide ample opportunity to exceed those expectations along the way.
This is the collective “We”. Both the client and the agency need more information to engage in work, and if the previous questions have been thoroughly discussed, both parties now know whether or not moving forward makes sense. The agency no doubt needs specific information to begin the process. Clients typically need a proposal of some sort, an estimate of price, and some sort of reassurance, be it case studies or references. Every project has its own set of circumstances that make it difficult to determine how much work needs to be done, so having a standard initial engagement to establish the opportunity and scope of work helps mitigate the risk for both sides.
Source: http://www.deepripples.com/blog/crucial-questions-for-prospective-seo-clients
search engine marketing sem experts search engine optimization internet marketing online marketing
improve google rankings search engine search marketing web 2.0 experts backlink building
So today Google announced that they have turned on SSL by default for logged in users, a feature that has been available for a while on encrypted.google.com. The way they set it up, as explained in this post, means that your search query will not be forwarded to the website you're visiting and that they can only see that you've come from an organic Google result. If you're buying AdWords however, you still get the query data.
This is what I call hypocrisy at work. Google cares about your privacy, unless they make money on you, then they don't. The fact is that due to this change, AdWords gets favored over organic results. Once again, Google gets to claim that it cares about your privacy and pulls a major public "stunt". The issue is, they don't care about your privacy enough to not give that data to their advertisers.
That might also enlighten you to the real issue: Google still has all your search data. It's just not allowing website owners to see it anymore. It's giving website owners aggregated data through Google Webmaster Tools, which would be nice if it hadn't shown to be so incredibly useless and inaccurate.
If Google really cared about your privacy, (delayed) retargeting wouldn't be available for advertisers. They wouldn't use your query data to serve you AdSense ads on pages, but I doubt they'll stop doing that, if they did they would have probably said so and made a big fuzz out of it.
If Google really cared, the keyword data that site owners now no longer receive from organic queries would no longer be available for advertisers either. But that would hit their bottom line, because it makes it harder to show ROI from AdWords, so they won't do that.
So I think "privacy" is just a mere pretext. A "convenient" side effect that's used for PR. The real reason that Google might have decided to stop sending referral data is different. I think it is that its competitors in the online advertising space like Chitika and Chango are using search referral data to refine their (retargeted) ads and they're getting some astonishing results. In some ways, you could therefor describe this as mostly an anti-competitive move.
In my eyes, there's only one way out. We've now determined that your search data is private information. If Google truly believes that, it will stop sharing it with everyone, including their advertisers. Not sharing vital data like that with third parties but using it solely for your own profit is evil and anti-competitive. In a country such as the Netherlands where I live, where Google has a 99%+ market share, in other words: a monopoly, I'm hoping that'll result in a bit of action from the European Union.
---
Joost is a freelance SEO consultant and WordPress developer. He blogs on yoast.com about both topics and maintains some of the most popular WordPress plugins for SEO and Google Analytics in existence.
Source: http://www.seobook.com/false-privacy-claims
website promotion email marketing building traffic list building article marketing
by Mike Fleming
...you need to drastically rethink what it means to use data on the web...there is a lot of data, but there are fundamental barriers to making intelligent decisions...because clickstream data is great at the what, but not at the why...it's important to know what happened, but it is even more critical to know why people do the things they do on your site...and the what else, which is perhaps the most underappreciated data on the web...your web analytics tool can report only what it can record...if you marry the what with the why and the what else, you'll have a lifetime of happiness...
-Avinash Kaushik (@avinash), Web Analytics 2.0
You've got enough work to do, right? All you want is a report. You just want to see that all of that hard work you are doing for your website is paying off. You want to see that blue line go up and to the right. It makes you feel good. Hey, I know the feeling. The problem is that if you stop there, you will fall behind. Likely way behind. The web 2.0 world that we live in requires more than getting more visitors to your site.
Although those reports make you feel good, they don't tell you what to do next. They don't tell you what your competitors are doing and how you can and should react. Yes, there is value in feeling good. But feeling good doesn't grow your business. It doesn't give you insights that will push you ahead into the future. In fact, looking at a visitor line in your web analytics that goes up and to the right doesn't do much of anything at all. It just means more people found your site. Unless they're buying, more visitors mean nothing.
What will push you ahead, on the other hand, is information about your customers that your competitors don't know, information about your competitors that they don't know about you, and the ability to turn that information into experiments and apply what you learn.
Be sure and visit our small business news site.
Source: http://www.searchengineguide.com/mike-fleming/how-to-have-a-lifetime-of-happiness-on-y.php
search marketing web 2.0 experts backlink building website promotion email marketing
Take a look at the two ads below. If you were an avid collector of luxury watches, which ad do you think you'd click on?
The ads are fairly unique. The URLs are the same, but everything else is different. Which ad do you think generated more than three times as many clicks?
Made your decision?
The winning ad is ad number one. It was written by BoostCTR writer "brescia33," and it increased CTR by 225%. Where the original ad was getting 1 click, the new ad is getting 3.25 clicks, more than TRIPLE the original ad's performance.
So why did the new ad win? And why did it win by so much? Let's take a look...
The original ad is somewhat vague. After reading it, I'm not really sure why I should click the ad or what's going to happen when I do.
If the only benefit is to "show off" my watch collection, why would I take the time to do that? Why should I "broadcast my style"? To whom will I be broadcasting it?
Unless I'm a vain person who likes to show off for the sake of showing off, I'm unlikely to click on this ad -- even if I do have a killer collection of luxury watches! (Side note: I only have one watch. It's a solar-powered watch I got for $70 on Amazon.)
Because the original ad is vague... and the primary benefit will not appeal to most collectors... it fails to generate as much interest.
The winning ad gets more specific. After reading it, I know three things: 1. I will find luxury watches for sale. 2. I will be able to show off my watches to other collectors. 3. I will be able to sell my watches if I want to.
It doesn't take a mathematician to see that the winning ad includes three benefits where the original ad only includes one. On this basis alone, the new ad is much stronger.
But there's more...
What do watch collectors most want to do? Expand their collections, of course! By advertising the opportunity to buy up more luxury watches, the winning ad hits the watch collector's core motivation right away.
Plus, the winning ad answers the nagging question: With whom will I be sharing my most prized timepieces? After all, it wouldn't make sense to show off your watches to somebody who knows nothing about watches. So the detail about "fellow collectors" is actually very important.
Fellow watch collectors are the only people on earth who will understand and appreciate the value of your collection. And so the winning ad -- with just two words -- creates a sense of community with people who might otherwise be hard to connect with.
You must always be specific in your advertising.
The slogan "Broadcast Your Style" might be appropriate when paired with a company logo, but it's not appropriate for a PPC ad targeting a specific search phrase on Google.
If a searcher has to think too hard to figure out what you're trying to communicate, he'll just move on to the next ad. Clarity and specificity are king when it comes to PPC advertising.
What do you notice about this ad contest? Feel free to leave a comment below.
The BoostCTR writers are chomping at the bit to improve your ads. They've collectively spent thousands of hours improving pay-per-click ads on both Google and Facebook. They increase CTR and conversions by 30% on average, sometimes as much as 225% or more. Best part: You can put 'em to work... risk-free for 30 days!
About the Author: Ryan Healy is a direct response marketer and BoostCTR writer. Since 2002, he has worked with scores of clients, including Alex Mandossian, Terry Dean, and Pulte Homes. He writes a popular blog about copywriting, business growth, and lifestyle design. See his 2012 business predictions here.
This post originated on the WordStream Blog. WordStream provides keyword tools for pay-per click (PPC) and search engine optimization (SEO) aiding in everything from keyword discovery to keyword grouping and organization.
Source: http://www.wordstream.com/blog/ws/2012/01/11/getting-back-to-basics-raises-ctr
building traffic list building article marketing affiliate marketing clickbank experts
Most everyone knows of Siri by now. Has anyone come of age any faster? When I hear news of Siri I immediately think of the impending takeover by computers and the subsequent apocalypse (ie Skynet, Cylons, and The Borg).
I'm not an iPhone user, so me and Siri are strangers. However, because of the work we do in search marketing, I do pay attention when someone, reputable, says Google is in danger.
In the spirit of paying attention to Google's well being I was reading a recent Search Engine News (great resource, not an affiliate link) about Siri and it's (his?) threat to Google.
"Siri has the ability to completely shatter Google's search monopoloy as we know it because it makes search completely obsolete....Siri doesn't return Google, Yahoo or Bing search results. Siri just provides you with the information you're looking for." Search Engine News
Google's search monopoly shattered?
A small study conducted by The Arora Report found that Siri users quickly abandoned Google. As the Search Engine News article put it, "consumers feel that one right answer from Siri is better than 1 million relevant links from Google."
Yikes! That's potentially world changing for a search marketing company like ours. (My head hurts.) Should we get in to Siri Optimization?
Siri can still use Google search results to answer a question, so it isn't exactly a replacement for Google, just a potentially helpful interloper. Siri is also going to provide a nice boost to Yelp, as it's a "go to" resource. Similarly, the not so well known WolframAlpha search engine will be getting more attention.
Clearly there's a movement toward mobile devices, whether phone or tablet, that makes browsing search results pages less than enjoyable. At the end of his article about Siri and SEO on Inc.com, Jeff Haden says "more and more, your customers won't be hanging out on search engines." I think he's right. Granted, a SERP is much better than a YellowBook, but it's still a clunky interface and not much fun.
No doubt Siri alternatives are being developed as you read this. Google, Bing and others are likely to catch up. If the technology gets good and becomes widely adopted, then it could just turn in to a marketing game. Some "Siri's" will probably be better than others, but it might boil down to a style issue. Do you want a hipster search familiar or a working-class version? What about an animal helper? What about a version that can match search results to your personality? Could Siri learn that you like cheaper restaurants or prefer non-smoking establishments?
The possibilities are overwhelming (Where's my EMP device just in case?), both intriguing and scary. I'm all for less typing, so that's good, and probably safer. The scariest thing for me is how many people are likely to trust Siri and reduce critical thinking skills even further. "Siri made me do it...and the Twinkie." That's my cynical side coming out. Let's not go down that path.
Search/Find/Decide technology is evolving, and so must the business of search. It's doubtful Google is going to be put down so easily, but the times, as the man says, are a changin'. Who knows? If Apple is super successful with their development of AI, Mr. Siri might become a free agent.
Additional Reading:
Why Siri Is a Google Killer?
Is Siri a Google Killer? (quora discussion)
Why Siri Can't Find Abortion Clinics
Siri and The End of SEO
Does Siri Threaten Google's Search Monopoloy?
Source: http://www.deepripples.com/blog/siri-killing-the-google
pay per click ppc experts social media social networking social media marketing
Source: http://www.internet-marketing-cafe.com/Art/319126/404/Strategies-Of-Quitting-Smoking.html
backlink building website promotion email marketing building traffic list building
Posted by Dr. Pete
Just over a week ago, Google launched a massive change to search personalization, Search Plus Your World. Along with this change came a new toggle switch to shut off personalization. Below the Google search box and above the results, you’ll see something like this:
The default, person icon is personalized results, and you click on the globe to shut off “your world” (I won’t comment on how little sense that makes). Of course, we already had personalized results and a handful of ways to shut them off before, so what does “personalization” mean now, and do any of these de-personalization methods actually work? I thought it was time to put that question to the test.
I actually started with 6 ways to de-personalize, but ended up excluding two of them for the final test (more on that below). The original 6 were:
I’ve already discussed the new option (1) above, but I thought it might be a good review to talk briefly about the other options. Here’s a quick primer:
If you’ve been in SEO for a while, you’re familiar with the “pws=0” de-personalization parameter. By adding it to the end of a Google query URL (“&pws=0”), you can theoretically remove history-based personalization. A simplified URL would look something like this:
This one’s pretty straightforward. Just sign out of your Google account. Unfortunately, the Google interface has been changing a lot lately, but if you have Google+, click on your avatar in the top bar, and you’ll see an option for “Sign Out” at the bottom of the menu.
Option (4) just combines (2) and (3). Sign out of Google, run your search, and then append the “&pws=0” parameter to the URL.
Google’s Chrome browser has a built in “incognito” mode that supposedly removes any traces of your browsing activity, such as cookies or search history. In Chrome, click on the wrench icon in the upper right, and you’ll get an option for a “New incognito window”:
While Chrome’s incognito mode does seem reliable, there’s something about trusting a Google product not to pass Google data that just makes me itch. So, for my “control” condition, I used another incognito browser, a version of Firefox that runs directly off of my IronKey USB drive.
Originally, I was going to use a stand-alone crawler (PHP-based) as the control condition. Unfortunately, my crawlers all run out of a different state from a different C-block of IPs, so I decided to confine the test to only methods I could use directly from my office setup.
I’ll discuss the search queries and metrics more below, but I initially did a dry run of 5 queries, and I ran into a couple of issues and insights that caused me to scrap that data and start over. Briefly, here’s what I learned:
As I was collecting data, I realized that switching Google’s new de-personalization toggle was actually adding “pws=0” to my query URLs. If you add it manually to the URL, the toggle switches itself. Options (1) and (2) are functionally identical, so I only used the de-personalization toggle in the final test.
I originally ran each option one-by-one, recording the data. By the time I was done (15-20 minutes), the Google results for the control had sometimes changed. I realized that I would need to run all of the versions of each query as back-to-back as possible and then collect the data. In the final experiment, I ended up using multiple windows and 2 PCs on the same connection.
There was no measurable difference between options (3) and (4) in my pilot data. Adding “pws=0” to a signed out query didn’t seem to have an impact. So, I dropped option (4) in the final test. This left 4 methods:
Given the labor-intensive nature of collecting this data, I decided to use a set of 10 popular queries, pulled from Google Trends Hot Searches list for 1/17. I purposely picked popular queries so that they were more likely to be personalized and/or have social results. The point wasn’t to measure how much results are being personalized, but how well methods to remove personalization work. The query list was as follows:
The original #10 on the list was “school closings”, but I decided that had too much of a local SEO aspect, so I bumped up #11. Localization is a completely different issue these days (shutting off “personalization” doesn’t shut off localization), so I decided to avoid any searches that had clear local intent.
To compare the SERPs across methods, I tracked three different metrics, as described below:
This was a count of all non-paid results – organic, universal, and social. News, images, and TV/movie results all counted as +1 each. In other words, if news had 3 items, it was +3. If there were 6 images displayed, it was +6. I did this for two reasons: not only are these counts variable, but Google is now mixing in social images with regular image results. For example:
Here, a search for “jerry yang” (former Yahoo CEO) shows 9 image results, but 4 of them are coming from the new social integration.
I did a separate count of social results – anything with the person icon next to it. As with total results, social image results each counted as +1. So, in the Jerry Yang example above, that set of image results would count as +9 total results and +4 social results.
Finally, I calculated the shift between each pair of organic rankings. This ranking “delta” could range from 0-100, and was calculated with 3 simple rules:
So, if the #2 result in the control SERP ended up in #5 on one of the other de-personalization methods, it would count as +3 (change was always positive, regardless of the direction). If the #2 result fell out of the Top 10 on the comparison SERP, it would count as +10.
Sorry, that took a bit of explaining. So, in the end, I measured 3 metrics across 4 methods (counting the control) and 10 search queries. There are actually 5 “methods”, since I also measured personalized results, for comparison. The following table shows mean total results, social results, and change for each method:
Method | Total | Social | Change |
Personalized | 18.3 | 0.7 | 13.0 |
Toggle/pws=0 | 18.0 | 0.0 | 4.5 |
Logged out | 18.0 | 0.0 | 3.1 |
Incognito 1 | 18.0 | 0.0 | 4.3 |
Incognito 2* | 18.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 |
So, what does it all mean?
Logging out seemed to de-personalize results the most. Granted, this came from only 10 queries, and the difference between logging out and Chrome’s incognito function was only 1 query – where logging out matched the control. I should also note that I had to run the logged-out queries on a different machine (same network and IP). So, practically, I'd call logged out vs. Chrome's incognito a tie.
I’m hard-pressed to trust a tool Google built to be free of Google’s influence. That’s not conspiracy theory – it’s just common sense. Two of the queries showed different results for Chrome’s Incognito browser than my IronKey control. You could argue that my IronKey browser wasn’t actually a “control”, but in both cases, the Chrome Icognito results mirrored the de-personalization toggle results. Ultimately, no de-personalization method 100% matched the control condition.
Every method of personalization shut off the new social results, but even with a solid Google+ presence, my social results were limited. Four of the queries returned social results, ranging from 1-3 results (including personalized/social images). Keep in mind that these were all trending queries with a much higher than average likelihood of having social mentions.
The total result count only varied in one query – universal results (news, images, etc.) appeared and remained fairly stable for all forms of de-personalization. When personalized/social images appeared, these seemed to displace regular image results, keeping the count consistent. The same happened with organic results – social results replaced the organic results.
The Verdict
Google's new de-personalization toggle does seem to remove social results, and it's fairly effective for de-personalization, but it's not foolproof. Unfortunately, no method seems to be completely personalization free, and I'm willing to bet that situation only gets worse. It's interesting to note that, no matter what method I used and how radically I cleared my history, ever method still localized me to the Chicago area (even the IronKey incognito). While I didn't cover localization in this experiment, it's yet another way that what you see may be different from what your clients see.
Third-party tools and crawlers should still remove most personalization, and provide one way to standardize the numbers you use for reporting. My best advice is to pick an outside source (or even more than one) and stick to it over time. At the same time, supplement ranking information with search traffic and conversion metrics. You can't trust any one method to show you "real" rankings, and the very idea of "de-personalized" results may become little more than myth over the next few years.
Sign up for The Moz Top 10, a semimonthly mailer updating you on the top ten hottest pieces of SEO news, tips, and rad links uncovered by the Moz team. Think of it as your exclusive digest of stuff you don't have time to hunt down but want to read!
Source: http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/seomoz/~3/Fe9h33QZXXs/face-off-4-ways-to-de-personalize-google
sem experts search engine optimization internet marketing online marketing website optimization