Matt Cutts has posted on Twitter today(http://twitter.com/mattcutts/statuses/866824220):
"Unsubscribing to seomoz for a bit. Read http://bit.ly/3ABPRk right after http://bit.ly/2ZbJjy . "Tree hugger SEO publicly bitching"? Sheesh."
The two articles Matt is referring to are:
- I Refuse To Participate In The Vicious Nastiness Going On In Our Industry
http://www.seo-scoop.com/2008/07/21/refuse-to-participate-in-vicious-industry/
- Tiers of Transparency: The Ethical Brand Ambassador
http://www.seomoz.org/blog/tiers-of-transparency-the-ethical-brand-ambassador
42 Comments
"Unsubscribing to seomoz for a bit. Read http://bit.ly/3ABPRk right after http://bit.ly/2ZbJjy . "Tree hugger SEO publicly bitching"? Sheesh."
The two articles Matt is referring to are:
- I Refuse To Participate In The Vicious Nastiness Going On In Our Industry
http://www.seo-scoop.com/2008/07/21/refuse-to-participate-in-vicious-industry/
- Tiers of Transparency: The Ethical Brand Ambassador
http://www.seomoz.org/blog/tiers-of-transparency-the-ethical-brand-ambassador
42 Comments
Comments
Come on Harith - everything Matt tweets is not news :)Besides, I think you should hold off on this one until we see what Rand and co. are doing about that post. If they choose to take it down we might be able to avoid another industry fight - in which case it would be better not to have a Sphinn post on the subject - no?
Harith - although the content is interesting - is it worth sphinning? I dont think so - almost all SEOs follow Matt - I am sure they all saw those tweets.
Good morning, Nick,My current submission is under "Topic Type: Discussion". Not as "News" . I believe the subject is worth further discussing here on Sphinn. Therefore the submission. :-)PS. Something wrong with comments submission. sorry for posting twice
Rob,weak up :-)"If people wanted to know everything that Matt says on Twitter, they would follow him on Twitter."Did you mean that we shouldn’t discuss on Sphinn what take place or said on other media? are you building a new Soviet Union on Sphinn?Do you intend to isolate Sphinn from the outside world and the outside world from Sphinn? communism in 2008?Amazing!!!
Harith, feel free to discuss important topics in a constructive and worthwhile fashion, although this submission has no substance. I might as well post to Sphinn that I’ve changed over to a new breakfast cereal today! All I’m asking for is substance, so that other Sphinn members don’t wonder why they’ve just wasted 50KB of their bandwidth quota to view this page.
Rob,I assume you are talking here as Sphinn Admin, not Rob as a person, right?So you think that there is no substance in a subject like:The Head Of Google Spam Detection Team and Google Spokesman to the webmaster/SEO/SEM communities Unsubscribing SEOmoz (popular name among the SEO/SEM communities, to say at least) mentioning two articles posted by two fellow Sphinn members!As to your Desphinn, I think its unfair. You as Admin of Sphinn are most welcome to remove or edit posts.But as an Admin you have more weight than the rest of us members of Sphinn. Therefore, you shouldn’t Desphinn as Admin. You can’t be both a member and Admin at the same time :-)
Harith, my objection to this submission isn’t the fact that you submitted a tweet (that’s perfectly fine by me) or that you submitted two Matt Cutts tweets in one week. Its the fact that this submit can potentially exacerbate an already ugly situation and it gives air time to more negativity in the SEO industry, which we’re all tired of. I’m not saying sweep Marty’s post under the rug, but I think what needs to be said has already been said in the post’s comments. I expect Rand to pull down the post and to put a Youmoz policy in place against needlessly negative posts.
Halfdeck,"Its the fact that this submit can potentially exacerbate an already ugly situation and it gives air time to more negativity in the SEO industry, which we’re all tired of."No. Free discussions could only add strength to our community. Hiding things is a sign of weakness. Whay should we be afraid of telling things as they are?Btw, this thread and one of my yesterday threads illustrate very well that we have at the moment "Desphinn Tyrrany" at Sphinn. Say welcome to Digg ;-)
Morning Harith :)Yep my feelings were the same as HD. More posts/coverage just seems to escalate the issues for all concerned and the damage it is doing. However that window of opportunity seems to be slipping away now, Rand has still not taken down the post after several hours of ’internal consideration’. I notice Lyndon has also blogged the post too. http://sphinn.com/story/61089Ah well, so much for keeping the peace. Calacanis - any chance of releasing a statement and uniting the community again?
Alternate headline would be"The day seo ate itself"
Btw, this thread and one of my yesterday threads illustrate very well that we have at the moment "Desphinn Tyrrany" at Sphinn. Say welcome to Digg ;-)Are you saying that the users should not express their negative opinion through the means that the community is providing them? Any opinion is welcome as long as it is positive ? Is this Soviet Union on Sphinn ?
"I notice Lyndon has also blogged the post too"That post feels like a ticking timebomb. Too bad I agree with most of what’s said in it."Free discussions could only add strength to our community. Hiding things is a sign of weakness."TMZ is free to talk 24/7 about Britney Spears shaving her head. I suppose ignoring that type of news is "hiding" and a sign of weakness.
Halfdeck,My 20 years old daughter would be very mad at you if you keep talking about Britney Spears like that :-)
In the Google SEO world, what Matt Cutts says, anywhere, is news.As a successful Natural Organic White Hat SEO, myself, I am NOT interested in most marketing / SEO news stories in general as the success of my SEO work is not affected in the least by the lastest news story. But, I found this news item on Matt Cutts rather revealing. And, it provided some much needed background information.Follow whoever on Twitter? Never! That is what Sphinn is for.
Folks,I’m gonna require from every Sphinner posting a comment on this thread to pay me in Sphinn Love, including but not limited to: NickWilsdon , rishilakhani, evilgreenmonkey, Halfdeck, Lyndon and neyne. Pls go ahead and Sphinn. :-)In return I’m gonna Sphinn anything you submit (including crap) for the rest of my physical life :-)And thanks a bunch for those kind Sphinn friends who Sphunn so far; JohnHGohde and UtahSEOpro. Power to you ;-)
Woo-hoo! I’ve got a life-time auto-sphinn from Harith. I can feel him slowly turning to the dark side :D
Where’s the talk about Avatars?
Hmmm......shit my finger slipped. Harith you Sphinn gamer :D
Wow... an opinionated guy like me has a lot to work with here.First of all, @evilgreenmonkey, I do follow Matt Cutts and actually missed that tweet because of Twitter’s amazing reliability. In any case, I think it most definitely warrants a discussion.@Harith, your "Sphinn Love" comments make me want to desphinn your submission no matter what. I didn’t in this case but seriously you don’t come off well. You can’t dictate how people use this site and although I think it’s somewhat tongue in cheeck, you’re essentially begging for sphinns and that’s just sad.Finally, @NickWilsdon it’s been 7 hours since your comment about waiting and Rand & co haven’t done anything. I’m not sure what time exactly Rand posted his disclaimer that they were considering what to do with the post but it’s been at least a couple of hours which should be more than enough time to figure out what to do with it.
Skitzzo,"@Harith, your "Sphinn Love" comments..."That was humour. I guess all the other friends here have understood it as such too :-)
@Harith, I understand it was humor but you’ve made the same type of "joke" several times and like I said it comes across as one of those "I’m joking but I really mean it" type "jokes".Again, I didn’t desphinn this one but figured I’d let you know how it reads (at least to me).
@Skitzzo That note has been up for about 10 hrs now - post seems to be staying. Besides that window of opportunity pretty much went after the US came into work.
Rand’s been in a similar position before, where gman posted a flame on Moz targeting some woman and Rand’s response was something along the lines of "let me consult my lawyer first" type of deal. Don’t get me wrong, I like Rand, but that response back then prompted Matt Cutts to unsubscribe, and this just feels like deja vu.
As I said on the post, I don’t like the tone or style of the content. I don’t agree with posting personal attacks and I personally wouldn’t publish it. That said, I’m even more against censorship (and into transparency), so I let Rebecca & Marty figure this one out themselves and I think they’ve done a good job. Marty issued an apology, Rebecca added it to the post and put it back in YOUmoz (rather than leaving it on the main blog) to help clarify the origin.Sorry for the delay, but the timing was bad on this one. I emailed with folks last night, and we didn’t re-connect until this morning at 9:30am (Pacific time).
later this afternoon I’ll be posting to sphinn when mat uses his left hand to scratch an itch on his right arm ... be on the lookout for it it’s going to be EPIC!!!! :-)
@randfish, do you not think it warrants a post explaining what happened and maybe what you just posted here? The fact that it was pulled back into Youmoz doesn’t matter a whole lot now that everyone has read it.I understand that you weren’t the person that wrote it or published it on the main blog but it’s your blog on your site. It’s sort of a "the buck stops here" issue and the fact that you allowed the post to stay on the main blog for 12 hours or so, even though you commented that you were troubled by the content, IMO makes a public address (if not an appology to those involved) neccesary.
I’m going to disagree Skittzo - a public re-hashing of these issues will only make this into a bigger deal than it needs to be. Far better that it go quietly into obscurity and fall under the many mistakes that we’ve made in the past and will try improve upon in the future. The 28K feed subscribers don’t want to hear about how we handle disagreements internally, they want SEO advice, better tools, more content, etc. That’s what we’ll focus on. For those who were attacked or offended, they’ve been in contact privately through email and we’re always happy to answer queries through those channels. Apologies were made directly on the post - that’s where they belong - another "let’s talk about all the drama" piece is going to be perceived by the vast majority to be a waste of time.
@hariththumbs up for trying to lighten it up...
I did call out Matt Cutts on his most recent blog post for his very bland choice of golf shirts...perhaps I should bring that discussion to Sphinn? :.)
Time to move on. I’m satisfied with how SEOmoz handled things.
Rand,Just wish to thank you for chimming in. Very kind of you. And I really feel this thread deserves to hit the front page of Sphinn allowing people to read the friendly discussion including Rand’s feedback.Blame it on our Admin Rob who started the "Desphinning Campaign" by these words:"If people wanted to know everything that Matt says on Twitter, they would follow him on Twitter." Oh well ;-)
So I’ll chime in on the "is this news" front and give Harith some support. Of course it’s news. It was major news.Matt’s a major figure in the search marketing space. He deliberately chose to say he was going to give SEOmoz a break apparently because he disagreed with one of the articles they posted -- and he did so in a public arena where he knew it would be spotted. It was pretty much a slap against SEOmoz, and fair to say, they felt that slap and reacted to it -- as well as reacting to what their own community was saying.I’m not defending the piece. Nor am I saying Matt was wrong to post publicly that he was no longer reading. But yes, to say this wasn’t news is absurd. It would be like saying if Eric Schmidt twittered that he no longer reads the Wall Street Journal, that’s not noteworthy. Of course it would be.Also, I changed this to a news story linking directly to the twitter in question.
@dannysullivan, Matt Cutts either unsubscribed because he did not like the style of the article and the attacks it contained. In this case, it’s a matter of personal tastes and distastes, and definitely not news.Or, he unsubscribed because he did not like the substance. But then, if it is really important for SEO people, as you and others imply, where is the discussion on the substance of that article?aimClear asks this repeatedly ("Where’s the talk about Avatars?"), but here, as in some other thread, his question only gets a bunch of negative votes.So, in the end, where is the news? Do you perceive real interest in the substance?As far as I see, it’s only "news" because there is huge interest in the SEO mud fight du jour, with all those "two cents" rolling in from every corner.
Sza, SEOmoz is a highly read and -- this incident aside -- generally well respected search publication. Matt has interacted with them on many occasions to provide information that they pass on to their readers. Many readers look to them for advice and information.When Matt says publicly that he’s unsubscribing, that hits SEOmoz’s reputation. Sure, it might be Matt "personally" not pleased about something. But Matt’s also a public figure, and I have no doubt in my mind that he twittered as he did to make a public statement and send a signal over his displeasure. That hits SEOmoz professionally, whether Matt did it wearing his "personal" hat or not. He could just as easily unsubscribed quietly.I guess I shouldn’t say it was "major" news. I mean, this isn’t Yahoo buying Microsoft or anything. But yes, I stand by the fact that if somone of Matt’s reputation and influence says publicly that they’re no longer going to read a leading search publication, that’s news. It’s certainly worthy of discussion, and Harith was correct in feeling so, in my book.Whle I don’t agree with the tone of what Marty wrote, the stirring he did and many of the things he said, let’s not also lose something else in the focus on that. Matt’s twitter puts a chilling tone out there to me and other publishers. If any of us publish something he doesn’t like, will there be a twitter of death waiting for us? In this case, it’s easy for lots of people to think they’re glad that Matt used his influence to add to the pile up pressuring SEOmoz over that article.But the next article? What if someone writes something about SEO, say a technique Matt doesn’t like? Will there be a twitter that he’s unsubscribing from that?As a publisher, I don’t want to feel like I’ve got to ensure that Matt or Google is happy with everything we publish. Don’t forget -- at one point Google’s Eric Schmidt put News.com on double secret probation for a year, refusing to talk to them because Eric was upset over a privacy article they did (after about two months, they dumped that incredibly stupid ban). So this type of issue indeed sits very heavy in my mind, when it comes up.That doesn’t mean I want to publish irresponsible material, and I think over the years, I’ve been pretty good about that -- getting the balance right where even if Google disagrees with something, they still see the value in reading what we publish and contributing as makes sense.
Danny,Thanks for chiming in. Very informative educating comments, indeed. Much appreciated.
@dannysullivan, To me, it’s your answer that’s news. Perhaps you just made up your reasoning on the fly to explain why you consider this newsworthy.Or.. you’ve just stated in all seriousness that you consider a major Google representative to have grown dangerously powerful for the wider community’s (that includes honest publishers) good. Which is not something I would dispute (in fact, I’d agree with it), but from your mouth it carries a bit more weight.In true Harith style, it might even merit a Discussion with a title, ’Danny Sullivan fears Matt Cutts to be an unpredictable threat !!!’
This story has many layers and at first I did think along the lines of ’Why has Matt’s decision to unsubscribe from SEOMoz news’. Its only in later light that I have began to understand the consequences that such an action may warrant.But also touching on the point that sza brought - up : "Google representative to have grown dangerously powerful", I can see why some may think this way.TBH its Matt’s choice to read whatever he wants and it was his own free will that made him decide to voice his action through Twitter. When you also have Danny reaffirming to a certain degree the nod to have Matt onside you certainly sit-up and take notice. For the majority of us (including myself) there is no fear-factor from Matt unsubscribing to our feed because he probably doesn’t subscribe anyway. But it’s also interesting Matt noted Donna’s post, perhaps he’s just fed-up of what seems like a constant-squabble-bubble that has been in force since the turn of the year and is quite simply fed-up reading posts that snipe or bitch.
If people wanted to know everything that Matt says on Twitter, they would follow him on Twitter.
I am afraid sphinning everything Matt says isnt what sphinn is about. Not useful info. Follow Matt on Twitter if you want. Its free.
Harith, this is getting pathetic... in so many ways. dude, you are weird...
In other news, SEOs jump on bandwagon! Three-exclamation-points-in-a-row!
lame this is not news ..................... .........