Sorry this site requires JavaScript to be enabled in your browser. See the following guide on How to enable JavaScript in Internet Explorer, Netscape, Firefox and Safari. Alternatively you may be blocking JavaScript with an advert-related or developer plugin. Please check your browser plugins.
Upcoming Conferences
Search Engine Land produces SMX, the Search Marketing Expo conference series. SMX events deliver the most comprehensive educational and networking experiences - whether you're just starting in search marketing or you're a seasoned expert.
Join us at an upcoming SMX event:
- SMX West - Feb. 28 - Mar. 1, 2012
- SMX Munich - Mar. 27-28, 2012
- SMX Toronto - Apr. 25-26, 2012
- SMX Sydney - May 1-2, 2012
- SMX London - May 15-16, 2012
- SMX Advanced Seattle - June 5-6, 2012
- SMX Paris - June 7-8 2012
- SMX Melbourne - Aug. 2012
- SMX East - Oct. 2-4, 2012
- SMX Stockholm - Sept. 15-16, 2012
- SMX Social Media Marketing - Dec. 2012
Latest News From Marketing Land
- Marketing Day: February 10, 2012
- Report: iPhone, iPad Now Drive More Web Traffic Than Mac OS
- Drawing Out Your Affiliate Program Marketing Plan
- Is Yahoo About To Make Another Big Mistake — With Its Display Ad Business?
- Google Analytics For The Enterprise: Perception & Reality
- - See more news at Marketing Land -
Upcoming Webcasts
Learn more about search marketing with our free online webcasts and webinars from our sister site, Search Marketing Now. Upcoming online events include:
- The Inside Scoop on Automating and Optimizing Your PPC Campaigns - February 21, 2012
Latest News From Search Engine Land
- Google’s Recent Domain Registrations: Labs, Screenwise & AdWords
- Google AdWords Gets Shared Lists To Eliminate Duplicate Data Entry
- SearchCap: The Day In Search, February 10, 2012
- Now, Mitt Romney Has A Santorum-Like Bing & Google Problem
- Search In Pics: Google Sugar Cube, Yahoo Valentines & Chrome M&M’s
- - See more news at Search Engine Land -
Comments
Rand’s got a similar write-up discussed here: http://sphinn.com/story/3848
Robert’s a personally likable guy, but watching him make statements like this is like watching someone driving a car full speed toward a concrete wall while yelling "It’ll be OK -- we’ll get through." Best. Quote. Ever
This one will be an evergreen for sure: "Want to be like Robert -- and Jason Calacanis -- and keep equating SEO with spam? Then fuck off." :-)
Danny - great job as usual. But the "f_ck off" statement is curious -- why let yourself get pulled down to that level? Your passion and knowledge saturate the page, getting aggro like that hurts the core message I think. I can understand how frustrating it must be to constantly defend SEO. Like it or not you’ve evolved into the spokesperson for this industry. You obviously have no problem with credibility, authority, trust and respect in the SEO world (and with the engines themselves). Outside this relatively small world is where SEO really needs you though, and I think it’s easy for an ’outsider’ to gloss over an entire piece after seeing that four letter word above the fold. It’s always easier to criticize than to actually do, so please don’t take this the wrong way. Just trying to offer that if it can help at all. And I think you’ve done a stellar job being the figurehead for SEO so far, so no harm done :)
Because it needed to be said, loudly, clearly and in a blunt manner that makes it clear this stuff isn’t being tolerated more. I watched Jason at Gnomedex once again swing out at the SEOs to pump up his product. Jason knows everything I’ve written on the subject, yet he’ll still continue to slam at SEO for his own purposes. Robert should know better as well, but it’s convenient to build and argument that SEOs are somehow responsible for all the sins of the search world he wants to concoct (whether they are sins or not). You’re absolutely right that it is completely out of character for me to be that blunt and vulgar in my writing, but there it is. I’ve written essay after essay on the topic over the years -- hey, I just did another one, but if that particular word makes a few people pause and reconsider the latest slam they want to do against SEO, good. Because you know, the industry takes slams it doesn’t deserve and never gets the credit for the good things it does.
True that. I wonder why trolls like Calacanis and Scoble get so much airplay, when they’re obviously manipulating issues for their own ends? And everyone who covers their latest self-promo stunt, always says something about how they’re probably just doing it for attention, yadda yadda, but then writes it up and cites them anyway. Sorry, different issue. Back on topic - you’re probably right. I hope this sends a strong message.
Well, one of the links in my story was all about how I didn’t want to see SEOs rise to Jason’s latest bait as part of the Mahalo launch: http://searchengineland.com/070511-064952.php "If I’m starting to sound cranky, it’s because I am. Jason’s long been anti-SEO (where he defines SEO as the worst elements of it), even before the stealth project rumors came out. But as my email notes, I’m expecting he’s going to stir the SEO pot once again to pull in some attention.... That’s fine. I’ll look forward to looking at it. But I’m going to stay as much as possible out of the baiting game that this is some anti-SEO tool. Jason’s great at the baiting, but this is one I think the SEO industry as a whole should ignore. Instead, I’ll just be interested to see it from a search perspective. Trot it out -- let’s see if it is more useful than Google, Yahoo, Microsoft and Ask." I was pleased that by and large, the SEO community has ignored Jason’s latest punches. Everyone has some degree of attention capital they get. You prove you were worth the attention, people will keep investing their time reading you, listening to you and assuming they’re getting something through what they learn. I think many SEOs invested in Jason, looking at his arguments, pushing back as part of a debate and at this point felt like they were investing in some type of pyramid scheme, where he gets all the benefit and they get nothing. The investment is stopping. With Robert, it’s the same thing, or will likely be. Many have suggested that since he left Microsoft, he’s not interesting or doesn’t have much to say. That’s not entirely true, but it does feel like there’s been an uptick in posts about video mainly to get us to pay attention to his videos. Lately, he’s written tons about Facebook, and it has been interesting to see him work the platform. But then today, I invested serious time watching a half-hour of video. I watch video from practically no one. And there was no payoff here -- there were a few bad arguments with little backing and a slam at SEOs. It just makes me far less likely to invest in him again. When Rand said in his post’s title "I used to respect Robert Scoble’s opinion," it’s the same thing -- he’s invested in someone, then found that in an area he knows tons about -- SEO -- it was a bad investment. Another example I often use is when I’m looking for a travel book, I get a book about a place I already know. If that book tells people to go to places I’d recommend, then I trust the other books in a series more. Rand knows SEO. Then he sees Scoble come in wide of the mark. How can he then trust Robert to be an expert in other areas?
Well, unfortunately it looks like people won’t stop listening to Scoble and Calacanis any time soon. Rand knows SEO, but that’s not the problem. The problem is Tom, Dick, and Harry don’t know SEO but trust someone like Robert Scoble, listening to him even when he’s wrong. So in that case, it’s good you’re still defending SEO. And also in that case (bringing this back to the main point of my response), it’s not good to drop an F-bomb in one of the opening paragraphs. Like it or not we simply cannot tell people to f-off when debating an issue :) (yeah, like you needed to hear that) Tom, Dick, and Harry need to hear the truth but likely won’t want to listen to a ranting SEO. (Just so you don’t think I’m arguing in circles here... I totally understand your stance on the issue and know it was an intentional move.)
Adam wrote "I wonder why trolls like Calacanis and Scoble get so much airplay" They do because so many have not yet realized that the best response is to ignore what we wish to see less of in the future. Any time we respond to what we do not desire we contribute to increasing their audience. Danny wrote: "the industry takes slams it doesn’t deserve and never gets the credit for the good things it does." I have already mentioned elsewhere that I am not an SEO; however, I do understand the basics of SEO and work with many who have specialized skills in that area. The obvious benefit I see to white hat and probably even some gray hat SEO is to ensure that searchers can locate what they’re seeking and Web site owners can be found. It is mystery to me why they aren’t revered for providing such an important service - and I for one certainly believe their actions are far more beneficial than detrimental. I know how frustrating it can be to cover the same ground over and over; however, I agree with Adam that use of that word is out of character and also that given the respect you’ve abundantly earned it won’t hurt and will certainly get attention. It might not be the attention you want and could lead to having more to defend so I’m not sure I would have handed anyone that ammunition. Totally your call though. It doesn’t change my admiration for you and what you’ve accomplished in the least. Now that I’ve read more of what you write I clearly understand the credibility you’ve built and why you’re held in such esteem by so many.
Just to be clear, I didn’t drop it in the opening paragraph. I said I would be using it later in the story. I did that purposely so that people who might somehow be offended by the language would get a early heads-up it was coming, rather than be completely shocked. And you know, I tend to agree that you cannot simply tell people to F-off in a debate. But I’ve been in this debate for years. I’ve done the same arguments over and over and over. It goes against all my usual instincts to be so crass, so blunt, but like I said -- this was a time when I’d had enough. I mean really had enough. In one of my columns, I wrote that characterizing SEOs with stereotypes was like saying some minority group is all the same, based on bad stereotypes that group. But if people really made remarks about groups like that -- if Jason or Robert talked about a minority group in the way they’ve talked about SEOs, the world would come down on them. I guess I’ve felt enough is enough, especially when it seems to be coming lately from people who as I’ve said seem to be using SEOs as whipping boys (and girls) for whatever personal motives they may have.
Well, I’m not all that shocked. But there’s always the old The Who line ("Why don’t you all f-f-fade away") which implies about the same thing. I figure that these two are just looking for links, no more, no less. Otherwise, why would they continue to misconstrue SEO when, by now, they should know better? That, or they’ve drunk the Koolaid, and truly believe that, without SEO spam, search engines would be just perfect. Wow.
Wow, I can’t believe a man that commands so much attention supposedly for his intelligence could be so vocal with his ignorance. This isn’t 2001, Search engines are a lot smarter than he gives them credit for. H1, H2... and a few paid links, does he really think that’s all there is to it. He is basically talking about topical relevance, which modern search engines spend a lot of time on, figuring out which sites are involved in any given niche, and by how much. If you want to go down that path of Mahalo, techmeme etc, Google already offers anyone with the expertise the ability to create their own search engine; specify sites with "trust" and cut out the crap. While this is useful, and probably increasing so in the future, it doesn’t address the real value of search which is in the long tail. Mahalo, Squidoo, Techmeme, Wikipedia, and the thousands of other custom search engines and directories are all valuable resources. But none will ever answer every search query I do in a week nearly as well as Google... simply because their not scalable to the degree general search engines are. I think Calcanis should stick to preaching what he knows best - baiting SEO’s...Oh wait...