[Build Backlinks Online] Are Links Losing Value in Google's Algorithm? - Whiteboard Friday

Build Backlinks Online has posted a new item, 'Are Links Losing Value in
Google's Algorithm? - Whiteboard Friday'

Posted by randfish
There are some great arguments to be made on both sides of the question of
whether links are losing value in Google's algorithm. In some ways, it seems
that they are -- and in some, they're more valuable than ever. In today's
Whiteboard Friday, Rand explores both sides of the argument, offering some
concrete advice to SEOs on how they can navigate today's waters.







Are Links Losing Value in Google's Ranking Algorithms-WBF_1












Here's the link to coverage of Google's testing removing links from the
algorithm, and to the roundup post where links as a ranking signal are discussed
(in particular, check out Russ Jones' reply in the comments). For reference,
here's a still of this week's whiteboard!



Video Transcription


Howdy, Moz fans, and welcome to another edition of Whiteboard Friday. Today,
I want to talk a little bit about links losing their value in Google's ranking
algorithm.


So Google recently came out and talked about how they had tested a version of
their search engine, of search quality algorithms, ranking algorithms, that did
not include links as a ranking signal. Of course, a lot of SEOs went "Wait, they
did what?"


But it turns out Google actually said they really did not like the results.
They didn't like what they saw when they removed links from the ranking
elements. So maybe SEOs are going, "Okay, can I breathe easy, or are they going
to keep trying to find ways to take links out of the ranking equation?"
Certainly, links for a long time have been an extremely powerful way for SEOs
and folks to move the needle on indexation, on rankings, on getting traffic from
search engines.


I'm going to personally come out and say that, in my opinion, we will
continue to see links in Google's rankings systems for at least the next five
and probably the next ten years. Whether they continue to be as important and as
powerful as they've been, I think is worthy of a discussion, and I do want to
bring up some points that some very intelligent marketers and SEOs have made on
both sides of the issue.


So, first off, there are some folks who are saying, "No, this is crazy. Links
are actually growing in value." I thought Russ Jones from Virante made some
excellent comments on a recent blog post where some experts had been asked to do
a thought experiment around what Google might do if links were to lose signals.


He made some good points, one of which was as Google filters out . . . so
let's say I've got this webpage on Google, and as I filter out the value that
are passed from some links through algorithms like Penguin or through filtration
systems that remove either Web spam or low-quality links or links that we don't
find valuable in our relevancy algorithms, it actually is the case that these
other links grow in importance. In fact, as Russ wisely pointed out, many of the
other kinds of signals that Google might potentially replace links with, things
around user and usage data, things around social signals, all of those things
actually can be validated through the link graph, and you can use the link graph
to add additional context and information about those other signals. So I think
there's a point to be made.


People have also pointed out that as we get into this world where no-follow
is very, very common, a lot of websites putting no-follow on there, social
sharing is oftentimes a much more common form of evangelizing or sharing
information than linking is. Before we had the popularity of Facebook and
Twitter and LinkedIn and Google+ and all these networks, that social sharing
would have been bloggers and people in forums linking out to these resources.


There's also, unfortunately, created a lot by Google themselves, and Bing to
a certain extent, too, there are many, many webmasters and site owners and
editorial specialists on the Web who have a fear of linking out. They worry that
by linking to something bad or if they link out and then something happens to
that website they link out to, that maybe something will happen to their site.


As a result, it's actually become a greater and greater challenge over time
to earn editorial links for everyone. This is interesting because it actually
suggests that there is more value when you do earn those editorial links. So I
think there's a very credible case to be made.


On the flip side, there are SEOs who are pointing out, hey, look links are
definitely a diminishing signal because there are elements in a ranking system,
and anytime you have elements in a ranking system and you add new signals of
relevancy, new signals of usefulness, of importance, of popularity, whatever
those are, the pie chart has to squish those in. Then, the portion that used to
be links, all of this stuff here, just this portion is still link-
based. So links become a smaller piece of the pie chart.


One good way of explaining this is think of, for example, Olympic ice
skating, where you have judges who give rankings. Those judges, they'll give a
score -- a 7.5 and an 8.5. They have criteria that they look at. As new criteria
get added, the criteria for other pieces necessarily becomes a little bit less
important.


Now, in Google's ranking system, it's not quite the same logic. We don't have
a pie chart that can add signals and remove signals. It's not like everybody has
a score out of just 10. But the ability of pages and sites to move up in the
rankings is influenced by the elements that are in here in a similar fashion.


So what really should SEOs do? What should we take away from this sort of
debate and discussion and this testing of Google by removing links from their
algorithmic signals and not liking those results? Well, in an ideal world, in a
best-case scenario, as a marketer, the way that I believe we should be thinking
about this is to invest in the marketing, in the tactics and channels that
provide value in multiple ways.


By "multiple ways," I mean provide value in terms of branding; provide value
in terms of direct traffic; provide value in terms of growing my social network;
provide value in terms of growing my e-mail network, in terms of growing my
influence and thought leadership in this sphere; all those kinds of things.


If I can get those multiple ways and still earn links? So content marketing
is one that a lot of SEOs and marketers have been investing in because it does
these things. Content marketing means that I get social shares. It means that I
get more social followers. It means that I grow the people who pay attention to
my brand and are aware of my brand. That content can also earn links, which
helps me in the search engine rankings. That's the ideal world. There are many
forms of this. Content marketing isn't the only one.


It can also be good, not quite as good, to refocus the energy that you might
currently be expending on building all kinds of links and instead concentrate
very carefully on the few links that really matter. As we've seen here, even for
those who are arguing, "No, it's becoming less important," it's not becoming
less important. Those folks are saying, "Hey, there are a lot of things getting
filtered out, and it's harder and harder to earn the good editorial links."
Focusing on getting those is still very valuable.


Do not do these things -- keep getting any and every link. We've talked about
this many times on Whiteboard Friday. You guys are all familiar. Especially the
non-editorial kind. It's too dangerous a world. If you're building a site that
you want to last in the search engines for a long period of time, many months
and years in the future, you can't afford to be actively, proactively going and
getting non-editorial links.


Please, don't ignore the value that you get from activities that might not
directly earn you a link -- things that could get you brand mentions and grow
your brand, things that could build up your resource of content, things that
could build up your social channels -- just because those things don't earn you
a link.


A great example of this one is a lot of folks have been talking about guest
posting. Of course, I did a Whiteboard Friday right before Google made their
announcement about guest posting. Guest blogging, guest posting, in that classic
SEO for a link fashion, is not a great idea. But it can still be a great channel
to earn brand awareness and attention, to earn direct traffic. I mean, a lot of
folks can post on forums, on sites that earn them an additional audience, and
that additional audience in the future might turn into people who share and link
and become customers. So that's a beautiful world. Don't ignore the value of
that.


I'm sure there's going to be some great debate and discussion in the
comments, and I really look forward to hearing from all of you. Take care. We'll
see you again next week for another edition of Whiteboard Friday.



Video transcription by Speechpad.com
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!



You may view the latest post at
http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/seomoz/~3/gXChK7nplqs/are-links-losing-value-in-googles-algorithm-whiteboard-friday

You received this e-mail because you asked to be notified when new updates are
posted.
Best regards,
Build Backlinks Online
peter.clarke@designed-for-success.com

[Build Backlinks Online] Ethical Public Relations in the New Age of Wikipedia

Build Backlinks Online has posted a new item, 'Ethical Public Relations in the
New Age of Wikipedia'

David King, Founder and Director at Ethical Wiki, joins the Social Pros Podcast
this week to talk about the impact Wikipedia has on social media in todays
world, the future of PR, and how companies can update their Wikipedia pages to
more accurately reflect their corporation and their message. Please Support Our
Sponsors Huge thanks []




You may view the latest post at
http://feeds.feedblitz.com/~/57856505/0/convinceandconvert~Ethical-Public-Relations-in-the-New-Age-of-Wikipedia/

You received this e-mail because you asked to be notified when new updates are
posted.
Best regards,
Build Backlinks Online
peter.clarke@designed-for-success.com

[Build Backlinks Online] Glad Makes Cleaning Up Fun With New #TrashCrashers Campaign

Build Backlinks Online has posted a new item, 'Glad Makes Cleaning Up Fun With
New #TrashCrashers Campaign'

When it comes to lifes fun events, cleaning up doesnt have to feel like a chore.
Inspired by the fun people can have making messes, Glad recently launched its
#TrashCrashers campaign, which leverages visual storytelling, influencer
partnerships and events in an effort to make people view cleaning up in a new
way. The campaign preview []



You may view the latest post at
http://feeds.feedblitz.com/~/57774095/0/convinceandconvert~Glad-Makes-Cleaning-Up-Fun-With-New-TrashCrashers-Campaign/

You received this e-mail because you asked to be notified when new updates are
posted.
Best regards,
Build Backlinks Online
peter.clarke@designed-for-success.com

[Build Backlinks Online] New Research: Most Companies Do Not Have the Talent to Leverage Marketing Analytics

Build Backlinks Online has posted a new item, 'New Research: Most Companies Do
Not Have the Talent to Leverage Marketing Analytics'

The latest edition of The CMO Survey, from the Fuqua School of Business at Duke,
has arrived, and there are some implications for social media marketers worth
noting. First of all, the study is solidwhile it is based on a self-selected
sample of about 400 marketers (88% of which are at least VP level), the []



You may view the latest post at
http://feeds.feedblitz.com/~/57798477/0/convinceandconvert~New-Research-Most-Companies-Do-Not-Have-the-Talent-to-Leverage-Marketing-Analytics/

You received this e-mail because you asked to be notified when new updates are
posted.
Best regards,
Build Backlinks Online
peter.clarke@designed-for-success.com

[Build Backlinks Online] 3 Steps to Identify Blog Topics that are Relevant to Your Audience

Build Backlinks Online has posted a new item, '3 Steps to Identify Blog Topics
that are Relevant to Your Audience'

Posted by Aleyda
If you're reading this post right now, chances are that you have experienced
this (or know someone who has): You have the deadline of a blog post coming, but
you still don't know what to write about.


Sometimes you get away by writing about breaking news or a trend in your
field, by doing a review of a new product or service, or by covering a recent
conference or meetup that you have attended, but you can't do this all the time.
You also want to write about something that is not only useful but also
attractive, something that allows you to connect with your audience.


And you might be an experienced blogger, copywriter, or marketer. You might
also know your audience pretty well; you have built your personas, completed and
developed keyword research, and have already tried some techniques to get
through the "writer's block." You have browsed through the content of prolific
creators to get inspired and even tried Portent's content idea generator, but
you still have a hard time finding a relevant and exciting blog post idea each
time that your deadline approaches.


This likely happens because although you know where to find the dataâand
might even have it alreadyâto get you inspired and identify ideas, the
hardest part is to make it actionable, since it's so easy to get lost in such a
vast amount of information.


What you need in order to identify blog post ideas that will allow you to
connect with your audience is an actionable and simple process that is easily
repeatable, applicable to any industry, and scalable:



Step 1: Gather the relevant data

How can we avoid getting lost when there's so much data available through so
many sources? By focusing only on gathering the most important data that's
relevant to your goal: Identifying a relevant and attractive blog post idea for
your web audience.


Here's the data that you will need:

1. Your own most popular posts

You don't need to go through all of your previous posts, just select the most
popular ones:



Most visited posts on your blog: Use Google Analytics to identify those blog
posts that have had the highest amount of visits, the most valuable visits
(those that generated the highest amount of conversions) and the most engaged
visits (those that had the highest duration and generated more pageviews on the
blog). Keep only the top 20% of them.




Most shared posts on social networks: Use SocialCrawlytics to crawl your blog
and see which are the posts that have been shared the most by your visitors in
their favorite social networks. Again, only keep the top 20% of them.





After gathering the data, consolidate these two "Top 20%" lists, eliminate the
duplicates, and create a spreadsheet with the following information for each
post:

Title
URL
Visits
Conversions
Visit duration
Shares in each social network (Twitter, Facebook, Google+, LinkedIn, etc.)

Now you know which of the posts has been, until now, your own most popular
content. You know what has attracted better traffic and visibility in social
networks, and the social networks that your audience prefers.

2. Your competitors' most popular posts

It's time to collect the most popular posts from your competitors, and
although you don't likely have access to their full analytics, you can still
identify some important statistics:

Most shared posts on social networks: Crawl their blogs with SocialCrawlytics
as you did before.
Most externally linked posts: With Open Site Explorer, check to see which
posts have earned the highest amount of links from other sites.

With this information you can consolidate these two lists into one and create
a spreadsheet for the top 20% of posts by your competitors that includes the
following data:

Title
URL
Shares in each social networks (Twitter, Facebook, Google+, LinkedIn, etc.)
External links
Linking domains



Here you have another very valuable and highly targeted source of information:

The most popular blog posts of your competitors!

3. Your community's and influencers' most shared content

Besides your own top content and that of your competitors, you can also
identify which content is most liked in your own social communitiesâthe
different groups that are connected to each other and form your audience.


For Twitter, you can get your communities and the influencers, topics, and
locations per communities by using Tribalytics, just by adding your Twitter
handle:




Once you identify your different communities, their most popular topics, and
influencers, you can get even more specific by using Twtrland to obtain the most
popular tweets for your influencers:




Create a list with the top content shared in your influencers' top tweets and
segment it using the different topic areas identified for your communities.
Complete it with social and search popularity-related data for each one of them:

Title
URL
Shares in each social networks (Twitter, Facebook, Google+, LinkedIn, etc.)
External links
Linking domains

Here's another very relevant input for your blog post ideas: The content that
your influencers like to share and that has been popular in your own Twitter
communities.

4. The hottest relevant content in social networks

After having identified the posts topics and pieces that have performed better
for you, your competitors, and in your social communities in the past, you can
identify which have been the overall most popular pieces of content in social
networks about those same topics in the latest times.


Organize the best-performing content that you have now into different topics
categories or areas and use Buzzsumo to search for them.




Download the most shared content in social networks for each category. You
will have a list with the following information:

Title
URL
Shares in each social networks (Twitter, Facebook, Google+, LinkedIn, etc.)
Content type

Consolidate the lists, segmenting again per category and organize it by
prioritizing the overall best performing content for your topics in social
networks.

5. Your relevant web industry questions

Another very relevant source of blog post ideas is the questions asked by your
online community in social networks, such as Twitter, and on sites like Quora.


Go to your relevant topic's questions, and create a list with the
highest-voted questions. Automate this process by creating an IFTTT recipe for
their RSS feeds, by adding them directly into a Google Docs Spreadsheet.




You can complete the previous list of questions with the ones that users make
directly in Google by using the SEOchat related keywords tool, a multi-level
suggestion keyword finder that will give you the queries that your audience
searches for in Google about your desired topics.




By doing this, you will learn which are the biggest questions that people ask
on the web about your relevant topics. A direct source of ideas to create posts
that answer them.

6. Your industry web content requests

Subscribe to HARO or ProfNet and get daily email alerts each time a media
outlet asks for the input of a specialist about your selected categories of
content. Create filters to apply a label to those emails that specifically
include one of your relevant content topics:




By doing this you will learn how journalists are looking to cover these topics
and the type of content they're writing about them already. This can serve as an
ongoing reference for content ideas: See what important sites are writing about
your relevant topics at the moment.

Step 2: Ask the relevant questions

Once you have gathered all the previous data you will have a very complete,
but still manageable, prioritized and categorized source of potential blog post
ideas from different type of sources:




Analyze and make this data actionable with the next steps:

Ask yourself which are the characteristics that differentiate this top content
and questions? What do they all have in common? From the areas where they are
focused to the style or format, identify the patterns that they follow and make
a list of criteria with them.
Create a list of potentially attractive posts ideas by taking as an input the
already existing popular content, questions and requests that you have
identified before, applying the criteria that you have identified that they all
share.
Specifically ask the five Ws (who, what, when, where, why) and "how" for the
potential topics, thinking on how these will target your audience needs and
emotions.
Classify each idea with a level of "interest" based on how relevant is for
your audience and the amount of search volume that exists around each topic (you
can validate the keyword planner information with those of SearchMetrics and
SEMRush).

Search and identify which of these post ideas have been already covered,
whether by you, your competitors, or any other site in the past. See which sites
have published the posts and the degree of success they had with them. It's also
important that you specify in which content format (text, infographic, video,
checklist, slides, etc.) and type (guide, news, review, webinar, report,
competition, etc.) they have been published, as well as when they were published
(since it's not the same to have been covered five years ago than just a couple
of months before).

By following these steps you will have a list of blog posts ideas with this
information:
The blog post idea
Interest
Search volume
Relevance level

Coverage status
Publication URL
Content format
Content type
Publication date
Shares in each social networks (Twitter, Facebook, Google+, LinkedIn, etc.)
External links
Linking domains


Prioritize those ideas that have the highest level of interest and that
haven't been published yet.

Step 3: Identify your blog post opportunities

For each of the highly prioritized potential ideas for posts, ask the
following questions to filter them further and validate your opportunities:

Is this topic related to your business's vision and goal?
Is this the type of post content that is really interesting and useful for
your audience?
Is it clear how the post will help your audience solve an issue or improve
what they have?
Will you be able to write the post to be easily consumed and understood by
them?
Are the resources needed to write the post feasible for you?
Will it be profitable for you to rank with this post?

The winning idea will be those for which you answer yes to the questions.




In case that you have identified a topic that has been already covered in the
past with a blog post, but it complies with the rest of the previous criteria so
is still attractive to pursue, then think about how you can create a unique
selling proposition that differentiates yours from what came before. Two common
options are:

Do a follow-up post, completing or expanding the initial information.
Reformat the post to build a tool, create a checklist, a guide, a list or
compilation of resources, an infographic, a presentation or a video that makes
it easier and more attractive to consume, and then write a post to announce it.
Some examples; rinse and repeat.

I contribute my writing to Moz, State of Digital, and at WooRank and
it´s fundamental for me to have a process to follow to be able to come up
each month with new blog posts ideas, so I've followed this process in the past
to write these posts:

A follow-up Q&A post after my Mobile SEO Mozinar.
A test challenge after my MozCon presentation in 2012
A checklist compiling the most important International SEO factors and another
for SEO friendly migrations
A compilation of international SEO tools and another of SEO guidelines for 2014
A case study to launch my hreflang tags tool
A presentation and a checklist giving tips for international business travel
A step-by-step guide to do a Mobile SEO audit
A post answering the question I got in social networks about how I create my
slides

It has worked pretty well for me in the past and hopefully it does for you
too!


Do you use a process to identify your blog posts ideas? I would love to hear
about it.
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!



You may view the latest post at
http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/seomoz/~3/4GMdKqFbSFE/identifying-blog-topics-relevant-to-your-audience

You received this e-mail because you asked to be notified when new updates are
posted.
Best regards,
Build Backlinks Online
peter.clarke@designed-for-success.com

[Build Backlinks Online] TITLE

Build Backlinks Online has posted a new item, 'The 7 BEST Chiropractic Practice Marketing Strategies!'

In this free video training, you’ll discover the best chiropractic marketing strategies that are working right now to attract an extra 30+ new patients per month. The beauty of implementing these systems is that you don’t need to spend any money to make them effective!

Here’s what you’ll learn on the webinar:

The top 12 tools that are EXPLODING today’s chiropractic practices.

3 powerful social media strategies that turn the internet into your personal ATM.

The easiest and most credible offline marketing method that gets you into any business at ANY TIME. This averaged our office 1 new patient PER DAY. (it’s not spinal screenings either!)

How to turn what you already know into a vast array of information products that can be sold 24/7 online.

How to design, organize, and execute your 12 month marketing calendar in order to attract dozens of new patients each month.

And more…

Click the play button below to view.

The information shared will DRAMATICALLY impact your chiropractic practice in a positive way. You’ll be able to serve more, earn more, and pay-it-forward on a much bigger scale!

 

 

–

Did you like this post? If so, click the Facebook "like" button below and share it with your friends.

Related Blog Posts:

Avoid This Chiropractic Practice Marketing Mistake!

3 Instant Income Multipliers For Chiropractors

[Replay] 7 Steps to Ending Chiropractic Insurance Dependency

Yelp Deleting Chiropractic Reviews! (and what to do about it)

You may view the latest post at http://dcincome.com/blog/the-7-best-chiropractic-practice-marketing-strategies/ You received this e-mail because you asked to be notified when new updates are posted. Best regards, Build Backlinks Online peter.clarke@designed-for-success.com

[Build Backlinks Online] New Study Shows Original Content Reaches More People on Facebook

Build Backlinks Online has posted a new item, 'New Study Shows Original Content
Reaches More People on Facebook'

Posted by Chad_WittmanThis 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 Moz,
Inc.
Facebook continues to make significant changes in the news feed. This time
Facebook has decreased the importance (technically the "weight") of status
updates. With these changes occurring so rapidly in the news feed, many brand
managers want to know how to stay on top of it all.


We dug deep into the data to see what the latest change was and wanted to
introduce a philosophy to stay ahead of the constant changes. We analyze and
monitor this type of data for thousands of Facebook pages with a tool called
EdgeRank Checker.


On Jan. 21, Facebook released a blog post explaining that status updates from
pages are less engaging than status updates from friends. In other words, status
updates were going to lose exposure in the news feed.


The change was implemented nearly immediately, as we saw organic reach begin
to dip rapidly. In the graph below, you'll see a ~40% decrease from the two
weeks after Jan. 21, as compared to the two weeks before:




While frustrating for many brands, status updates aren't displayed nearly as
often as links and photos, as they typically don't provide as much value to the
business. Status updates are typically used for gathering general opinions or
quick message updates, whereas links can drive actual traffic.


During this change, the other content types were not significantly impacted.
Most experienced a very moderate decrease, which is most likely due to normal
fluctuations. Interestingly, videos have now become the strongest performer in
the news feed. Our sample size for posts with videos is less than optimal, but
our historical data shows a similar pattern. For brands that have the capability
to deliver engaging videos, it should be considered as an interesting content
outlet in the future.



How does a brand stay ahead?

As we study each change in the news feed, a common theme begins to appear.
Content that creates value tends to bubble to the top. Google has a similar
approach with search results. We see Facebook slowly becoming similar to Google
in that capacity. When we examine the brands that are less impacted by negative
changes, they tend to have strong engagementâspecifically shares. Why is
this? We think we can explain this phenomenon with a concept called Content
Originator.

Content Originator

Brands that actually create the content (thus, Content Originators) are the
ones that experience the most value in the news feed. We've seen Google take a
similar approach with examining inbound links. Content Originators actually have
less to do with Facebook specifically, as compared to the maturation of any
social network. Twitter most likely experiences similar results, which you can
see as a Tweet propagates across the worldâthe Content Originator gets
more exposure.


The reason that Content Originators are able to succeed with an onslaught of
changes is that they are able to utilize natural distribution networks such as
shares. While Facebook's algorithms may not weigh their initial post as heavily
as before, strong engagement and shares are strong signals to distribute the
content further.


The news feed is filled with increasing competition that boasts larger and
larger budgets to gain exposure within the feed. Being a Content Originator
helps slice through the noise created by so many pages re-reporting news. The
re-reporting of news is something that Facebook is attempting to decrease
through these changes. It is also possible that brands will begin to gain
additional exposure through the "Trending" section if they're the Content
Originator of a new and trending topic.


In an example below, you can see the local value that Facebook provides in the
trending result. A story that was shared on Facebook 2,000+ times from
CarolinaLive (not quite a Content Originator, but as close as you can get in a
situation like this, as compared to a CNN-type news source) is given the extra
exposure. The next object listed is from Fox Carolina News, again more of a
Content Originator than the national brand of Fox News.




The example above is meant to illustrate how Facebook perceives Content
Originators elsewhere in their platform. We use things like this as clues to
better understand how the news feed works.

Conclusion

Facebook decreased organic reach of status updates by ~40% on Jan. 21. For
most brands, this doesn't have a large impact on their strategy, as they are
mostly using links and photos to further increase their brand. Using a concept
called Content Originator might help craft a content strategy that stays ahead
of news feed changes. Facebook may be placing additional value on content
originators in the news feed, and is surely valuing brands with strong
engagementâespecially ones with high share levels.

Methodology

We studied roughly 50,000 posts from 800 different pages for the two weeks
before and after Jan. 21. For most metrics, we examined the median of each
page's average performance over the time period analyzed. Engagement is defined
as likes + comments + shares for this study.
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!



You may view the latest post at
http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/seomoz/~3/MlFzcA8aEV4/new-facebook-study-original-content

You received this e-mail because you asked to be notified when new updates are
posted.
Best regards,
Build Backlinks Online
peter.clarke@designed-for-success.com

[Build Backlinks Online] TITLE

Build Backlinks Online has posted a new item, 'Alex Mandossian Interviews Facebook Expert, Dr. Matthew Loop'

This past Friday, I was very fortunate to be interviewed by legendary marketer and entrepreneur, Alex Mandossian. Since I was at Underground Seminar in New Orleans, we decided to do a special Google Hangout. Technology did cooperate so I wanted to share the recording with you.

In this free training, you’ll discover:

1) Three time-tested strategies to beat Facebook’s new algorithm
2) The biggest traps to AVOID when advertising on Facebook to get more traffic.
3) How to get over 1,800 likes from a single blog post without breaking the bank.

Just click the play button below to view. The information shared DIRECTLY affects you as a business owner! Facebook is changing and you need to stay up-to-date if you want to profit in a big way.

 

 

–

Did you like this post? If so, click the Facebook "like" button below and share it with your friends.

Related Blog Posts:

The 12 Common Denominators of Internet Millionaires

How to Create Quote Graphics to Share on Facebook 

3 Ways to Add an EXTRA $100,000 in Recurring Income this Year

Social Media Revenue Strategist, Dr. Matthew Loop, Speaks in Cali

You may view the latest post at http://dcincome.com/blog/alex-mandossian-interviews-facebook-expert/ You received this e-mail because you asked to be notified when new updates are posted. Best regards, Build Backlinks Online peter.clarke@designed-for-success.com

[Build Backlinks Online] Bloggers Aren’t Just Bloggers: A Solid Example of Multi-Channel Marketing

Build Backlinks Online has posted a new item, 'Bloggers Aren't Just Bloggers:
A Solid Example of Multi-Channel Marketing'

One of the many points that I illustrated in my post yesterday about a
co-campaign that Dailys Cocktails and Wholly Guacamole teamed up on was the
value of a multi-channel marketing strategy. (Read it here if you missed it, its
a good one!) Bloggers are a fantastic springboard for such a strategy because
they are []



You may view the latest post at
http://feeds.feedblitz.com/~/57690342/0/convinceandconvert~Bloggers-Aren%E2%80%99t-Just-Bloggers-A-Solid-Example-of-MultiChannel-Marketing/

You received this e-mail because you asked to be notified when new updates are
posted.
Best regards,
Build Backlinks Online
peter.clarke@designed-for-success.com

[Build Backlinks Online] TITLE

Build Backlinks Online has posted a new item, 'A/B Testing Best Practices Can Save You Time, Money and Effort – Here's How'

Share

Everybody* knows that A/B testing best practices can help you run faster, jump higher and increase conversions. When it comes to providing users with an engaging and rewarding online experience, good A/B tests are a more effective treatment for embarrassing landing pages than topical ointment. However, approaches to designing multivariate tests that provide accurate and representative results can be uncertain at best and outright divisive at worst.

A/B testing is an invaluable tool for landing page optimization when implemented correctly. To minimize wasting time, money and effort on changes that will yield little to no benefit – or even make things worse – take the following points into consideration during your next project.

* Not everybody knows this

Prove It

Before you casually ask your designers and copywriters to create dozens of different buttons or calls to action by the end of the day, it's crucial that you have a hypothesis you wish to test. After all, without at least some idea of the possible outcomes, A/B testing becomes A/B guessing. Similarly, without a hypothesis, discerning the true impact of design changes can be difficult and may lead to additional (and potentially unnecessary) testing, or missed opportunities that could have been identified had the test been performed with a specific objective in mind.

Just as scientists approach an experiment with a hypothesis, you should enter the multivariate testing phase with a clear idea of what you expect to see – or at the very least, some notion of what you think will happen.

Formulating a hypothesis doesn't have to be complicated. You could A/B test whether subtle changes to the phrasing of a call to action results in more conversions, or whether a slightly different color palette reduces your bounce rate.

Whatever aspect of your site you decide to test, be sure that everyone involved in the project is aware of the core hypothesis long before any code, copy or assets are changed.

Key Takeaway: Before you begin your A/B test, know what you're testing and why. Are you evaluating the impact of subtle changes to the copy of a call to action? Form length? Keyword placement? Make sure you have an idea of what effect changes to the variation will have before you start A/B split testing.

 

Take a Granular Approach to A/B Testing

One of the most common mistakes people make when performing A/B tests is comparing the results of landing page layouts that are too radically different from one another. Although it might be tempting to test the effectiveness of two completely different pages, doing so may not yield any actionable data. This is because the greater the differences between two versions of a page, the harder it is to determine which factors caused an improvement – or decline – in conversions.

Don't be seduced by the idea that all variations in an A/B test have to be spectacular, show-stopping transformations. Even subtle changes can have a demonstrable effect, such as slightly reformatting a list of product features to persuade users to request more information, or phrasing a call to action differently to drive user engagement.

Even something as "harmless" as minor differences in punctuation can have a measurable impact on user behavior. Perry Marshall, marketing expert and author of "The Ultimate Guide to Google AdWords," recalled an A/B test in which the CTR of two ads were evaluated. The only difference between the two? The inclusion of a single comma. Despite this seemingly irrelevant detail, the variant that featured the comma had a CTR of 4.40% – an improvement of .28 percentage points over the control.

However, that's not to say that comparing user behavior on two very different versions of a page is completely without merit. In fact, doing so earlier in the testing phase can inform design decisions further down the pipeline. A/B testing best practices dictate that the greater the difference between two versions of a page, the earlier in the testing process these variations should be evaluated.

Key Takeaway: Test one element at a time so you'll know for sure what change was responsible for the uptick in conversions. Once you've determined a winner, test another single change. Keep iterating until your conversion rate is maxed out.

Test Early, Test Often

Scientists rarely use the results of a single experiment to prove or disprove their hypotheses, and neither should you. To adhere to A/B testing best practices, you should evaluate the impact of one variable per test, but that doesn't mean you're restricted to performing just one test overall. That would be silly.

A/B testing should be a granular process. Although the results of the first test may not provide you with any real insight into how your users behave, they might allow you to design additional tests to gain greater understanding about what design choices have a measurable impact on conversions.

The sooner you begin A/B testing, the sooner you can eliminate ineffective design choices or business decisions based on assumptions. The more frequently you test certain aspects of your site, the more reliable the data will be, enabling you to focus on what really matters – the user.

Key Takeaway: Don't put off A/B testing until the last minute. The sooner you get your hands on actual data, the sooner you can begin to incorporate changes based on what your users actually do, not what you think they'll do. Test frequently to make sure that adjustments to your landing pages are improving conversions.

Be Patient With Multivariate Tests

A/B testing is an important tool in the marketing professional's arsenal, but meaningful results probably won't materialize overnight. When designing and performing A/B tests, be patient – ending a test prematurely might feel like saving time, but it could end up costing you money.

Economists and data scientists rely on a principle known as statistical significance to identify and interpret the patterns behind the numbers. Statistical significance lies at the very heart of A/B testing best practice, as without it, you run the risk of making business decisions based on bad data.

Statistical significance is the probability that an effect observed during an experiment or test is caused by changes made to a specific variable, as opposed to mere chance. To arrive at statistically significant results, marketers must have a sufficiently large data set to draw upon. Not only do larger volumes of data provide more accurate results, they also make it easier to identify standard deviations – typical variations from the average result that are not statistically significant. Unfortunately, it takes time to gather this data, even for sites with millions of unique monthly visitors.

If you're tempted to cut a test short, step back for a moment. Take a deep breath. Grab a coffee. Do some yoga. Remember – patience is a virtue.

Key Takeaway: Resist the temptation to end a test early, even if you're getting strong initial results. Let the test run its course, and give your users a chance to show you how they're interacting with your landing pages, even when multivariate testing large user bases or high-traffic pages.

Keep an Open Mind When A/B Testing

Remember how we emphasized the importance of forming a hypothesis before starting the testing phase? Well, just because you have an idea of the outcome of an A/B test doesn't mean it's going to happen – or that your original idea was even accurate. That's OK, though, we won't make fun of you.

Many a savvy marketer has fallen prey to the idea that, regardless of what her results tell her, the original hypothesis was the only possible outcome. This insidious thought often surfaces when user data paints a very different picture than the one that project stakeholders were expecting. When presented with data that differs significantly from the original hypothesis, it can be tempting to dismiss the results or the methodologies of the test in favor of conventional knowledge or even previous experience. This mindset can spell certain doom for a project. After all, if you're so confident in your assumptions, then why A/B test in the first place?

Chris Kostecki, a seasoned marketing and PPC professional, can certainly attest to the importance of keeping an open mind when A/B testing. While evaluating two versions of a landing page, Chris discovered that the variant – which featured more positional copy and was further away from the product ordering page – outperformed the control by a substantial margin.  Chris noted that although he was confident that the more streamlined page would result in more conversions, his A/B test results proved otherwise.

Remaining open to new ideas based on actual data and proven user behavior is essential to the success of a project. In addition, the longer the testing phase, and the more granular your approach, the more likely you are to discover new things about your customers and how they interact with your landing pages. This can lead to valuable insight into which changes will have the greatest impact on conversions. Let your results do the talking, and listen closely to what they tell you.

Key Takeaway: Users can be fickle, and trying to predict their behavior is risky. You're not psychic, even if you do secretly have a deck of tarot cards at home. Use hard A/B test data to inform business decisions – no matter how much it surprises you. If you're not convinced by the results of a test, run it again and compare the data.

Maintain Momentum

So, you've formulated your hypothesis, designed a series of rigorous tests, waited patiently for the precious data to trickle in, and carefully analyzed your results to arrive at a statistically significant, demonstrable conclusion – you're done now, right? Wrong.

Successful A/B tests can not only help you increase conversions or improve user engagement, they can also form the basis of future tests. There's no such thing as the perfect landing page, and things can always be improved. Even if everybody is satisfied with the results of an A/B test and the subsequent changes, the chances are pretty good that other landing pages can yield similarly actionable results. Depending on the nature of your site, you can either base future tests on the results of the first project, or apply A/B testing best practices to an entirely new set of business objectives.

Key Takeaway: Even highly optimized landing pages can be improved. Don't rest on your laurels, even after an exhaustive series of tests. If everyone is happy with the results of the test for a specific page, choose another page to begin testing. Learn from your experiences during your initial tests to create more specific hypotheses, design more effective tests and zero in on areas of your other landing pages that could yield greater conversions.

Choose Your Own Adventure

No two scientific experiments are exactly alike, and this principle most definitely applies to A/B testing. Even if you're only evaluating the impact of a single variable, there are dozens – if not hundreds – of external factors that will shape the process, influence your results and possibly cause you to start sobbing uncontrollably.

Take Brad Geddes, for example. Founder of PPC training platform Certified Knowledge, Brad recalled working with a client that had some seriously embarrassing landing pages. After much pleading and gnashing of teeth, Brad finally managed to convince his client to make some adjustments. The redesign was almost as bad as the original, but after being A/B tested, the new landing page resulted in an overall sitewide increase in profit of 76 % – not too shabby for a terrible landing page.

Don't approach the testing phase too rigidly. Be specific when designing your tests, remain flexible when interpreting your data, and remember that tests don't have to be perfect to provide valuable insights. Keep these points in mind, and soon, you'll be a seasoned A/B testing pro – and no, you don't have to wear a lab coat (but you can if you want to, it's cool).

Key Takeaway: Every multivariate test is different, and you should remember this when approaching each and every landing page. Strategies that worked well in a previous test might not perform as effectively in another, even when adjusting similar elements. Even if two landing pages are similar, don't make the mistake of assuming that the results of a previous test will apply to another page. Always rely on hard data, and don't lose sleep over imperfect tests.

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.

You may view the latest post at http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/WordStreamBlog/~3/lQjPXJaaiZE/ab-testing-best-practices You received this e-mail because you asked to be notified when new updates are posted. Best regards, Build Backlinks Online peter.clarke@designed-for-success.com

[Build Backlinks Online] How to Use Presentations for Content Marketing

Build Backlinks Online has posted a new item, 'How to Use Presentations for
Content Marketing'

Lets face it. When you think content marketing, your brain immediately thinks
blogs, eBooks, and whitepapers. But, what about presentations? If you neglected
this medium in 2013, I want to encourage you to take another look at
presentations in 2014. Here are few reasons why: You Have a Story Worth Sharing
Lets first establish that []



You may view the latest post at
http://feeds.feedblitz.com/~/57715708/0/convinceandconvert~How-to-Use-Presentations-for-Content-Marketing/

You received this e-mail because you asked to be notified when new updates are
posted.
Best regards,
Build Backlinks Online
peter.clarke@designed-for-success.com

[Build Backlinks Online] (Provided): 10 Ways to Prove SEO Value in Google Analytics

Build Backlinks Online has posted a new item, '(Provided): 10 Ways to Prove SEO
Value in Google Analytics'

Posted by JeffalyticsThis 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 Moz,
Inc.
...

You may view the latest post at
http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/seomoz/~3/GdwEKKH1TGU/proving-seo-value-in-google-analytics

You received this e-mail because you asked to be notified when new updates are
posted.
Best regards,
Build Backlinks Online
peter.clarke@designed-for-success.com

[Build Backlinks Online] TITLE

Build Backlinks Online has posted a new item, 'The Future of PageRank: 13 Experts on the Dwindling Value of the Link'

In a recent Webmaster video, Matt Cutts confirmed that Google has tried internal versions of its search engine that work entirely without links. The results are low-quality – "for now," he said. But this suggests that the value of the almighty link has come into question at Google, and they may be working on a version of the PageRank algorithm that doesn't depend so heavily on the link graph – which means PageRank as we know it might be on the chopping block. But when?

Don LaFontaine, Master of the "In a World" Movie Trailer Voiceover

In light of this, we asked some of our favorite SEO and inbound marketing experts to answer the following three questions:

1. Do you see the link losing value over time? Do you foresee a future where backlinks lose some or all of their weight in the PageRank algorithm? How far off would it be?
2. Thought experiment: If Google search did work without links (as Russian search engine Yandex is attempting), what metrics would replace it?
3. How – if at all – should SEO's change their content marketing and link building strategies in the coming years, given inevitable changes to the algorithm?

We got great insights into the future of PageRank, links, and SEO from industry experts Aaron Wall, Rae Hoffman, Brett Tabke, Michelle Robbins, Julie Joyce, Rand Fishkin, Glenn Gabe, Barry Adams, Alan Bleiweiss, Larry Kim, Pete Meyers, Eric Enge, and Dharmesh Shah (click their names to jump ahead). Prepare to have your mind blown!

Here are their answers, in no particular order:

Aaron Wall

Is the link losing value over time? Do you foresee a future where backlinks lose some or all of their weight in the PageRank ranking algorithm? How far off would it be?

Almost all individual signals lose value over time as more variables get added into the mix. 

One could perhaps say that variables that are on the way up/gaining importance are an exception to this, but even in these cases as the search results become more ad-heavy it offsets some of those alleged gains. 

Links have been losing weight for about a half-decade now due to the folding in of other metrics and increasing algorithmic and manual penalties. How far off x level of decline is really depends on loads of factors which are query and vertical dependent. Some queries are localized, some have paid vertical ads from Google, some have lots of usage data which can be folded in, some queries are mobile-centric, some queries have Google scraping-n-replacing the results with their knowledge graph, etc. All these variations on search impact different areas to different degrees. In some areas SEO might still be profitable even for small businesses for another half-decade or decade to come. In other areas SEO will have close to a zero percent chance of being profitable unless it is done by one of the players which is already favored algorithmically before they consider investment into SEO. 

And even in some of those cases which look great, Google can arbitrarily shift outcomes overnight on a vertical-wide basis. Look at the historical algorithmic performance on SEMRush for Ask.com and BizRate. One entity is an extension of the home team, while the other clearly is not.

Thought experiment: If Google search did work without links (as Russian search engine Yandex is attempting), what metrics would replace it?

As mentioned above, there are some vertical-based metrics Google can use for things like location or similar. And then there are a nearly limitless number of ways Google could count their passive tracking of users from logged in user accounts, Google Chrome, Google Android, Google Fiber, etc. Google can further use things like credit card registration, YouTube usage data, location, search history, Google+ activity, etc. to determine which user accounts to trust more than others. 

The differential and deferential policing of link-based activities is in effect a way of removing links, selectively. One way Google is "uncounting" links is through massive amounts of algorithmic and manual penalties. That in effect is a way of having links not count for some while allowing them to count for others. The broad distribution (and even amplification) of fear-based propaganda around links by various link analysis tool vendors only further removes some types of links from the link graph. 

How – if at all – should SEO's change their content marketing and link building strategies in the coming years, given inevitable changes to the algorithm?

Anything which is scalable and widely scaled will eventually be promoted as a form of spam, unless it is done by the home team. Thus the more differentiated one's efforts are and the harder + more expensive they are to reverse-engineer and duplicate, the better. 

One can focus aggressively on brand building and raise funds from venture capitalists tied in with Google ventures, such that they become exempt from algorithmic and manual review issues. Give Google a taste of the revenues and your chances of success increases dramatically. In terms of outcomes, it's the difference between CustomMade or RetailMeNot versus TeachStreet or a small mom and pop e-commerce store. The search engine advertising driven biases the Google founders warned about in their early research were not so much a warning as a roadmap for Google. When Google buys MediaOcean we can expect TV ads to bleed even more directly into driving "organic" rankings.

Aaron Wall is the owner of SEOBook.com.

Rae Hoffman

Do you see the link losing value over time? Do you foresee a future where backlinks lose some or all of their weight in the ranking algorithm? How far off would it be?

I think that Google would love to find a way to make links less of a component in search engine rankings, but I don't see that being truly viable anytime soon. Links are essentially the currency of the web. I don't think Google can change that at its core in the near future – especially since links are valuable outside of search engine rankings. 

What I think is plausible in the next few years is having a better "checks and balances" system for links – where they can look at outside factors in correlation to a link to give that link more or less value. Right now, they look at the quality of the linking site. But, does the link get shared socially (and if so, who is sharing it)? Does a link bring traffic to the linked site (and if so, what's the bounce rate, time on site, etc. of traffic from that link?) And how is a site traffic profile affected after link bursts? For example, if you average 100 visitors a day and then get an inbound traffic / link spike, does your traffic – after the initial spike wears off – increase to 120 visitors per day? 

Then you get into what they're hoping to do with Google+ –  who wrote the content containing the link? And what is that person's area of expertise? For example, in a perfect world, Google would know that I am authoritative on SEO and affiliate marketing – and articles I write on those topics, and people I link out to, should be given more weight. But if I wrote an article on gardening, should that content / outbound links also receive more weight because I as an individual am considered "authoritative" in a different topic? What I believe they're aiming for is to answer that question with a "no." 

I think that what Google is aiming to do is kill off the value of the "scalable" link. Everything they've been doing – from both a penalty and "where we want to go in the future" perspective appears to be targeting that.

Thought experiment: If Google search did work without links (as Russian search engine Yandex is attempting), what metrics would replace it?

I think they could use many of the aspects I mentioned above in that scenario. But I also don't believe they're looking to replace the link. If I were them, I'd be looking to have better ways to "validate" the link. 

How – if at all – should SEO's change their content marketing and link building strategies in the coming years, given inevitable changes to the PageRank algorithm?

I've been talking about a link building strategy that contains a heavy focus on traffic development vs. merely "link development" for almost a decade now. I think sites that build content to solve problems vs. "get search traffic" have had the advantage in regards to obtaining defensible search engine rankings for several years now and will continue to increase their advantage in the future by staying focused on that same strategy. "Content marketing" has existed long before it was called content marketing.

Typically, an SEO looks at analytics reports with a filter to look at only search traffic, and I think that's a mistake. You need to be looking at reports filtered down to direct and referral traffic as well, because if those aren't increasing with your link building and content marketing strategies, then you're not building defensible links. And more importantly, you're not building a defensible online business.  It seems counterintuitive, but by putting a larger focus on increasing the slices of your traffic pie outside of search engine rankings than most business currently do, you'll end up with better – and more defensible – search engine rankings at the end of the day.

Rae Hoffman, AKA Sugarrae, is the CEO of PushFire.

Brett Tabke

Is the link losing value over time? Do you foresee a future where backlinks lose some or all of their weight in the PageRank algorithm?

Yes. The web has been rewritten in the image of PageRank. The link's value is questionable. Google has used a lot of band-aids over the years to the Page Rank based algorithm in an attempt to keep it valid. However, it is clear that the value of the link as a metric is questionable in almost all occurrences today.

Do you foresee a future where back links lose some or all of their weight in the ranking algorithm?

I think it is clear it has *already* done that. Google is trying everything they can to "devalue" the link as a scoring metric. A link from a PR9 page used to mean instant top-page rankings under the appropriate keywords. Today, that same link means very little by itself. The value of the link is going to continue to decline.

If Google search did work without links, what metrics would replace it?

You remember the story of how Google figured out spelling suggestions? They looked at all the ways people misspelled britanny, and then let the users tell them which one is right. They do that for all their spelling suggestions. In effect, they are using user-powered intelligence to direct their spelling algo. They can do something similar for search results.

So there are a couple of ways I think Google could eliminate the page rank algo:

(a) human-powered reviewers scoring pages

(b) a user behavior derived algo

(c) a hybrid of a/b

Consider if you have 1,000 people reviewing pages. Each person could visit 1 page per minute for 6-8 hours a day. That is 360,000 pages per day. That means in 1 week's time, you could score the top results for (guessing) 75-80% of the links in SERP's people actually see and click on. To refine it down even further, you could take the top clicked links and do a reverse QA check every week to get scoring from multiple reviewers and give it a group score. That means, you could basically "hand score" the entire set of top clicked SERP links in a couple of months. Now imagine you are doing that for say the last 10 years. Why would you need page rank when you have people rank?

Think about all the click and traffic data Google has to work with:

• Google Analytics (the leading site metric on the web). Google knows where click paths come from, go to, and where they dead-end in a happy camper, or a "back button and try again."
• AdSense. Ads that people like and click on. Also gives them page view data.
• Google Chrome browser.

That gives Google a huge set of data to score pages with for any query. They know what links people follow to find successful answers. With all that, why would they need a Page Rank algo? They could be almost to the point of eliminating both on-the-page and off-the-page criteria. They can just follow user behavior. They could let users train the algo the same why they let users tell them to identify spelling mistakes by offering them two choices and seeing what ones people pick most.

How – if at all – should SEO's change their content marketing and link building strategies in the coming years, given inevitable changes to the algorithm?

I would start to focus on all traffic sources that don't require search traffic. I would use those efforts as content fodder for the search engines, and allow the SE's to send whatever traffic they send. I would pretend that search engines don't exist and focus on everything else: full stop (yes, I know and I'm not happy about it either).

Brett Tabke is the founder of Pubcon and WebmasterWorld Inc.

Michelle Robbins

Do you see the link losing value over time? Do you foresee a future where backlinks lose some or all of their weight in the ranking algorithm? How far off would it be?

I think links were a necessary part of the PageRank algo in the beginning, and for a very long time, when there were no other signals available. But that pool was (and still is) very easily manipulated – and it's become a terrible signal at best. Google can keep playing link whack a mole, but I believe that if they want to present truly relevant and valuable results to users – using links as a heavily weighted factor (or even at all) – has to go. They know this, and we're probably not more than a few years or less away from this happening.

Thought experiment: If Google search did work without links (as Russian search engine Yandex is attempting), what metrics would replace it?

Everyone is keen to believe social signals are or will replace links in importance, but that's just trading one unreliable signal for another. I believe the real key to relevant results lies in tying offline, behavioral data, with the online data they crawl. Google's in an interesting fix – they always try to tie a result to a person, what they know about you via your search history, social signals, etc. – but that's not getting the job done. And it's not even really necessary. Just because I order pizza online regularly, doesn't mean I'm the one ever buying or eating that pizza. However, knowing that I physically walk into the same pizza place a few times a month, and am there for 45 mins to an hour – well that actually tells a story, about both my behavior and the quality/popularity of that restaurant. 

So for local business search results, what's the best indicator of a business' relevance in a community? Joe's Pizza has 1,000 backlinks and a 4-star rating on Yelp, but only about 2,000 people through the doors each month. Paul's Pizza has maybe 100 links, is not even reviewed on Yelp, but has 5,000 people through the doors each month. Which pizza place should rank higher? Google understands this – that getting IRL behavioral data is necessary, which is why they are all in on the Android OS. They don't care about making nice phones. They need a reliable tracking device, and not just for a maps button or default search – but for the data that can be obtained via that device and the apps, where it lives, where it shops, where it eats, what it buys. 

The iOS platform presents a challenge for them for this kind of data acquisition – but they're scrappy in Mountain View – they'll just roll their own wifi hotspots, give you an app that supplies immediate authentication, you're happy, get free wifi, and they can aggregate that very valuable "where" data. Mostly, I remain surprised that they simply don't just partner with Nielsen. Nielsen already has all of this data (see below).

They know so much more about the IRL habits of people – and it's valid, powerful, anonymized data – all of which provides real, authentic brand/business signals. Google has a data bias though, they prefer to acquire it themselves. We are seeing some movement in this regard however, notably, the ComScore partnership.

Keep an eye on Google's partnerships, and especially their acquisitions, this is usually the best indicator of where they are headed. 

How – if at all – should SEO's change their content marketing and link building strategies in the coming years, given inevitable changes to the PageRank algorithm?

SEOs need to market as if Google isn't watching. 

The acceptance that content actually is king, means SEOs are now catching up to where large brands have been all along. This turns the tables because for so long, the big brands "didn't get it" – they either had minimal or nonexistent web presences. This was boon for online only businesses and gave the "little guy" a shot at the top – whether or not in the real world, that small brand was dominant. 

The past few years (and algorithm shifts) have brought cries from SEOs that "Google has a big brand bias" – I don't think this is true at all. Google has a data bias – and that means a content bias. And big brands have content. Stacks of content, decades of content, that they have finally gotten around to putting online. Brands don't even have to do much to promote their own content – consumers happily do it for them. In natural ways and in varied places across the ecosystem that Google crawls. Nike is a perfect example of this – if Nike dominates an athletic shoe SERP, it's not brand bias, it just makes sense. 

As to the power of traditional marketing and branding, and how doing a thorough job of that can translate to winning in the SERPs, there is a very large brand, with decades of content, that had a site lie dormant for 2-3 years (no updates, no changes, no content being added). In less than three years, after relaunching, here's where they were as of the 3rd quarter of last year:

Monthly unique visitors: 1 million

Monthly unique visits: 1.7 million

Monthly pageviews: 3.4 million

SEO budget: $0

They have a 2-person marketing team, and 1 full-time writer. They have no SEO team, they hire no SEO consultants. They have truly terrible title tags and URL structure. Yet for about 20 terms I polled, they rank in the top 5 for them all (usually #1 - #3).

###

The real TL;DR version:

Google wants their results to be valid and relevant – to mirror user expectations in the real world, and they will continue to evolve their system to get there. Links aren't doing it, so they are working to adapt. Offline signals are valid, not easily manipulated, and can be captured. Thus I believe they will be used in the algo.

To continue being effective in Google results, SEOs need to focus on marketing. Brands have learned (or acquired or hired) what they need from SEOs – SEOs now need to catch up and learn solid brand marketing fundamentals.

The biggest challenges will be faced by online only brands – especially small brands, in competitive niches. But in this case, I wouldn't focus my efforts on Google, I'd focus on finding where my customers are online, where else they go, what the affinity brands for them are – and invest in a lot of co-marketing and advertising. Just like they would need to do in the offline world ;) 

Michelle Robbins is the Vice President of Technology for Search Engine Land's parent company, Third Door Media.

Julie Joyce

Do you see the link losing value over time? Do you foresee a future where backlinks lose some or all of their weight in the ranking algorithm? How far off would it be?

I think that links could lose some value but it's not a doomsday scenario in my opinion. Considering links are how we move around on the web I cannot imagine a successful search engine that doesn't take their importance into effect. Unless someone wants to totally rebuild Google, I don't see it happening soon. I'm sure someone will do it, but do it well without links? I shudder to imagine that world and not just because I'd have to find something else to spam all up on.

Thought experiment: If PageRank did work without links (as Russian search engine Yandex is attempting), what metrics would replace it?

Interaction, hopefully. I could see them looking at things like how much time does a user spend on a page, how many pages on a site does he or she visit, how many of a site's posts get social love, how many legitimate comments are happening, etc.

How – if at all – should SEO's change their content marketing and link building strategies in the coming years, given inevitable changes to PageRank?

I think they should start thinking more like human beings and less than money-making machines. I know it's marketing and that's the goal, but when you stop thinking like a human you take the kind of shortcuts that get you into trouble and ruin it for the rest of us.  

Julie Joyce is the owner of Link Fish Media, the co-founder of SEO Chicks, and a regular link contributor to Search Engine Land and Search Engine Watch.

Rand Fishkin

Is the link losing value over time? Do you foresee a future where backlinks lose some or all of their weight in the PageRank algorithm? How far off would it be?

Relative to other elements in Google's arsenal of algorithmic components, I'd say that yes, the link has been losing value for almost a decade. That said, I don't think that in the next decade, we'll see a time when links are completely removed from ranking features. They provide a lot of context and value to search engines, and since the engines keep getting better at removing the influence of non-editorial links, the usefulness of link measurement will remain high.

Thought experiment: If Google search did work without links (as Russian search engine Yandex is attempting), what metrics would replace it?

Likely a lot of things already in the index like user and usage data, history and personalization, content and context analysis, semantic analysis, brand signals, etc. I think Google would also find great value in social signals, but they've chosen to forego these (at least the direct ones) due to competitive issues.

How – if at all – should SEO's change their content marketing and link building strategies in the coming years, given inevitable changes to the algorithm?

If you've been building links without thought to whether a search engineer would ideally want to count that link's value, you're likely in for a nasty surprise at some point. Producing things (content, branding, product, services, features, etc.) that naturally earn the types of links engines are trying to find and count is the very best way to stay ahead of whatever shifts may occur in the future.

Rand Fishkin is the Founder of Moz.

Glenn Gabe

Do you see the link losing value over time? Do you foresee a future where backlinks lose some or all of their weight in the ranking algorithm? How far off would it be?

Yes, I absolutely believe links will lose value over time, and especially as technology evolves and the engines have access to even more data. For example, when you have Google Glass-like technology in a contact lens, you're driving a car run by Android, and eventually a chip in your head that can retrieve information in milliseconds. And if you just laughed, you should know Google's AI expert Ray Kurzweil recently explained that by 2029, robots will be smarter than humans. Think about ranking factors when that arrives. :) But that's 2029, not the next 3-5 years.

For now, links aren't dead. Not even close actually. I still think a strong link profile is a valuable asset that will be assessed by Google and Bing when determining rankings. And Google's internal testing of "link-less" rankings backs that up… Matt Cutts explained last week that Google's test produced low-quality results. It shows that Google is obviously interested in factors beyond links, but it also shows the complexity in getting that right.

The fact of the matter is that a historical view of a link profile still provides solid insight into how popular and relevant a website is for a particular query (when taking volume, quality, relevance, temporal factors, etc. into account.) Sure, links have been gamed heavily over the years, but as someone that does a boatload of Penguin work, I can tell you that Google has launched an all-out assault on unnatural links.

So, I still think links will be important over the next 2-3 years. That said, a rounded combination of factors could absolutely diminish the power of links as time goes on. And that's been somewhat happening already…which brings me to your next question.

Thought experiment: If Google PageRank did work without links, what metrics would replace it?

I wrote a post before Facebook Graph Search rolled out titled "BeastRank – 12 Potential Ranking Factors for the Upcoming Facebook Search Engine." That post holds a lot of information about how Social could influence search rankings (albeit for Facebook's purposes). But Google also has G+, and it does have access to a lot of social data of its own. When you combine other factors, you can see how an algorithm that relies less on links, and more on engagement, could be used by Google.

Beyond links, the following factors could all possibly be used to influence rankings:

• Brand mentions across Google properties and services (Search, YouTube, Google Plus, Gmail, etc.) Brands are trusted. People like brands. And Google loves brands.
• AuthorRank (or some form of it) once it officially rolls out. The model of ranking people versus websites is extremely intriguing. It makes a lot of sense and can tie rankings to authors versus the sites their content is written on.
• Social engagement including +1s, shares, mentions, participation, etc. This is where something like BeastRank could shine. See my link above for more information about the potential of Facebook's search algorithm.
• Influencer Engagement – connecting the dots between experts and thought leaders and the content they view, share, etc. So it would take the previous bullet to another level. 
• Content Engagement – dwell time, actual bounce rate (by vertical and niche), downstream traffic, etc. Panda is already taking some of this into account, so it wouldn't be a stretch to think it can become even more prominent.
• Long-Term – And thinking long-term when Google Glass and Android-run cars take over, other interesting factors could come into play. For example, what you have seen, where you have been, where you are headed, what you are thinking about, who you are looking at, how long you stayed somewhere, the history of the people you are with, your physical condition, your mental condition, etc. could impact rankings. But that's a bit into the future. 

How – if at all – should SEO's change their content marketing and link building strategies in the coming years, given inevitable changes to the algorithm?

In the short-term (2-3 years), I still believe the combination of producing killer content (based on data) and utilizing Social to connect with target audiences is a recipe for success. Effectively executing that combination can impact a wide range of ranking factors (beyond just links). And that can help companies rank as links begin to lose their value.  For example, it can impact brand mentions, sharing, influencer engagement, AuthorRank, etc. 

And for the long-term, I highly recommend becoming extremely familiar with the next phase of technology (like wearables, automotive technology, etc.) For example, how will people share from cars, how will they retrieve information from wearables, what's the mechanism for attribution from the next generation of gadgets, etc.? That might just lead you down the path towards new ranking factors. For example, the number of (Android) cars that have bookmarked a certain piece of content. 

From a content generation standpoint, I still believe companies need to think about the pain points their target market is dealing with. Then understand how those people are searching for solutions.  And think about where those people will be, how they will be searching, what types of devices they will be using, how they will be asking questions (Hummingbird), etc. That might lead to new versions of content that once didn't make sense to create and publish.

By the way, if you do everything right (based on what I listed above), those efforts can lead to strong metrics across potential rankings factors (as mentioned earlier). And guess what? One of the byproducts would be more links. So I guess we're back to square one.  :)

Glenn Gabe is President of G-Squared Interactive.

Barry Adams

Is the link losing value over time? Do you foresee a future where backlinks lose some or all of their weight in the PageRank algorithm? How far off would it be? 

Yes I do see links lose value over time, but I don't believe links will disappear entirely from the ranking algorithms. I think Google is already moving to a scenario where links will have different weights depending on the specific query space. For knowledge graph entities, links might not mean much for the top 10 results, but for competitive commercial terms Google might still want to take a strong queue from websites' link graphs to determine which one to rank. But as a search engine based on links, Google will never entirely abandon the link graph. Links are the essential foundation of the world wide web, and Google as a search engine would be foolish to discard links entirely – even if it were possible for them to do so.

Thought experiment: If Google search did work without links (as Russian search engine Yandex is attempting), what metrics would replace it? 

I suspect sentiment analysis, once Google cracks it (and it's a very hard nut to crack), will take up a lot of the slack from links in the ranking algos. Google is likely to start looking at brand mentions online and assessing if those mentions were positive or negative. In the end Google wants to rank the most relevant results for a query that gives its users the best experience, and that means ranking websites that deliver quality service and added value. That can be reflected in positive brand mentions online, so a sturdy sentiment analysis algorithm is Google's holy grail to replace links with.

How – if at all – should SEO's change their content marketing and link building strategies in the coming years, given inevitable changes to the algorithm?

The trend in SEO over the past year – if not longer – has been to build a strong brand presence online and use this to accumulate links naturally. Coupled with outreach activities that focus on adding value to third-party websites with engaging content, and you already have the foundation for where Google and, as a result, SEO are heading: strong online brands with abundant positive mentions. The focus will need to shift from using content to build links to using content to build a positive online brand, and that's a very small step to take which some SEOs already have done.

Barry Adams is the Digital Director of The Tomorrow Lab and Editor at State of Digital.

Alan Bleiweiss

Is the link losing value over time? Do you foresee a future where backlinks lose some or all of their weight in the PageRank algorithm? How far off would it be? 

Link value is destined to become lower in the overall search algorithm framework as Google discovers more signals that can help reinforce/confirm or challenge link signals. The critical factor here though is how difficult it is to determine the trust strength of those other signals. How long it takes to wean themselves off of link signals is a crap-shoot guess. The biggest obstacle to such a transition is directly based on that difficulty of determining trust strength elsewhere.

Thought experiment: If Google search did work without links (as Russian search engine Yandex is attempting), what metrics would replace it? 

The obvious metrics would be social media and on-site factors.

Social is a multi-headed beast that is ever-changing. User behavior within social can be gamed in many ways, just as the link landscape has been gamed in many ways over the years. On-site gaming of the system is already more difficult than gaming the social sphere, and this is why we've continually seen more and more efforts to drive improved on-site signal trust through the years. It's why Schema markup, crawl efficiency and page processing considerations are now baked into the signal evaluation process. And it's why Google just recently refined their "above the fold" algorithm.  

All of these can help Google better understand sites and quality/relevance signals…  

Since Google+ isn't considered a pure social channel, Google's already been reshaping off-site signal considerations by using G+ for author and publisher trust signal clarification and I expect they'll continue to do so with more effort.

IF they can get enough adoption of Google Fiber across a big enough swath of the United States (and eventually elsewhere around the globe) I would not be surprised if they tap that data stream to help influence consumer intent and preference signals, just as they are already likely tapping Gmail. Not just for paid advertising, but also for overall understanding of trust signals that can (and may, to some degree already be) used to help influence organic results.  

From there, it's all about societal behavior digitally. So as new digital channels come into existence, it's all fair game for tapping.

How – if at all – should SEO's change their content marketing and link building strategies in the coming years, given inevitable changes to the algorithm?

I drive this message consistently across all the interviews I'm in, all my audit work, and client training I perform. Content marketing and link building are tactics. They're not strategies. The strategy most people group them in is "what can we do to improve our SEO?" The correct, sustainable and proper strategy is bigger than that: Brand building. Whatever the channel, method or opportunity is that comes along, does it contribute to real, trustworthy brand building? If so, great. If not (if it's a "trick," "shortcut" or "way to fool search engines"), it's toxic.  

Alan Bleiweiss is the owner of Bleiweiss Consulting, a specialized SEO company.

Larry Kim

Is the link losing value over time? Do you foresee a future where backlinks lose some or all of their weight in the PageRank algorithm? How far off would it be? 

Yes. I see a future where links are far less valuable and I think that the golden age of the SEO link is behind us. Links are too easily manipulated and there are many better signals available today that weren't available when Google was first started.

Thought experiment: If Google search did work without links (as Russian search engine Yandex is attempting), what metrics would replace it? 

Quality Score for organic search. Google treats paid search ads as content, too. Google only gets paid if people click on the ads, so they give more prominent positioning to ads that are more relevant. An algorithm called Quality Score determines ad relevancy without using any links at all!

Our internal research has revealed that Quality Score is mostly based on user engagement, in particular, the click-through rate of your ad compared to the expected click-through rate for your ad's given position. This kind of data is harder to fake since there are way more clicks happening than links on the web, and Google can figure out which clicks are real vs. fake since they have Google Analytics/Google AdWords/AdSense tracking codes on most websites, and have huge market share for Chrome on both desktop and mobile. They already have systems in place for detecting click-fraud, and I'd also note that Google acquired click-fraud company Spider.io on Friday.

Additionally, signals like authorship, social media, and your browsing history could be used, too.

How – if at all – should SEO's change their content marketing and link building strategies in the coming years, given inevitable changes to PageRank?

Here's what we're investing in:

• Content Quality: Long form, in-depth articles with original research and non-obvious point of view.
• Remarketing: Amplify the effectiveness of our content marketing and SEO efforts with remarketing to increase brand recall and user engagement metrics like repeat visitor rate, time on site and conversion rates.
• Social Media: Improve social engagement metrics.
• Diversification: Non-search marketing stuff, like partner and event marketing, contests, etc.

Larry Kim is the Founder and Chief Technology Officer of WordStream.

Pete Meyers

Is the link losing value over time? Do you foresee a future where backlinks lose some or all of their weight in the ranking algorithm? How far off would it be?

I think Google is definitely adding layers, so in that sense – yes. If you add non-link signals then the math says that, overall, links must count for less. I guess the question is – how much less? Right now, in 2014, I'd say not much less. Links are still the core of Google's engine, and it's hard to imagine that's going to change overnight.

The PageRank algorithm is elegant and was impressively effective when it launched, especially compared to crude on-page factors, but I don't think that any modern search engine can operate on just one type of ranking factor. Anything can be gamed. I suspect that Google will move more toward corroborating signals. Let's say you have a ton of links, but no traffic, no social, no CTR. That's just not normal. Likewise, if you have thousands of Likes, but no Tweets, no +1s, no links, etc., something isn't right. The real power, down the road, is in being able to look across signals. Links will still matter, but you won't be able to build them in a vacuum.

Thought experiment: If Google search did work without links (as Russian search engine Yandex is attempting), what metrics would replace it?

If they were willing to cross the data barrier, I think user signals – including traffic from Google Analytics. Forget social – dig in and see what sites people are actually visiting. Beyond privacy and gaps in the data, though, there's a chicken-and-egg issue. For example, let's say you used CTR and dwell time (the time people spend between clicking a result and returning) as primary signals. How do you know what to rank in the first place in order to measure CTR and dwell time? Again, this is where I think corroborative signals are important.

How – if at all – should SEO's change their content marketing and link building strategies in the coming years, given inevitable changes to the algorithm?

There are hundreds of answers, if you want to dig into the details, but let me boil it down to one main idea that I think is critical. Make sure that you diversify your tactics and that any tactic has more than one purpose.

Here's an example – let's say that Site (A) builds links purely for SEO, and Site (B) builds links that get traffic and those links just happen to also help SEO. What happens if Google changes the rules and discounts these links? Site (A) is dead in the water, but Site (B) still has traffic. Put aside white-hat/black-hat, Google's guidelines, etc. and ask this: "Is my SEO strategy also building my business?" Editorial links aren't just good for SEO; they're good for your brand and they can drive traffic. Even if the rules change, they'll still have value.

Pete Meyers is a Marketing Scientist at Moz.

Eric Enge

Is the link losing value over time? Do you foresee a future where backlinks lose some or all of their weight in the ranking algorithm? How far off would it be?

On February 3, 2014 I published an article in Search Engine Land called Google is Not Broken. The point of this is that Google is doing just fine. Yes, you can point to bad search results, but their stock price is soaring, and they are effectively a global monopoly in their market space (China, Korea, Czechoslovakia are notable exceptions).

For this reason, I don't see Google as having great urgency to make some great overhaul of PageRank or their search results. But, even if there was this great urgency, let's take a look at the nature of the available signals on the web:

a. Links are a signal that require the person to own a web site. Once you implement a link, it is permanently there until you remove it, visible for all to see.  As a result, links require a fair amount of effort and commitment.

b. Social shares (or tweets) is another potential signal. Bear in mind though that there is little effort or commitment involved in a share or a tweet. I know many people who reshare the articles of others without even visiting the article page (just based on the title). This is a very common practice! In addition, that share disappears from people's streams or feeds pretty quickly.

c. Likes, +1s, and Favorites are even weaker signals. Google cannot even tell what you have Liked – it is entirely invisible to them. They can crawl that Like counter on a web page, but they can't tell if it was generated entirely by Fiverr or really authoritative people. While Google can see +1s and Favorites this signal requires even less effort, and less commitment than a share or a tweet.

d. User interaction with content and the search results could also be used. I believe that Google has already incorporated this to some degree in the search results. Duane Forrester confirmed to me that Bing is using click through rate as a ranking factor in an interview I did with him in 2011. However, I believe that links are still a stronger ranking factor.

e. Content analysis? No, we gave that one up back in 1998 when Google came out with their link-based algorithm.

Ever since the first Moz correlation study people have been adamant that Google is using social signals as a ranking factor, and Google remains adamant that they are not. I believe that Google is NOT using them as a result of extensive studies I have done on the topic:

a. Direct Measurement of Google Plus Impact on Rankings

b. Does Facebook Activity Impact SEO?

Important note: Of course Google is using Google Plus in personalized results. You can read more about that in this article.

So in summary, I don't think that link-based signals will lose all of their weight until there is a fundamentally different set of signals available that are not web-based.

I think there are likely changes that will come in terms of increasing the weight on authoritative sites and continuing to decrease the weight on sites with little or no authority.

Thought experiment: If PageRank did work without links (as Russian search engine Yandex is attempting), what metrics would replace it?

I think that Google would use user interaction with the search results as the most important signal. This could involve simply testing content in the SERPs, seeing how it does, and adjusting accordingly. This is what Duane Forrester described to me in terms of what Bing is doing.

They could then supplement this with social signals. I believe the use of social signals would be very heavily slanted in two directions: personalization and endorsements by people with highly authoritative profiles.

How – if at all – should SEO's change their content marketing and link building strategies in the coming years, given inevitable changes to the algorithm?

Another big question! I have been saying for many years that the big need is to go holistic. You have to look at the big picture. Think about what you would like to have in place if Google and Bing went away entirely – imagine if Congress passed a law saying that operating a search engine was illegal.

What are the thing you wish you had in place if that happened? You would probably want the major sites that cover your market space to regularly publish your content. You would probably want the top influencers in your market space to regularly share you stuff in social media. You would want people to recognize your brand.

You know what is great about this strategy? I will leave you with a quote from my July 2012 interview of Matt Cutts:

"By doing things that help build your own reputation, you are focusing on the right types of activity. Those are the signals we want to find and value the most anyway."

Isn't that cool? Pursing the best strategy for search engines is actually the best strategy if there are no search engines!

Eric Enge is the president of Stone Temple Consulting.

Dharmesh Shah

Is the link losing value over time? Do you foresee a future where backlinks lose some or all of their weight in the ranking algorithm? How far off would it be?

I think it's losing some value – but not as much as some experts believe.  Links have always acted as a form of "endorsement" and a signal of quality to the target page. I think that's still true today. What's different is the sheer volume of other signals of quality – namely social signals. Since it is much easier to tweet than blog, more people tweet than blog. So in a way, it creates a more "democratic" and diverse set of data. I don't think Google or the other search engines are going to eliminate links as a signal from the algorithm anytime soon. They may just reduce the weighting, but it doesn't make sense to drop the signal completely.  

Thought experiment: If Google search did work without links (as Russian search engine Yandex is attempting), what metrics would replace it?

Honestly, I don't know. The first thing that jumps to mind is social data. Signals like tweets, shares, follows etc.

How – if at all – should SEO's change their content marketing and link building strategies in the coming years, given inevitable changes to the Page Rank algorithm?

I've long advocated that people focus more on the content, experience and brand than "tactical" SEO. It seems that the long-term winners in the SEO race are those that deliver a positive experience to users, create useful content and get the "basics" right in terms of crawlability and such. Everything else always seems to be a short-term boost, because the algorithm keeps changing so much. The thing I like to keep in mind is that Google (and the other engines) are simply trying to calculate what content searchers want to see (i.e. what they consider high value). That's what the algorithm is trying to proxy. In my mind, SEO is basically HHO (Human Happiness Optimization).

Dharmesh Shah is Chief Technology Officer and Co-Founder of HubSpot.

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.

You may view the latest post at http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/WordStreamBlog/~3/-qBVPlwfMyg/pagerank You received this e-mail because you asked to be notified when new updates are posted. Best regards, Build Backlinks Online peter.clarke@designed-for-success.com