Calendar
Network
Feeds
Jill Whalen - The Self Contradiction
Is it just me or does anybody else feel that Jill Whalen is just spinning in a self weaved web of contradiction? She consistently contradicts herself and when you approach her, she won't respond. Now to me, that pretty much shows a lack of ability to back up her own statements.
Let me give an example:
In a post she writes, "“I also wanted to make it crystal clear that once your site is optimized and doing well, if you stop working on it, you won’t suddenly lose your rankings."
I would like to point out the numerous times she's stated the opposite. She has stated that you must continue working on a site otherwise you will lose rankings.
Here's another for ya:
“much of what you read online about what is supposedly going to gain you high rankings is a complete myth.”
Since I know she won't reply or approve the post I left on this particular comment made on her site, I'll just say here what I said there.
It seems to me you just contradicted yourself because that is what you do. You give online “advice” about how to rank well so perhaps your “advice” is also a myth.
Perhaps your readers who want real value should take a look at what Matt Cutts had to say about you. Just a suggestion.
18 Comments
Comments
Kudos for stepping up to the plate.
One can only listen and take so many loads of absolutely absurd bullshit for so long.
Hey Jill,
WHEN you read this, no comment by you is neccessary as you will only contradict yourself ONCE AGAIN. Although it would be interesting to see the whimsical nonsense you and "not playing with a full deck" have to say.
Alright, I'm not here to take sides HOWEVER I would like to respond to the points you make.
You wrote:
What she has written in both cases is true. You do need to keep working on sites. Just optimizing it and doing some link building isn't going to keep you ranking indefinitely HOWEVER if one day you decide to stop or you take a bit of time off you're rankings aren't going to drop like a light turning off. Over time the rankings will fall as the algos change and the competition improves however it's not an on-or-off issue and thus, what she has said in both cases is true.
And to the second point, believe it or not, much of what you read online really is cr@p (I'd say easily about 90%) - and I'll even say that here, you know, online. ;) It's not a contradiction. A top doctor can come out and say that some doctors are better than others and some are downright horrible. That doesn't mean he's a contradiction any more than a blogger and writer saying that a lot of what's out there is cr@p.
I may not agree with everything Jill has written nor would she agree with everything I have but it appears to me that you've got a personal gripe with her and are looking for any holes you can find, real or imagined. If you were as public as she is would everything you said hold up to such scrutiny?
Who is Jill Whalen?
PS: It's normal behaviour for women to contradict themselves. Just pay close attention!
Beanstalk:
These aren't the only contradictions you will find. Believe me, I used to have a great deal of respect for her but the more she writes, the less attractive her advice becomes.
I agree that the majority of what you read online is crap and thus, have slowly ceased to follow much of it but by far the absolute worst cases I have seen of crap are from her.
I have no personal gripe with her per se. Her inability to fully explain what she's talking about is all about her. I just happen to be one of the few who would stand up and say anything about it.
Every public figure has to stand up to such scritiny. Give me the name of one famous/infamous person who hasn't? If I choose to have my name be as public as hers, I would expect to get rapid fire responses from those who disagree with me. That is life and that is how it goes.
Noobliminal:
That is a great question and your comment about it being normal behavior is absolutely true as far as I have ever seen but that is just my own observation just as it's my own observation of Jill's consistent self contradiction.
Be well all... I'm sure she'll pull some strings and have this post removed. Kudo's to her.
It's too easy to take things out of context with a position like this. And what's the point anyway? -not going to earn any friends here by targetting Jill.
Ha ha ha ha h a... FLAME BAIT - an oldie but a goodie!
You see, there are far more people out there spewing SEO garbage than I could ever count. So, we attack some one prominent. Why? Cause it's great Flame Bait that's why.
... more SEO garbage... weeeeeeeeeeeeee... grumble grumble.... :0(
Please don't take this as a defensive stand against you TimDinnen but I don't get my friends from Sphinn or any other online source. I prefer R/L friends that I can see in front of me, not on a glorified blog like this one.
Jeezz (Scott is it?) ..so ya just don't like women is that it? U remember yer snide remark on DP about Tamar thinking she is 'special' (contact Matt Cutts post)???
What's the gig? I like to rant as much as the next guy, but there's no need to be such a fishing nut job about it... and at those that may be prominent in this game.... what's the point?
It's either Flame bait or U are way to tense.....
Have a few brews.... smoke a fatty and be cool ..... yer gonna get high blood pressure.... bwaaa ha ha ha ha.....
Matt said:
So when you say Jill's readers should perhaps take a look at that, indeed, they should. That's Matt saying Jill's giving advice significant enough that he'll point his own audience at it. Many people who write about SEO would kill for that type of a reference.
Matt doesn't agree with 100% of what most anyone writes, including me. It doesn't mean that other people are giving out bad advice -- it just might not be advice he personally would recommend.
You didn't really provide any examples of her contridicting herself. You gave one quote, then simply said you wanted to point out the many times she's contradicted it without showing it.
Perhaps she has done so, and maybe she will respond. Personally, I find it a big turnoff whenever anyone says something like "I know she won't reply or approve the post I left." I'd have also rather seen you do a post about a particular bit of advice she's given that you mght have wanted to dispute or examine more closely.
See now you guys are taking it way out of context. Gypsy, yes it is Scott and I love women as much as ... well, most guys. In fact, I love my women like I love my coffee; Ground up and in the freezer. I'm only kidding... my girlfriend suggested I use that "joke".
Anyway, I'm not uptight by any means. I'm pretty laid back, slow to temper, etc. Oh and I don't smoke "fatties". I might just take you up on the few beers though but I'm not much of a drinker these days either.
So the bottom line here is that I pointed out my opinion. Not for links, not to get friends, not to gain enemys. These are simply my opinions. As with TV, Radio, or whatever form of media that you choose to occupy your time, you don't have to read it, watch it, hear it, etc.
So no, it's not "Flame bate" or even that I'm uptight and tense.
Now to let the cat out of the bag even more (since I kind of eluded to it with my fellow ear-shotters). Although I truly do feel that way about Jill, I pulled off a major topic of discussion where I'm at. I love the various view points that I have read here but mostly the view points that I hear between those within ear shot of me.
Conversations like these rarely happen here and it was the perfect topic to get things kicked off. Thanks for the excellent viewpoints and conversation everyone.
Have a fantastic weekend and thanks for the conversation.
@anyone:
Try not to raise some people on too high pedestals. They higher you place them the more disappointed you will be eventually. Murphy says smth like: Blessed are those moderate in expectations as they will not be disappointed.
On the other hand there's only so much you can say about SEO. After a while you may forget where you left it and start over or mix your previous afirmations to sound interesting.
And this is true about many 'SEO Gurus'. I've seen so many posts on anchor text by so many people and so many times it got me sick.
PS:Shoot me now! I offended your GODS.
Exactly. If you do find an example of her contradicting that statement, I'll need to see the context. Of course she's said many times that it's good to continue working on a site. We all know that web sites should grow and develop over time. But I don't think she's ever said that if you don't do that you'll lose rankings.
Besides, the part you're quoting (from this week's newsletter) was written in reference to SEOs who use FUD to convince their clients to continually pay them, whether they're actually doing any work on the client's site or not. The context makes a big difference, don't you think?
A couple of things:
1) Sbuskirk - You do sound like you have an axe to grind against Jill. Otherwise, why bother posting something like this here, where Jill is a valued contributor. Is your hope to embarrass her? If so, not very cool.
2) Noobliminal - "It's normal behaviour for women to contradict themselves. Just pay close attention!" Are you aware of how sexist that remark sounds? Maybe you meant that as a joke, but it strikes me as a rather unenlightened remark to make in an attempt to dismiss a well-known player in this field because she is female. That's not sitting well with me.
I think everyone at Sphinn had about enough of the Rand Fishkin is an imposter thing a week or so ago. Will attempting to discredit well-known marketers become a regular Sphinn-bait tactic here? In the Rand case, that didn't work out horribly well for the instigator. Maybe folks should rethink the lack of professionalism inherent in pointing fingers to gain publicity.
I'd like Sphinn to be better than this.
All the unacceptable ad hominem (ok: ad feminam) pseudo-arguments aside, un-contextualized as they are, even if we accept that Jill may have seemingly "contradicted herself" in the course of all the years she's been in business (and I'm not saying here that she had) - ah, so what?
Don't the search engines do it all the time? Isn't "it ain't rocket science" one of the SEOs' favorite and most prevailing statements? Don't we all know that what may work out like a beaut within one particular context may fail utterly in another?
If you're hunting for 100% consistency, build your own alternate universe because you won't find it anywhere in the real world. Nor is it in any way desirable: in physics, it would equate to entropy, which is tantamount to the death of the universe - certainly nothing you would want to experience first hand.
@flatman: OMG! Please stop writing posts using the dictionary. Live by the KISS concept: Keep It Simple for the Stupid! Thank you.
What's up, Noob - you got dyspeptic dyslexia or something? Or do you actually mean "keep it simple for stupids"? LOL
@flat: No prob, mate, but see what it gets you: Don't scare the natives and hillbillies, heh. (You're European, right? If so - how did I guess? LOL)
If sbuskirk has an axe to grind, let him do it elsewhere. This whole post is utterly pointless - it doesn't contribute anything worth noting and the only reason I'm chiming in here too is by way of helping to create a precedence.