Internet Marketing Stuff
244 views | +0 today
Your new post is loading...
Your new post is loading...
Scooped by Simon Dadia!

SEO Consultant Chicago - Your Website Or Video On The First Page Of The Search Engines - YouTube

If your a Chicago based company then you need a proven SEO consultant to get your videos and your web properties ranked in Googlr. An SEO Consultant Chicago ...
No comment yet.
Scooped by Simon Dadia!

The Alleged $7.5 Billion Fraud in Online Advertising

Posted by SamuelScott

"This is the biggest advertising story of the decade, and it's being buried."

So wrote Ad Contrarian Bob Hoffman, the retired CEO and chairman of Hoffman/Lewis Advertising, in June 2013 on a $7.5 billion scandal that has been developing under the digital radar in the advertising world for the past few years. The three main allegations, according to those who are making them:

Half or more of the paid online display advertisements that ad networks, media buyers, and ad agencies have knowingly been selling to clients over the years have never appeared in front of live human beings. Agencies have been receiving kickbacks and indirect payments from ad networks under the guise of "volume discounts" for serving as the middlemen between the networks and the clients who were knowingly sold the fraudulent ad impressions. Ad networks knowingly sell bot traffic to publishers and publishers knowingly buy the bot traffic because the resulting ad impressions earn both of them money—at the expense of the clients who are paying for the impressions.

These charges have not seen much discussion within the online marketing community. But the allegations have the potential to affect everyone involved in online advertising—ad agencies, in-house departments, agency and in-house digital marketers, online publishers, media buyers, and ad networks. An entire industry—billions of dollars and thousands of jobs—is at stake.

And it all starts with a single impression.

The impression that you make


Online advertising is based on an "impression"—without the impression, then an advertisement cannot be viewed or clicked or provoke any other engagement. The Internet Advertising Bureau, which was founded in 1996 and "recommends standards and practices and fields critical research on interactive advertising," defines "impression" in this manner:

a measurement of responses from an ad delivery system to an ad request from the user's browser

In another words, an "impression" occurs whenever one machine (an ad network) answers a request from another machine (a browser). (For reference, you can see my definition and example of a "request" in a prior Moz essay on log analytics and technical SEO.) Just in case it's not obvious: Human beings and human eyeballs have nothing to do with it. If your advertising data states than a display ad campaign had 500,000 impressions, then that means that the ad network served a browser 500,000 times—and nothing more. Digital marketers may tell their bosses and clients that "impression" is jargon for one person seeing an advertisement one time, but that statement is not accurate.

The impression that you don't make


Just because a server answers a browser request for an advertisement does not mean that the person using the browser will see it. According to Reid Tatoris at MediaPost, there are three things that get in the way:

Broken Ads—This is a server not loading an ad or loading the wrong one by mistake. Tatoris writes that these mistakes occur roughly 15% of the time. Bot Traffic—Whenever hackers write these automated computer programs to visit websites and post spam or create fake accounts, each visit is a pageview that results an an ad impression. According to a December 2013 report in The Atlantic, 60% of Internet traffic consists of bots. Alleged Fraud—In Tatoris' words, "People will hide ads behind other ads, spoof their domain to trick ad networks into serving higher-paying ads on their site, and purposefully send bots to a site to drive up impressions." Noam Schwartz described in TechCrunch two additional methods of alleged fraud: compressing ads into a tiny one-by-one pixels that are impossible to see and using malware to send people to websites they never planned to visit and thereby generate ad impressions. AdWeek found in October 2013 that 25% of online ad impressions are allegedly fraudulent.

Tatoris crunches all the numbers:

We start with the notion that only 15% of impressions ever have the possibility to be seen by a real person. Then, factor in that 54% of ads are not viewable (and we already discussed how flawed that metric is), and you're left with only 8% of impressions that have the opportunity to be seen by a real person. Let me clarify: That does not mean that 8% of impressions are seen. That means only 8% have the chance to be seen. That's an unbelievable amount of waste in an industry where metrics are a major selling point.

Essentially: If you have an online display ad budget of $100,000, then only $8,000 of that ad spend has the chance to put advertisements in front of human eyeballs. (And that's not even taking into account the poor clickthrough rates of display ads when people do see them.)

If you are paying $0.10 per impression, then the $10,000 that you will pay for 100,000 impressions will result in only 8,000 human views—meaning that the effective CPI will actually be $1.25.

How bot traffic affects online ads


Jack Marshall, an alleged reformed fake web traffic buyer, explains in a Digiday interview how the scheme allegedly operates. Here are just three excerpts:

How and why were you buying non-human traffic?
We were spending anywhere from $10,000 to $35,000 a day on traffic. My conversations with [these ad networks] were similar: They would let me decide how much I was willing to pay for traffic, and when I told them $0.002 or below, they made it clear they had little control over the quality of traffic they would send at that price. Quality didn't really matter to us, though. As a website running an arbitrage model, all that mattered was profit, and for every $0.002 visit we were buying, we were making between $0.0025 and $0.004 selling display ads through networks and exchanges. The biggest determinate of which traffic partner we were spending the most money with was pageviews per visit. Since we were paying a fixed cost per visit, more pageviews equaled more ad impressions. Almost none of these companies were based in the U.S. While our contacts were in the US and had American names and accents, most of the time we found ourselves sending payment to a non-US bank.

In other words, the publisher would allegedly pay an ad network $0.0020 for a visit from a bot, and the resulting ad impression would garner $0.0025 to $0.0040 in revenue—that's a gross margin of 25% to 100% for the publisher for doing nothing! It's no wonder that so many websites around the world may be allegedly involved in this practice.

Do you think publishers know when they're buying fake traffic?
Publishers know. They might say "we had no idea" and blame it on their traffic acquisition vendor, but that's bullshit, and they know it. If you're buying visits for less than a penny, there's no way you don't understand what's going on. Any publisher that's smart enough understand an arbitrage opportunity is smart enough to understand that if it was a legitimate strategy that the opportunity would eventually disappear as more buyers crowded in. What we were doing was 100 percent intentional. Some articles revolving around bot traffic paint publishers as rubes who were duped into buying bad traffic by shady bot owners. Rather, I believe publishers are willing to do anything to make their economics work.

Do networks, exchanges and other ad tech companies do anything to stop this from happening?
We worked with a major supply-side platform partner that was just wink wink, nudge nudge about it. They asked us to explain why almost all of our traffic came from one operating system and the majority had all the same user-agent string. There was nothing I could really say to answer that question. It was their way of letting us know that they understood what was going on. It wasn't just our account rep, either. It was people at the highest levels in the company. Part of me wished they'd said "You are in violation of our TOS and you have to stop running our tags." I would have been happy with that. But they didn't; they were willing to take the money.

If these stories are true, then ad networks do not care that the impressions are from bot traffic and publishers do not care that are getting bot traffic because they are both making money. Who gets hurt? The companies advertising their products and services.

The worst part of it all

(Flickr user Don Hankins)

It's not only that online display ads are alleged to be amazingly useless and that many publishers and ad networks are allegedly involved in sleazy deals. A March 2015 investigative report in Ad Age found the following:

Kickback payments tied to U.S. media-agency deals are real and on the rise, according to Ad Age interviews with more than a dozen current and former media-agency executives, marketers' auditors, media sellers and ad-tech vendors who said they'd either participated in such arrangements or had seen evidence of them. The murky practice—sometimes disguised as (undisclosed) "rebates" or bills for bogus services—is being motivated by shrinking agency fees and fueled by an increasingly convoluted and global digital marketplace. "It's really ugly and crooked," said one ad-tech executive who described receiving such requests.

Some arrangements go like this: A large media shop, poised to spend $1 million with that ad-tech executive's firm to buy digital ads last year, asked for $200,000 to be routed back to the agency's corporate sibling in Europe. The $200,000 would pay for a presentation or presentations by the sibling's consultants. But these types of presentations aren't worth a fraction of the price tag, according to numerous executives dealing with the same issue, who spoke on condition of anonymity for fear of losing business.

Essentially, here is what is allegedly happening:

Clients give money to agencies to purchase online display advertising The agencies give the money to the ad networks The ad networks give a portion of the money back to the agencies The clients' display ads are only 8% viewable The 92% non-viewable impressions still earn money for publishers and ad networks

I think we can see who the loser is—everyone is making money except for the clients.

During the same month as the Ad Age report, former Mediacom CEO Jon Mandel reportedly told the Association of National Advertisers Media Leadership Conference that widespread "media agency rebates and kickbacks" were the reason that he left the agency business.

Heads in the digital sand

(Flickr user Peter)

I have yet to hear about this issue being addressed in any talk, panel, or session at a digital marketing, martech, or adtech conference. Prior to today, I have seen only one article each in two major publications in the online marketing industry. (Mozzers, please correct me if I am mistaken and have missed something major on this topic.)

Why is no one talking about this?

No marketing agency wants clients to know that 92% of its display advertising spend is wasted. No advertising manager wants the CMO to know that only 8% of the company's ads are reaching people at 100% cost. No CMO wants the CEO to know that 92% of the entire ad budget is being flushed down the digital toilet.

I myself would probably have not been permitted to write this article when I held various agency positions in the past because I managed clients' online advertising and some PR and digital marketing clients of the agencies were advertising networks themselves.

(Today, I am the director of marcom for, a log analytics startup, and I have the luxury of being accountable only for the results of my in-house work—and I do not plan to use online advertising anytime soon. Still, I was a journalist in my first career years ago, and I wanted to write this report because I think everyone in my beloved industry should know about this explosive issue.)

Hoffman, the retired ad agency CEO who I quoted at the beginning, puts it better than I can:

How does an agency answer a client who asks, "You mean more than half the money you were supposed to be custodian of was embezzled from me and you knew nothing about it?" How does an ad network answer, "You mean all those clicks and eyeballs you promised me never existed, and you knew nothing about it?" How does a CMO answer his management when they ask, "You mean these people screwed us out of hundreds of thousands (millions?) of dollars in banner ads and you had no idea what you were buying?"

Everyone is in jeopardy and everyone is in "protect" mode. Everyone wants to maintain deniability. Nobody wants to know too much. If display advertising were to suffer the disgrace it deserves, imagine the fallout. Imagine the damage to Facebook, which at last report gets over 80% of its revenue from display. Imagine the damage to online publishers whose bogus, inflated numbers probably constitute their margin of profit.

If the comScore findings are correct and projectable, it means that of the 14 billion dollars spent on display advertising last year in America, 7.5 billion was worthless and constituted some degree of fraud or misrepresentation.

But clients, CMOs, and CEOs are going to read one of these articles one day and start asking uncomfortable questions. I would suggest that Mozzers—as well as all digital marketers and advertisers—start thinking about responses now.

Responses to the scandal

(Flickr user Chris Potter)

Google, to its credit, has disclosed that 56% of its digital ad impressions are never actually seen—of course, the report was also released with the announcement of a new ad-viewability product.

Ginny Marvin summarizes at Marketing Land:

Google's viewability measurement tool, Active View, is integrated into both the Google Display Network and DoubleClick. Advertisers can monitor viewability rates and buy ads on a viewable impression basis rather than by served impressions.

Google also announced an update to DoubleClick Verification last week, which includes viewability monitoring, ad blocking, a content ratings system and spam filtering capabilities.

The goals of the Media Rating Council (MRC), an industry organization founded in the United States in the 1960s following congressional hearings into the media industry, are:

To secure for the media industry and related users audience measurement services that are valid, reliable and effective To evolve and determine minimum disclosure and ethical criteria for media audience measurement services To provide and administer an audit system designed to inform users as to whether such audience measurements are conducted in conformance with the criteria and procedures developed

The MRC has certified "viewable impressions" as a legitimate metric (as opposed to "served impressions"). The Interactive Advertising Bureau (IAB), mentioned earlier, issued guidelines in December that online advertising networks should aim for at least 70% viewability.

Facebook, for its part, announced in February 2015:

We are working with the MRC and a consortium of advertisers and agencies to develop more robust standards for viewable impressions. Our goal is to work with the MRC, our partners, and industry leaders around the world to help apply further standards for feed-based websites like Facebook, mobile media and new ad formats.

The American Association of Advertising Agencies, Association of National Advertisers, and IAB announced last year that they would create a new organization, the Trustworthy Accountability Group, to fight problems in the online advertising market and do the following:

Eliminate fraudulent traffic Combat malware Fight Internet piracy Promote greater transparency

TAG now consists of representatives from Mondelez International, JCPenney, Omnicom, Motorola, Google, Facebook, AOL, and Brightroll.

Canada's latest anti-spam legislation aims to fight Internet malware and bots—but a big stumbling block is that most of the problem comes from outside the country.

Will these corporate and organizational responses be enough? For the following reasons and more, it's impossible to know:

Industry guidelines depend on voluntary compliance. Industry recommendations do not have the force of law—any business that thinks it can still make a lot of money by ignoring the guidelines will likely continue to do so. Possible penalties for past behavior. Regardless of what reforms may occur in the future, should those who knowingly engaged in such alleged fraud and deception in the past be held criminally or civilly liable? (I'm not a lawyer, so I cannot comment on that.) IAB's 70% viewability goal. Should advertisers accept this metric as simply the nature of the medium? One estimate of the total display ad market amounted to $14 billion. If the 70% viewability goal can even be reached, should and will advertisers accept that $4.2 billion of their collective ad spend will still be lost before their advertisements are even viewed by human beings?

I have no answer—only time, I suppose, will tell.

But others are coming up with their own answers—those large corporations that are spending billions of dollars a year on online display advertising. As Lara O'Reilly wrote in May 2015 at Business Insider, $25 billion in ad spend is now under review in what Adweek is calling "Mediapalooza 2015." O'Reilly gives one possible reason:

Media reviews let brands reassess their ad spending, often by offering those contracts out in a competitive bidding process. The companies include General Mills, Procter & Gamble, Volkswagen, Visa, Sony, Coca-Cola, Citi, 21st Century Fox ... the list goes on. Some of these — P&G, Sony, and 21st Century Fox — spend more than $1 billion on advertising each year...

It could be that marketers are finally getting fed up with the apparent lack of transparency about where their budgets are actually being spent and why.

What marketers can do

(Image of an Indian online-marketing team I used with rights in a prior Moz essay
on the future of marketing departments)

Regardless of what the future will hold, here are my recommendations on how digital advertisers can respond:

Stop doing cost-per-impression (CPI or CPM) campaigns. Traditional digital advertising strategy recommends that people use CPM campaigns for brand awareness, cost-per-click (CPC) campaigns for traffic, and cost-per-action (CPA) campaigns for sales and conversions. In light of this scandal, I see no good reason to do CPM at all anymore. Revise advertising KPIs and metrics in human terms. Earlier in this article, I calculated the following change to a hypothetical CPI value: "If you are paying $0.10 per impression, then the $10,000 that you will pay for 100,000 impressions will result in only 8,000 human views—meaning that the effective CPI rate will actually be $1.25." In addition, half of all clicks in CPC campaigns might also be bots. As a result, a $2 CPC result may actually be $4 when reaching human beings is taken into account. Ad campaign analysts may want to take alleged bot and fraudulent activity into account when calculating ROI and whether display advertising is worthwhile. Demand full disclosure. Clients should ask agencies and media buyers if they are getting paid directly or indirectly by ad networks. Agencies and media buyers should ad networks how they are combating bot activity and any fraudulent behavior. Ad networks should not turn a digital blind-eye to publishers who intentionally use bots to make profits off of advertisers. If anyone gives vague answers or otherwise disparages such questions, then that is a red flag. Advertisers should demand and receive full, verifiable information in light of what has allegedly been occurring. Block certain countries from campaigns. According to a report in Ad Week, China, Venezuela, Ukraine, and Singapore have "suspicious traffic" rates of between 86% and 92%. (The rate in the United States is 43%.) Use ad-fraud detection platforms. Companies such as Forensiq, SimilarWeb, (which was bought by Google), Telemetry, and White Ops compare visit patterns with industry benchmark behavior as well as check for malicious software proxy unmasking, verify devices, and detect any manipulation. Run manual campaigns as much as possible. The only way to reduce wasted impressions significantly is to research and implement digital ad campaigns manually rather than use programmatic ad buying. Digital advertisers should research potential websites on which they want to run advertisements to see if they are legitimate—potentially even running ads on only the largest, well-known sites but doing so continuously. This way, it might be best to focus your ad campaigns on quality viewers rather than trying to maximize the quantity of viewers by also including lesser-known sites.

Beyond the current responses of the ad industry and my present recommendations for marketers, I do not know what will happen. My goal here is simply to explain to digital marketers what has allegedly been occurring. What the future will hold—well, that's up to we marketers and advertisers.

Additional resources

The Ad Fraud Wiki Bob Hoffman's blog post with a partial list of his writings on this topic Ad Week's Mike Shields, and Ad Age's Alex Kantrowitz—two of the reporters who are following this issue closely

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!

No comment yet.
Scooped by Simon Dadia!

Should I Use Relative or Absolute URLs? - Whiteboard Friday

Posted by RuthBurrReedy

It was once commonplace for developers to code relative URLs into a site. There are a number of reasons why that might not be the best idea for SEO, and in today's Whiteboard Friday, Ruth Burr Reedy is here to tell you all about why.

For reference, here's a still of this week's whiteboard. Click on it to open a high resolution image in a new tab!

Let's discuss some non-philosophical absolutes and relatives

Howdy, Moz fans. My name is Ruth Burr Reedy. You may recognize me from such projects as when I used to be the Head of SEO at Moz. I'm now the Senior SEO Manager at BigWing Interactive in Oklahoma City. Today we're going to talk about relative versus absolute URLs and why they are important.

At any given time, your website can have several different configurations that might be causing duplicate content issues. You could have just a standard That's a pretty standard format for a website.

But the main sources that we see of domain level duplicate content are when the does not redirect to the www or vice-versa, and when the HTTPS versions of your URLs are not forced to resolve to HTTP versions or, again, vice-versa. What this can mean is if all of these scenarios are true, if all four of these URLs resolve without being forced to resolve to a canonical version, you can, in essence, have four versions of your website out on the Internet. This may or may not be a problem.

It's not ideal for a couple of reasons. Number one, duplicate content is a problem because some people think that duplicate content is going to give you a penalty. Duplicate content is not going to get your website penalized in the same way that you might see a spammy link penalty from Penguin. There's no actual penalty involved. You won't be punished for having duplicate content.

The problem with duplicate content is that you're basically relying on Google to figure out what the real version of your website is. Google is seeing the URL from all four versions of your website. They're going to try to figure out which URL is the real URL and just rank that one. The problem with that is you're basically leaving that decision up to Google when it's something that you could take control of for yourself.

There are a couple of other reasons that we'll go into a little bit later for why duplicate content can be a problem. But in short, duplicate content is no good.

However, just having these URLs not resolve to each other may or may not be a huge problem. When it really becomes a serious issue is when that problem is combined with injudicious use of relative URLs in internal links. So let's talk a little bit about the difference between a relative URL and an absolute URL when it comes to internal linking.

With an absolute URL, you are putting the entire web address of the page that you are linking to in the link. You're putting your full domain, everything in the link, including /page. That's an absolute URL.

However, when coding a website, it's a fairly common web development practice to instead code internal links with what's called a relative URL. A relative URL is just /page. Basically what that does is it relies on your browser to understand, "Okay, this link is pointing to a page that's on the same domain that we're already on. I'm just going to assume that that is the case and go there."

There are a couple of really good reasons to code relative URLs1) It is much easier and faster to code.

When you are a web developer and you're building a site and there thousands of pages, coding relative versus absolute URLs is a way to be more efficient. You'll see it happen a lot.

2) Staging environments

Another reason why you might see relative versus absolute URLs is some content management systems -- and SharePoint is a great example of this -- have a staging environment that's on its own domain. Instead of being, it will be The entire website will basically be replicated on that staging domain. Having relative versus absolute URLs means that the same website can exist on staging and on production, or the live accessible version of your website, without having to go back in and recode all of those URLs. Again, it's more efficient for your web development team. Those are really perfectly valid reasons to do those things. So don't yell at your web dev team if they've coded relative URLS, because from their perspective it is a better solution.

Relative URLs will also cause your page to load slightly faster. However, in my experience, the SEO benefits of having absolute versus relative URLs in your website far outweigh the teeny-tiny bit longer that it will take the page to load. It's very negligible. If you have a really, really long page load time, there's going to be a whole boatload of things that you can change that will make a bigger difference than coding your URLs as relative versus absolute.

Page load time, in my opinion, not a concern here. However, it is something that your web dev team may bring up with you when you try to address with them the fact that, from an SEO perspective, coding your website with relative versus absolute URLs, especially in the nav, is not a good solution.

There are even better reasons to use absolute URLs1) Scrapers

If you have all of your internal links as relative URLs, it would be very, very, very easy for a scraper to simply scrape your whole website and put it up on a new domain, and the whole website would just work. That sucks for you, and it's great for that scraper. But unless you are out there doing public services for scrapers, for some reason, that's probably not something that you want happening with your beautiful, hardworking, handcrafted website. That's one reason. There is a scraper risk.

2) Preventing duplicate content issues

But the other reason why it's very important to have absolute versus relative URLs is that it really mitigates the duplicate content risk that can be presented when you don't have all of these versions of your website resolving to one version. Google could potentially enter your site on any one of these four pages, which they're the same page to you. They're four different pages to Google. They're the same domain to you. They are four different domains to Google.

But they could enter your site, and if all of your URLs are relative, they can then crawl and index your entire domain using whatever format these are. Whereas if you have absolute links coded, even if Google enters your site on www. and that resolves, once they crawl to another page, that you've got coded without the www., all of that other internal link juice and all of the other pages on your website, Google is not going to assume that those live at the www. version. That really cuts down on different versions of each page of your website. If you have relative URLs throughout, you basically have four different websites if you haven't fixed this problem.

Again, it's not always a huge issue. Duplicate content, it's not ideal. However, Google has gotten pretty good at figuring out what the real version of your website is.

You do want to think about internal linking, when you're thinking about this. If you have basically four different versions of any URL that anybody could just copy and paste when they want to link to you or when they want to share something that you've built, you're diluting your internal links by four, which is not great. You basically would have to build four times as many links in order to get the same authority. So that's one reason.

3) Crawl Budget

The other reason why it's pretty important not to do is because of crawl budget. I'm going to point it out like this instead.

When we talk about crawl budget, basically what that is, is every time Google crawls your website, there is a finite depth that they will. There's a finite number of URLs that they will crawl and then they decide, "Okay, I'm done." That's based on a few different things. Your site authority is one of them. Your actual PageRank, not toolbar PageRank, but how good Google actually thinks your website is, is a big part of that. But also how complex your site is, how often it's updated, things like that are also going to contribute to how often and how deep Google is going to crawl your site.

It's important to remember when we think about crawl budget that, for Google, crawl budget cost actual dollars. One of Google's biggest expenditures as a company is the money and the bandwidth it takes to crawl and index the Web. All of that energy that's going into crawling and indexing the Web, that lives on servers. That bandwidth comes from servers, and that means that using bandwidth cost Google actual real dollars.

So Google is incentivized to crawl as efficiently as possible, because when they crawl inefficiently, it cost them money. If your site is not efficient to crawl, Google is going to save itself some money by crawling it less frequently and crawling to a fewer number of pages per crawl. That can mean that if you have a site that's updated frequently, your site may not be updating in the index as frequently as you're updating it. It may also mean that Google, while it's crawling and indexing, may be crawling and indexing a version of your website that isn't the version that you really want it to crawl and index.

So having four different versions of your website, all of which are completely crawlable to the last page, because you've got relative URLs and you haven't fixed this duplicate content problem, means that Google has to spend four times as much money in order to really crawl and understand your website. Over time they're going to do that less and less frequently, especially if you don't have a really high authority website. If you're a small website, if you're just starting out, if you've only got a medium number of inbound links, over time you're going to see your crawl rate and frequency impacted, and that's bad. We don't want that. We want Google to come back all the time, see all our pages. They're beautiful. Put them up in the index. Rank them well. That's what we want. So that's what we should do.

There are couple of ways to fix your relative versus absolute URLs problem

1) Fix what is happening on the server side of your website

You have to make sure that you are forcing all of these different versions of your domain to resolve to one version of your domain. For me, I'm pretty agnostic as to which version you pick. You should probably already have a pretty good idea of which version of your website is the real version, whether that's www, non-www, HTTPS, or HTTP. From my view, what's most important is that all four of these versions resolve to one version.

From an SEO standpoint, there is evidence to suggest and Google has certainly said that HTTPS is a little bit better than HTTP. From a URL length perspective, I like to not have the www. in there because it doesn't really do anything. It just makes your URLs four characters longer. If you don't know which one to pick, I would pick one this one HTTPS, no W's. But whichever one you pick, what's really most important is that all of them resolve to one version. You can do that on the server side, and that's usually pretty easy for your dev team to fix once you tell them that it needs to happen.

2) Fix your internal links

Great. So you fixed it on your server side. Now you need to fix your internal links, and you need to recode them for being relative to being absolute. This is something that your dev team is not going to want to do because it is time consuming and, from a web dev perspective, not that important. However, you should use resources like this Whiteboard Friday to explain to them, from an SEO perspective, both from the scraper risk and from a duplicate content standpoint, having those absolute URLs is a high priority and something that should get done.

You'll need to fix those, especially in your navigational elements. But once you've got your nav fixed, also pull out your database or run a Screaming Frog crawl or however you want to discover internal links that aren't part of your nav, and make sure you're updating those to be absolute as well.

Then you'll do some education with everybody who touches your website saying, "Hey, when you link internally, make sure you're using the absolute URL and make sure it's in our preferred format," because that's really going to give you the most bang for your buck per internal link. So do some education. Fix your internal links.

Sometimes your dev team going to say, "No, we can't do that. We're not going to recode the whole nav. It's not a good use of our time," and sometimes they are right. The dev team has more important things to do. That's okay.

3) Canonicalize it!

If you can't get your internal links fixed or if they're not going to get fixed anytime in the near future, a stopgap or a Band-Aid that you can kind of put on this problem is to canonicalize all of your pages. As you're changing your server to force all of these different versions of your domain to resolve to one, at the same time you should be implementing the canonical tag on all of the pages of your website to self-canonize. On every page, you have a canonical page tag saying, "This page right here that they were already on is the canonical version of this page. " Or if there's another page that's the canonical version, then obviously you point to that instead.

But having each page self-canonicalize will mitigate both the risk of duplicate content internally and some of the risk posed by scrappers, because when they scrape, if they are scraping your website and slapping it up somewhere else, those canonical tags will often stay in place, and that lets Google know this is not the real version of the website.

In conclusion, relative links, not as good. Absolute links, those are the way to go. Make sure that you're fixing these very common domain level duplicate content problems. If your dev team tries to tell you that they don't want to do this, just tell them I sent you. Thanks guys.

Video transcription by

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!

No comment yet.
Scooped by Simon Dadia!

Your Daily SEO Fix: Week 2

Posted by Trevor-Klein

Last week, we began posting short (< 2-minute) video tutorials that help you all get the most out of Moz's tools. Each tutorial is designed to solve a use case that we regularly hear about from Moz community members—a need or problem for which you all could use a solution.

Today, we've got a brand-new roundup of the most recent videos:

How to Examine and Analyze SERPs Using New MozBar Features How to Boost Your Rankings through On-Page Optimization How to Check Your Anchor Text Using Open Site Explorer How to Do Keyword Research with OSE and the Keyword Difficulty Tool How to Discover Keyword Opportunities in Moz Analytics

Let's get right down to business!

Fix 1: How to Examine and Analyze SERPs Using New MozBar Features

The MozBar is a handy tool that helps you access important SEO metrics while you surf the web. In this Daily SEO Fix, Abe shows you how to use this toolbar to examine and analyze SERPs and access keyword difficulty scores for a given page—in a single click.

.video-container {padding-bottom:56.25%;padding-top:30px;height:0;overflow:hidden;}.video-container iframe, .video-container object, .video-container embed {width:100%;height:100%;}

Fix 2: How to Boost Your Rankings through On-Page Optimization

There are several on-page factors that influence your search engine rankings. In this Daily SEO Fix, Holly shows you how to use Moz's On-Page Optimization tool to identify pages on your website that could use some love and what you can do to improve them.

.video-container {padding-bottom:56.25%;padding-top:30px;height:0;overflow:hidden;}.video-container iframe, .video-container object, .video-container embed {width:100%;height:100%;}

Fix 3: How to Check Your Anchor Text Using Open Site Explorer

Dive into OSE with Tori in this Daily SEO Fix to check out the anchor text opportunities for By highlighting all your anchor text you can discover other potential keyword ranking opportunities you might not have thought of before.

.video-container {padding-bottom:56.25%;padding-top:30px;height:0;overflow:hidden;}.video-container iframe, .video-container object, .video-container embed {width:100%;height:100%;}

Fix 4: How to Do Keyword Research with OSE and the Keyword Difficulty Tool

Studying your competitors can help identify keyword opportunities for your own site. In this Daily SEO Fix, Jacki walks through how to use OSE to research the anchor text for competitors websites and how to use the Keyword Difficulty Tool to identify potential expansion opportunities for your site.

.video-container {padding-bottom:56.25%;padding-top:30px;height:0;overflow:hidden;}.video-container iframe, .video-container object, .video-container embed {width:100%;height:100%;}

Fix 5: How to Discover Keyword Opportunities in Moz Analytics

Digesting organic traffic that is coming to your site is an easy way to surface potential keyword opportunities. In this Daily SEO Fix, Chiaryn walks through the keyword opportunity tab in Moz Analytics and highlights a quick tip for leveraging that tool.

.video-container {padding-bottom:56.25%;padding-top:30px;height:0;overflow:hidden;}.video-container iframe, .video-container object, .video-container embed {width:100%;height:100%;}

Looking for more?

We've got more videos in last week's round-up! Check it out here.

Don't have a Pro subscription? No problem. Everything we cover in these Daily SEO Fix videos is available with a free 30-day trial.

Sounds good. Sign me up!

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!

No comment yet.
Scooped by Simon Dadia!

How to Create a Collaborative Work Environment [Infographic]

Whiteboards, screwdrivers, wires, and scraps from rubber tires all live as one in the Google Garage.

What's the Google Garage, you ask? It's a "commons where Googlers can come together from across the company and learn, create, and make," says program manager Mamie Rheingold.

Put simply, it's a playground for collaboration and innovation. While Google caters to the need for more connectivity, a study from Cornertstone OnDemand revealed that 38% of workers feel there is not enough collaboration in their workplace.

So why are so many businesses failing to see the writing on the wall?

To better understand the benefits of a workplace that focuses less on competition and more on collaboration, check out the infographic below from Column Five and PGi.

No comment yet.
Scooped by Simon Dadia!

The Biggest Pet Peeves of CRO Experts

Conversion Rate Optimization (CRO) isn't a widely known field, even among digital marketers. If you need a quick refresher, CRO is the process of creating an experience for your website visitors that'll convert them into customers.

But this science of lead conversion is quickly gaining ground. After all, who doesn’t want more clicks, leads, and sales?

On International Conversion Rate Optimization Day back in April, some of the best CRO experts in the business came together for an "Ask Me Anything" discussion on, where they answered questions about all things conversion rate optimization. One of the interesting topics they covered was the things that really tick them off in the world of CRO. And trust me when I say they didn't hold back.

What were some of the things that grinded these CRO experts' gears? Here are 13 pet peeves related to conversion rate optimization to be sure you aren't making on your website.

13 Pet Peeves From CRO Experts 1) Over-Simplification

The world is not simple, yet it’s natural for people to oversimplify everything. Optimizers have to be better than that. There is no 'people always prefer' or 'who would ever.'"

– Peep Laja (author, CRO specialist, & founder of ConversionXL)

(Read more from Laja here.)

2) Assumptions

You should [make it] very easy for the user to checkout. The buttons and headlines should tell people what to do next. Never make assumptions that you know what the customer should do."

– Alex Harris (e-commerce conversion specialist)

(Read more from Harris here.)

... Send good cart abandonment emails (and A/B test them), minimize distractions during the checkout process, make it clear to the customer what's happening in the process and when, try to avoid anything that makes it look like you're springing surprise fees or clever accounting on the customer, and reinforce why they're buying from you (painless pre-paid returns process, best in class quality, social proof of satisfied customers, etc. etc. -- test what works best for your customers)."

– Jim Gray (marketing engineer, data scientist & founder of Ioseed)

(Read more from Gray here.)

3) “Click Here” on Calls-to-Action

I personally hate "click here" prefixes, and so do search engines. (It hurts SEO.) It begs the question, does your CTA not already look like a clickable button For both headlines and CTAs, I use a variation of the fore mentioned formula: "I'd like to..." [WHAT: Specific Action]; "Because I want to..." [WHY: Specific Value].

"It's important to pair WHAT and WHY together. Sometimes this can be accomplished in one line. Two lines (headline + subhead, 2-line CTA, CTA + booster) are more often needed though. This shouldn't be feared if it provides more clarity and value."

– Angie Schottmuller (chief of conversion marketing at Unbounce)

(Read more from Schottmuller here.)

A simple formula to follow for button CTA's is 'Action Verb' + 'Benefit.'"

– Bobby Hewitt (president and founder of Creative Thirst)

(Read more from Hewitt here.)

4) Ghost Buttons

Ghost buttons drive me crazy. It goes against usability. The concept is a designer's fantasy trend that should die. The only time I find this tactic useful is when a client insists in having two CTAs on the page, and I basically want one to disappear. Ghosted buttons have ghost conversions."

– Angie Schottmuller (chief of conversion marketing at Unbounce)

(Read more from Schottmuller here.)

5) Ego

"It can be really hard to let something go when you've sweated over it. If it loses, you have to have the courage to throw it away. The best way to do that is to celebrate the fact that you learned something from the failure."

– Oli Gardner (co-founder of Unbounce)

(Read more from Gardner here.)

6) Unclear Call-to-Action Copy

It has to be abundantly clear what's going to happen when someone clicks that button. What are they going to get? Are they scheduling a demo, or signing up for that demo right then and there? You can't afford to leave people wondering, or they won't click out of nervousness."

– Joel Klettke (CRO copywriter)

(Read more from Klettke here.)

7) A "One-Size-Fits-All" Approach

I've seen case studies where including the word click increased... clicks. But like every case study, it isn't a panacea and should be taken with a grain of salt. You can't apply case study learnings, only use them to serve as inspiration and to be used to generate your own related hypothesis."

– Oli Gardner (co-founder of Unbounce)

(Read more from Gardner here.)

Everything you've read about button design is true, and false, and somewhere in between. If you truly believe that the best hypothesis and test you can come up with -- the one that will deliver a 200% increase on conversions -- is to change the button, then you should run A/B or multivariate tests against all of those options to see what works for your audience.

"The fact is, different audiences relate to different designs, language, reading levels, colors, and more. Averages across industries won't help you here."

– Stewart Rogers (director of marketing technology at VentureBeat Insight)

(Read more from Rogers here.)

8) Superlatives and Hyperboles

When it comes to using words like “amazing,” Peep Laja said it best: “Superlatives tend to lose against specifics (‘amazing pizza’ vs ‘stone-oven baked pizza by an Italian master chef,’ ‘fastest pizza delivery’ vs ‘delivery in 15 minutes’) 9 times out of 10. Instead of superlatives, offer lots of detail and specifics.”

Superlatives tend to lose against specifics ('amazing pizza' vs. 'stone-oven baked pizza by an Italian master chef;' 'fastest pizza delivery' vs. 'delivery in 15 minutes') 9 times out of 10. Instead of superlatives, offer lots of detail and specifics."

– Peep Laja (author, CRO specialist, & founder of ConversionXL)

(Read more from Laja here.)

Instead of obsessing over individual words, think about your context and slash hyperbole wherever it stands. If the claims you are making are believable, hit on customer pain points and directly explain a benefit, then the verbiage you use to describe that benefit can be flexible, so long as it fits the context."

– Joel Klettke (CRO copywriter)

(Read more from Klettke here.)

9) Buzzwords

i personally loathe 'rockstar.' I've used it. I'm embarrassed about it. But ... when I see it on a page today, I instantly get that feeling that an old person is trying to sound young."

– Joanna Wiebe (conversion copywriter)

(Read more from Wiebe here.)

10) Fluffy Language

A big hindrance on conversion rates and SEO alike is content that reads like generic fluff for the sake of targeting phrases."

– Joel Klettke (CRO copywriter)

(Read more from Klettke here.)

11) Half-Baked Value Props

I hate when writers rely on old, tired [stuff] like, 'We do X so that you can focus on what matters!'( what matters?); 'We get to know our customers' (everyone does); 'We're the highest quality' (what does that even MEAN? Nobody wants high quality!)."

– Joel Klettke (CRO copywriter)

(Read more from Klettke here.)

12) Ignoring or Avoiding Data

In answering the question, "What's your biggest pet peeve?"

When others pretend like the data doesn't exist."

– Tommy Walker (marketer at Shopify)

"Or worse, when others attempt to manipulate math for statistical significance to claim that the data qualifies as a valid test. Statistical significance is not the same as validity."

– Angie Schottmuller (chief of conversion marketing at Unbounce)

(Read more from Walker and Schottmuller here.)

13) Businesses That Stop Testing

“Always be testing” was the rallying cry for this crowd. The takeaway? Keep on testing, even after you have wins. (If you're not sure where to start, here's a list of real-life CRO tests to try for yourself.)

Many thanks to all the CRO specialists who joined me in this discussion.

What are your biggest CRO pet peeves? Share them with us in the comments.

No comment yet.
Scooped by Simon Dadia!

How to Build Effective Teams Based on Personality Type

This post originally appeared on HubSpot's Sales Blog. To read more content like this, subscribe to Sales.

“Round up the usual suspects,” the gendarme ordered in the famous line from the movie Casablanca. And frequently, that is how executives think when they create teams, committees, or task forces. The boss says or thinks something like, “Let’s appoint anyone who might know something about this issue.” Or, even more likely, “Grab anybody who’s got a stake in this thing.”

Organizations, of course, love such groups because when they work, they can improve coordination, help employees feel more involved, and maybe even spur innovation.

But when they flop (or, more commonly, just lapse into mediocrity), they can drain an organization of its vitality and leave a legacy of posturing, power struggles, and misunderstandings.

Designing a Group

We naively assume any group can automatically be a team. However, one of the biggest reasons teams misfire is that personality differences are ignored.

If, when you create a team, you employ knowledge of the four behavioral styles as defined by DISC (Dominance, Influence, Conscientiousness, and Steadiness), you greatly improve its chances for success.

Here are a few adjectives that describe each personality type:

Dominance: Decisive, adventurous, direct, risk-taker, assertive, self-reliant. Influence: Optimistic, persuasive, emotional, charming, sociable, impulsive. Conscientiousness: Accurate, analytical, tactful, sensitive, systematic, precise. Steadiness: Consistent, cooperative, deliberate, patient, loyal, composed.

(For more information on how to easily identify personality types, check out this post.)

You need to take into account that there are natural allies and antagonists among these four styles and also that each style functions best at a different phase in the lifecycle of a team.

The Natural Cycle of Groups

Work groups typically follow a cycle, just like the organizations which spawn them. They face predictable obstacles, rise to the occasion or fail, and either evolve or deteriorate as a result. At every stage in that cycle, each of the various behavioral styles can be a help or a hindrance.

Phase One: Finding Focus

Any new group, at first, gropes to find its focus. Members think, "Is this going to be worth the effort? Is this going to be a useful team that can get things done?"

In addition, each member at this point is seeking to define his or her role. They silently ask: "Do I fit in here, or am I an outsider? Am I going to be an important member of this group with real input, or am I just here for appearances? Is this going to waste my time?"

Conscientious styles and Dominance styles can be especially helpful during this first phase. They are both skilled at getting to the heart of matters, though in different ways.

If the challenges the group faces are intellectually complex, the Conscientious style will be in his element. Because they are so good at reasoned analysis on tasks, Conscientious styles can help clarify the mission and give the team focus.

Similarly, if the main hurdle the group faces is more of a conflict -- say, a history of discord among members and/or a split over its goals -- a Dominance style will likely shine. In fact, the group may be yearning for a strong leader who can tell the warring members to quit butting heads and either commit, or leave. That is a situation ready-made for the Dominance style.

In either case, people with these two behavioral styles may be able to get the group to psychologically buy into the idea of moving forward together, and convince the team that progress will be possible.

Phase Two: Facing the Realities

While a tough-minded Conscientious style or Dominance style may get the group going, this stormy second stage often cries out for the buoyant optimism of the Interactive styles. Their friendly, informal brand of leadership can send out a strong, clear signal that this group can work together and make things better for everybody.

A people-oriented approach is needed at this stage because it is at this point that reality often intrudes. The group may begin to see how difficult its task really is, how little time and resources are available, and how members may need to settle for a half a loaf rather than a stunning breakthrough.

All these factors can breed frustration, confusion, and disillusionment. This is when it will be decided if the group tackles the real issues in meaningful ways, or is mired in its own internal power struggle. That is why Interactive styles, who are good at smoothing over rough edges and encouraging all to share their thoughts and feelings, can be key players.

Many groups, of course, never transcend this them-versus-us mindset. They continue to silently debate: Who's the top dog? Such a team is not likely to accomplish much. Instead, members will continuously collide with one another, limiting themselves as a team and as individuals.

However, if the Interactive style, with his or her upbeat attitude and people skills, can get the members to quit keeping score, they may yet learn to work together.

Phase Three: Coming Together

Cooperation and collaboration become increasingly apparent -- and Steadiness styles can help meld individual differences into group progress because they are especially good at coalescing divergent views.

By opening their hearts and heads to one another, the Steadiness styles can blend the discordant elements into more of a single melody. The team begins to narrow the gap between what it earlier said it wanted to do and what it is actually doing. There has been a shift of identity, and it has become a true team because members who previously thought in terms of “me,” begin thinking “we.”

Phase Four: Reaching for Stardom

The final stage is more the exception than the rule. However, when reached, it means a team really is performing at its best and is functioning as a whole, not just as a collection of individuals.

Its members enjoy being part of the team and say so. They have learned how to work together. Morale is high. The group continually produces quality and quantity output and is effectively self-managing.

In the previous three stages, Dominance style-type behavior might have been called for on key decisions. However, at this stage, a hands-on, controlling style is not needed. In fact, once a group has this momentum, such a strong-handed style can be counterproductive and could even torpedo the group’s progress. Instead, the team’s decisions flow naturally from its deliberations. Differences among its members become a source of strength, not dispute.

Differences, not Deficiencies

Love ’em or hate ’em, work groups are here to stay. But, while they can be high performance vehicles, they can also be high maintenance, especially in the early stages. Only a team that fully understands and savors its members’ personality styles is likely to be genuinely productive.

If members were chosen carefully and if they practice adaptability, the advantages of stylistic diversity can quickly outweigh the group’s liabilities. Remember: We are talking about personality differences here, not deficiencies.

Therefore, in the final analysis, working with groups all comes down to suspending judgment, empathizing, and trying to play to people’s strengths. The result, despite our differences, can be a wonderful synergy.

No comment yet.
Scooped by Simon Dadia!

6 Tips for Making the Most of Your Retargeting Campaigns

This post originally appeared on HubSpot's Agency Post. To read more content like this, subscribe to Agency Post.

You may wan't to sit down for this statistic. Ready?

Only 2% of traffic converts on the first visit to a website. I repeat, 2%.

Considering you work tirelessly to drive traffic to your website in the first place, it's crucial that you have a plan in place to win back the attention of the 98% that took off empty handed. But how?

Retargeting is an advertising technique that allows brands to remain in front of bounced visitors once they've left their website. Through the use of a JavaScript tag on your website, your visitors are "cookied" upon arrival, allowing your retargeting vendor to display your ads to them as they browse other websites. (Which is why those boots I looked at on Zappos are seemingly haunting me.)

If you're ready to turn window shoppers into actual paying customers, this is a technique that you'll certainly want to dive into a bit more. To help you do so, I've put together a comprehensive list of tips on how to make the most of of your retargeting campaigns.

Real quick, to clarify how retargeting really works, take a look at this visual:

Image Credit: Retargeter

How to Make the Most of Your Retargeting Campaigns 1) Segment Everything

With audience segmentation, users can break down their visitors into groups based on their behavior on the website. Much like lead scoring, visitors can be bucketed into different levels of sales readiness according to the specific pages they have visited.

With this information in tow, you can then create more optimal ad experiences by highlighting the products or services these specific groups previously viewed and directing them back to pages they visited.

For example: Let's say a visitor viewed both your pricing page and your case studies page, but then wandered off without taking any next steps. While it's safe to assume they had some interest, you may want to segment them and serve up an ad for your consultation page to catch their interest and re-engage them.

2) Leverage Frequency Caps

Have you ever been in a clothing store where you can't seem to make it through one rack without being heckled by a sales associate? It's like everywhere you turn they are waiting to start a dressing room for you or tell you which shade of blue best compliments your eyes.

Even if you are interested in what they're offering, it can all feel a bit overwhelming.

To avoid this type of overly assertive approach with your retargeting, you'll want to leverage frequency caps. Frequency caps allows you to place a fixed limit on the number of times a specific ad will appear to help you be more strategic in your efforts.

The frequency cap should be entirely dependent on the objective you are trying to achieve, as well as what stage of the buying cycle the visitor is in. However, as a rule of thumb, Retargeter recommends exposing visitors to 17 to 20 ads per month.

3) Experiment With Durations

While frequency caps aim to regulate the number of impressions a visitor will experience throughout the day, week, or month, campaign duration focuses specifically on the lifespan of the cookie.

When you set a duration for your retargeting campaign you're essentially creating a signal to destroy the cookie after that specified amount of time. From this point on, visitors will no longer be served up ads.

The duration of your campaign should be set to align with the length of your sales cycle. However, according to Perfect Audience, you should aim to test longer-scale campaigns (30 to 90 days) against shorter campaigns (three to seven days) to determine what converts best.

4) Don't Forget to Use Burn Pixels

If your product or service only requires a one-time purchase (or you simply don't want to waste your budget on a visitor you've already successfully converted once), you'll want to use a burn pixel.

What's a burn pixel? It's essentially a line of code that that lives on the "post-transaction" page. When a visitor lands there, they are marked as so and will stop being served ads.

However, this isn't to say that you shouldn't be focused on marketing to your existing customers. While a burn pixel helps you to conserve your retargeting budget, research from Gartner Group suggests that 80% of your company's future revenue will come from just 20% of your existing customers. That's huge.

With that said, burn pixels can also be used to remove those who have already converted from your original retargeting campaign so that you can enroll them in a secondary campaign that employs ad copy that speaks to their unique wants and needs as a customer, rather than a visitor.

5) Conduct A/B Tests

To keep your campaign fresh, you'll want to pay close attention to which ads are performing (and which ads aren't). To uncover the most effective ads, consider conducting a handful of A/B tests that hone in on specific variables.

For inspiration, check out these A/B testing suggestions:

Size: For web campaigns, Perfect Audience found that ads with a resolution of 300 x 250 or 728 x 90 tend to perform best. Testing the size of your retargeting ads could mean the difference between an opportunity lost and a customer closed. Type of Content: Looking to restore their client's faith in retargeting, Add3 tested offering an ebook versus a whitepaper and ended up seeing a 325% increase in leads. Value Propositions: Ad real estate is primarily limited, meaning that you have little room to get your point across. To ensure they were delivering the strongest message, Retargeter tested two variations of a value proposition which helped to increase the conversion rate from 0.22% to 0.26%. 6) Rotate Your Creatives

If you went to a movie theater that never updated their film selection, would you keep going back for more? Or would you find a new movie theater?

Sure, we've all rewatched our favorite movies over and over again, but after awhile, they become predictable. And suddenly, that element of suspense and enchantment is gone.

To ensure that you're keeping your visitors curious, it's important that you have a plan for rotation. Rather than serving up the same thing every week (think grade school cafeteria menu), you'll want to swap out some of your existing ads with fresh ones to pique the interest of both new and existing visitors.

This will help to combat banner blindness and provide you with an opportunity to test out some new ad copy.

Has your company experimented with retargeting? What type of return have you seen from it? We'd love to hear about it in the comments section below.

Editor's Note: Perfect Audience is now an integration partner. With it, you can connect your marketing and advertising together with ease by creating retagreting audiences based on HubSpot Smart Lists. Check it out here.

No comment yet.
Scooped by Simon Dadia!

Meet 13 #INBOUND15 Speakers: Introductions From Their Fellow Speakers

The INBOUND team here at HubSpot is finishing off May with a big flourish. In celebration of this year's impressive (and growing!) list of INBOUND speakers, we've invited friends, colleagues, mentors, and influencers to share thoughts and stories about our speakers, and then share their posts on social media using the #speakerfan hashtag.

Some great #speakerfan posts include HubSpot VP of Content Joe Chernov's wonderful deconstruction of "true collaboration" with speaker Leslie Bradshaw, and Ben Heyman's personal list of the speakers he thinks no one should miss at this year's event.

In the spirit of sharing words about #INBOUND15 speakers, we've asked our speakers to introduce the fellow speaker they know well to you, our readers. Check out what they have to say about each other and learn more about the remarkable people you could see at this year's INBOUND event.

Brené Brown: Live and In Person By Seth Godin, Best-Selling Author

(Tweet this!)

"The thing is, Brené Brown is always live and in person. When we read her bestselling books or watch her explosively viral (and incredibly human) TED talks, we’re with her, together, no matter where we are. That’s because Brené sees us. She sees our isolation and our fear and our pain. Brené, more than any social scientist I know (and first and foremost, she is a scientist) is a human, a fellow traveler, a person who cares."

Seth Godin: What You May Not Know By Laura Fitton, HubSpot

(Tweet this!)

"After 18 books, thousands of blog posts, and hundreds of speeches what could the world not already know about Seth Godin? That he’ll quietly clear away trash at his events. That he’ll vehemently deny his mind and heart are extraordinary. That he may unexpectedly meet a train, cook lunch, or serve tea for a mentee. That he lives in authentic service of his family, original thinkers, and underdogs everywhere. That most of all, he just wants you to question and think and hope and try and do."

Justine Musk: Brilliant, Driven, and Inspiring By Porter Gale, Author & Speaker

(Tweet this!)

"Creative, articulate and independent, Justine Musk is an explorer and writer who isn't afraid to tell it like it is. Her insights and ideas inspire all those around her to think differently, reach higher and to live more passionately. A two-time author, speaker and blogger, Justine captivates on the stage and off."

Shama Hyder: Fearless and Knowledgeable By Anum Hussain, HubSpot

(Tweet this!)

"Going with the flow rather than against it: That's how Shama Hyder defines 'Zen.' It's in the name of her book, her business, and truly defines who she is as a marketer.

"After graduating at the top of her MBA class, Shama found herself looking for work at companies that had yet to recognize the value of social media. Rather than following the easy path, she started her own agency to prove how social media can work for business. Flash forward to now, and Shama's marketing firm is helping clients all around the globe take advantage of the digital world."

Porter Gale: Engaging, Gracious, and Oh-So-Smart By Susan McPherson, Author

(Tweet this!)

"Warm, genuine, multi-talented, and real, Porter Gale is a true Renaissance woman given the many hats she wears and has worn. A C-suite marketing executive, a best-selling author, a film producer and director, and if that weren’t enough, she’s an advisor to many start-up businesses and mom to a beautiful teenage daughter.

"Porter authentically lives her mantra that one’s network is indeed currency and must be valued and nutured. We can all learn from her tremendous experience."

Michael King: Feisty and Full of Heart By Laura Fitton, HubSpot

(Tweet this!)

"While I've been lucky to know some of our speakers for years, I met Michael just eight days ago. He's made a huge impression, fast.

"Lively, smart, funny and full of heart, Michael takes a stage like a boss and brings the audience on a feisty tour of his considerable mind. His stage presence is no accident considering his years as a musician touring the country on Greyhound buses and performing on stages big and small. I can't wait for you to meet Michael in September."

Tara Hunt: Passion, Raw Honesty, and Sparkle By Leslie Bradshaw, Made By Many

(Tweet this!)

"When I first met Tara Hunt, I was mesmerized. It was 2007 and a gaggle of geeks from FOWA London had shuffled into a pub, where Tara had a microphone and the attention of all of us. Her passion made her sparkle. Relatively new to the scene, I didn’t fully understand everything she was saying, but I knew what she was about: meaningful relationships and community.

"Fast forward to 2010: I was putting together an all-star roster of women in tech who had made fitness part of their lives for Nike Women. It gave me an excuse to reach out to Tara, who had been posting about her health journey. I remembering being so excited to talk with her one on one that I didn’t mind taking the call as I was wondering around Disney World in Orlando. To this day, I am inspired by her raw honesty and genuine spirit."

Susan McPherson: Angels Do Exist By Leslie Bradshaw, Made By Many

(Tweet this!)

"Susan McPherson is proof-positive that angels exist. No, I am not talking about the investor-types (although she is generously one of those, too). Rather, I am talking about her as 'a person of exemplary conduct or virtue.' With her talents and Rolodex, she could work anywhere and do anything. That she has chosen to focus on corporate social responsibility speaks to her altruistic-yet-practical heart. The projects she gets involved with don’t just inspire, they make a real, lasting impact.

"A big part of that equation is involving for-profit companies by aligning their incentives with doing well by the world around them. She has also been an incredible lighthouse to my younger sister, Jennifer, helping her navigate the waters of building a career while making the world a better place. I am so grateful to know her and have her in our lives."

Ann Handley: Who Needs No Introduction By Doug Kessler, Velocity Partners

(Tweet this!)

"Not a lot of people know this but Ann is short for 'Annoyingly'. Annoyingly successful, smart, funny, charming, talented ...

"When we think of being our best selves, we conjur up something more Ann-like. As an author ( Content Rules, Everybody Writes), she's clear, crisp, and compelling with sound, smart advice puncutated by laugh-out-loud moments and self-deprecating stories. As a speaker, she's generous, warm, and entertaining. And as a marketer, she's a sharp strategist, a student of the craft and a natural empath. That's a killer combination. And SO goddamn annoying." Tim Washer: Waiter at LongHorn's By Ann Handley, MarketingProfs

(Tweet this!)

"Tim Washer was born at a young age and went to school, where he majored in PowerPoint, with a minor in Overhead Transparencies. From there it was an obvious transition to comedy writer, emcee, actor, producer, and, eventually, waiter at Longhorn's.

"Tim is best known for appearances and writing on Last Week Tonight with John Oliver, The Onion News Network, Saturday Night Live, and that one cable spot for Bob's Discount Furniture that airs in greater Poughkeepsie. "Tim is not just funny. He's a creative genius. But more than that, he's also a devoted dad who possesses a generous spirit, sharp marketing instincts, and whatever a word might be for 'business smarts' that is not 'acumen,' because 'acumen' sounds like something the pharmacist prescribes for your hayfever." Doug Kessler: Facilitates Constructive Rants By Tim Washer, Cisco

(Tweet this!)

"One of the first rules I learned in comedy is that the most efficient path to discovering your voice is by exploring the things that make you angry. Doug Kessler and his team at Velocity simplified this process in theMarketing Manifesto. They made it so easy that even the corporate suits can learn to constructively rant. All of this from one of the nicest guys you'll ever meet. It kinda makes me mad."

Darren Rowse: There's More to All This Than 'Gee Whiz' By Chris Brogan, Owner Media Group

(Tweet this!)

"Darren Rowse runs problogger, which many of us turned to as possible proof that there was more to all this than gee whiz and complaining. His Digital Photography School went on to be huge as well. Sticking quite close to his knitting after all these years, he is every bit as prophetic and brilliant in what he covers as he was then."

Denise Jacobs: Creative, Vibrant, and Full of Possibility By Marcia Conner, Author

(Tweet this!)

"Creative. Vibrant. Full of possibility. That’s the world Denise Jacobs magically draws people into. She works in the eye of the storm, sparking big ideas, and catalyzing change. Through her organization 'The Creative Dose,' she channels creative genius, translating new approaches into actionable ideas, assisting people in finding their place in the sun. Curious, participative, and engaged, Denise is a force of nature, showing us new and better ways for us to be."

Which INBOUND15 speakers are you most excited to see? Share with us in the comments below -- or, better yet, on your own blogs. Be sure to use the #speakerfan hashtag!

No comment yet.
Scooped by Simon Dadia!

Google Unveils Rebranded Webmaster Tools

The tech giant introduced Search Console today, a rebranded version of its Webmaster Tools.
No comment yet.
Scooped by Simon Dadia!

Google Upgrades AdWords Editor to Support Labels

Reacting to user feedback, Google has upgraded its AdWords Editor to fully support lables, upgraded URLs, targeted in-app mobile ads, and call only ads.
No comment yet.
Scooped by Simon Dadia!

Apple Watch

The Apple Watch is a new smartwatch that operates as a small "wearable computing" device worn on a user's wrist.

No comment yet.
Scooped by Simon Dadia!

Does the Page Match the Search?

There are several opportunities to enhance the likelihood of the "right" page showing up for the "right" search.
No comment yet.
Scooped by Simon Dadia!

How to Build Links in Person

Posted by RuthBurrReedy

The important thing to remember when you're trying to attract links—real, powerful, high-quality, authoritative links—is that behind each of those links is a person. The kinds of links that Google wants you to build are the kinds of links that you get when a real live person decides to share or link to your content.

That great content you're creating is designed to be the kind of stuff people like to share, but getting people to share it often requires outreach. When you ask someone to read and possibly share your content, even if it's content you think they'll really like, you're essentially asking them to do you a favor. That's a lot easier to do if it's somebody who already knows you and likes you.

This is why a relationship-based approach to link building can be so powerful. By connecting with site owners on a personal level, you can start creating a positive association between you and the content you share. Start thinking of a link as something that's given online by a real live person who also exists outside the Internet, and you can move from being a link builder to being a relationship builder. One moment of link outreach can generate a link, but an ongoing relationship can result in multiple links and shares, not to mention introductions into that person's network of friends and connections.

Plus, you might make a friend!

Photo via Pixabay

A few caveats

In-person link outreach is not for everybody. There are a few reasons why building links in person might not work for you.

No budget: Like many content building and link outreach strategies, some of the in-person link building tactics I outline below will require a financial outlay, which not everybody can swing. No time: In-person link outreach takes a lot of time, and some of it will almost certainly need to be spent outside of work hours (or during work hours, but not at work). Too far away: If you're not located in the same city/state/country as your client, it's going to be harder for you to build links for them in person. Not a people person: If you dread talking to people, especially people you don't know, this strategy is going to be massively unpleasant for you.

Yes, you still have to build good content. Like any good strategy to attract links, building links in person is only going to work if you're also taking the time to build linkable, shareable resources that people will want to link to (need some help building content for your industry? Check out Ronell Smith's guide to creating content for boring industries). As you're laying the foundation for your link outreach relationships, you should also be planning your content calendar—that way, by the time you've got a great linkable asset ready to share, you've gotten to know some people who can share it.

Don't be creepy. The point of in-person link building is not to lie, cheat, or manipulate people into being friends with you in order to secretly use them for their sweet, sweet links. The point is to form strong, genuine professional relationships with people who will appreciate the awesome work you do. You'll be a stronger marketer for it, and maybe even meet your next boss or BFF.

All right! Let's make some friends.

Where to build links in person

Trade shows and conferences. This is the "budget outlay" item that I mentioned earlier: if you can swing it, attend some trade shows and conferences in your/your client's industry. Of course, this is easier to do if you're in-house, or only building links for a few clients, than if you have a whole roster of different sites in different industries under your care.

If your clients are in your area, make sure they let you know when they'll be attending or exhibiting at events, and see if you can tag along. Events like a home and garden show usually have tickets for under $20. In-house marketers should also see if they can be part of the booth staff at trade shows where their clients are exhibiting. If there's a relevant conference or trade show in your area and your client isn't exhibiting, see if you can get an expo-only pass for free or a reduced rate.

Marketing conferences can be a great place to hone your SEO skills, but they can also be a great place to connect with other marketers. If you're attending a marketing/SEO conference, take a look at the attendee list and see if there are other marketers from your industry who will be attending (especially if they don't work for competitors). Another SEO is going to understand why you might be asking them to share or link to your content, so it's worth your while to cultivate relationships with other SEOs who might have access to topically-related sites. A marketing conference is a great way for SEOs with a lot of different clients to build link relationships across multiple industries, too.

Shane Macomber Photography

Meetups and trade associations. In addition to higher-dollar industry events, most metro areas have a variety of meetups, clubs and associations, many of which are free to join. If your client is a member of an industry association, see if you can tag along to an event that's open to the public; even closed-membership groups tend to have a mixer or two every year to let potential new members experience the group.

Check sites like Meetup, LinkedIn, Facebook and yes, Google+, for groups in your area. There may be groups focused on your client's industry/ies, but it's also worthwhile to start attending local events around marketing, PR, advertising, social media, etc. to connect with other local marketers. Inbound links from sites in the same local area can be quite valuable for websites with a strong local focus, so building link relationships within your local community is definitely worth doing—and is another way to build link relationships for multiple clients at once.

Assessing link relationships

Of course, just because you've met someone in person doesn't mean they're going to link to you, or even that you'd necessarily want a link from them. Try to do some recon before heading to the event, so you can keep an eye out for your dream link targets.

Wherever possible, get a list of people who will be attending the event; this will help you pick out a few people with whom you'd really like to connect. If you can't get a list beforehand, compile a list of the people you met afterward and do some research.

Don't forget that attendees are people, not just businesses—you'll want to take some time to check attendees out on social media and LinkedIn, too. A person may have a business card from one company but actually work with multiple businesses. Someone with no website of their own might be a regular contributor to an industry blog, or just fantastically well-connected in the community you're trying to join and still worth getting to know. A person's position within a company will matter, too—you're more likely to get a link from a marketing/web person (who has access to the website) than, e.g., the manufacturing plant supervisor (who probably doesn't, and also has other things to do).

Take some time to evaluate sites like you would any other link prospect. Stay away from sites that appear at risk for a penalty, or are sleazy enough that you don't want to associate your client's brand with them. That doesn't mean they're not still worth getting to know as people (you should certainly never shun people at conferences, that's just rude), it just means that they won't be a focus of your link outreach later.

Make the connection

When you meet someone with whom you'd like to build a link-based relationship, don't start out asking for the link, any more than you would online. If you're at a networking or industry event, there's a basic understanding that people are there to make professional connections—there's no need to be more specific than that and say you're there to make connections that might result in links (nobody wants to feel like they're being used for their links).

After your research, you'll probably have a few people who you want to make sure you meet, but don't seek them out at the expense of forming other connections. Remember that your goal here is more than just a link—it's a relationship, which could be mutually beneficial to both of you. Ask people questions about themselves, their work and what they think about the event. Just like on social media, you don't want to talk only about yourself—your main success metric for these events should be engagement.

When a networking conversation is drawing to a natural close, excuse yourself (if you need an excuse, getting more food or drink is usually a good bet)—but make sure to get a business card, or social media info from your new professional connection. As you follow your new friends on Twitter or G+, add them to a list or circle for people from the event or group you've attended so you have them all in one place later.

Follow up

By the end of the event, you should have a list of new friends who might link to or share your content. Your next step is not to ask them to do so, however (unless you have a specific content piece that came up in your conversation that they were interested in). Your next step is to nurture that connection.

Start with a quick tweet or email the next morning that says it was great to meet them and maybe references something in your conversation. If your only point of contact for them is email, use it very sparingly—nobody likes aggressive emails. Your best best in this case is to try to see them again at the next event, to continue nurturing your relationship in person. You could also see if they want to meet for coffee or lunch to talk shop.

Photo via Pixabay

If you've added your new connections on social media, take some time every day to check in with your list. Talk to them—they're your new friends! Reply to their tweets, answer questions they might ask, and above all, share their content when they post it. You're showing them that you're a connection worth having by bringing value to their conversations. Make sure to switch up the time of day you're doing this, since different people use social media at different times of day. If you get into a conversation with some of their followers, make sure to add them to your list, too.

Over time, it will become clear which people are turning into real connections and which are just not going to respond to you. You'll also see some of your new pals sharing the content you post, without you even having to ask them—that's a great sign that they're seeing you and your content as valuable.

When your feel your relationship with someone is at a point where you can ask them for a favor without it being weird, go ahead and ask them to share or link to a piece of content of yours. Make sure the content in question is actually relevant to what they do/like; one awesome thing about relationship-based link building is that you may actually get content ideas by listening to what your new friends have to say. Be cool about it—a simple "Hey, I thought you'd like this, check it out" is often enough.

All of this relationship building can also be done online—people do it all the time. However, in my experience, meeting someone in person can drastically reduce the amount of time and the number of interactions it can take to build trust with someone and get to the point where you're happy to share each other's content. As with most link-building strategies, a time investment up-front can pay dividends down the line.

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!

No comment yet.
Scooped by Simon Dadia!

Your Daily SEO Fix: Week 4

Posted by Trevor-Klein

This week, we've got the fourth (and second-to-last) installment of our short (< 2-minute) video tutorials that help you all get the most out of Moz's tools. They're each designed to solve a use case that we regularly hear about from Moz community members.

Here's a quick recap of the previous round-ups in case you missed them:

Week 1: Reclaim links using Open Site Explorer, build links using Fresh Web Explorer, and find the best time to tweet using Followerwonk. Week 2: Analyze SERPs using new MozBar features, boost your rankings through on-page optimization, check your anchor text using Open Site Explorer, do keyword research with OSE and the keyword difficulty tool, and discover keyword opportunities in Moz Analytics. Week 3: Compare link metrics in Open Site Explorer, find tweet topics with Followerwonk, create custom reports in Moz Analytics, use Spam Score to identify high-risk links, and get link building opportunities delivered to your inbox.

In this installment, we've got five brand new tutorials:

How to Use Fresh Web Explorer to Build Links How to Analyze Rank Progress for a Given Keyword How to Use the MozBar to Analyze Your Competitors' Site Markup How to Use the Top Pages Report to Find Content Ideas How to Find On-Site Errors with Crawl Test

Hope you enjoy them!

Fix 1: How to Use Fresh Web Explorer to Build Links

If you have unique data or a particularly excellent resource on your site, that content can be a great link magnet. In this Daily SEO Fix, Felicia shows you how to set up alerts in Fresh Web Explorer to track mentions of relevant keyword phrases, find link opportunities, and build links to your content.

.video-container {padding-bottom:56.25%;padding-top:30px;height:0;overflow:hidden;}.video-container iframe, .video-container object, .video-container embed {width:100%;height:100%;}

Fix 2: How to Analyze Rank Progress for a Given Keyword

Moz's Rank Tracker tool retrieves search engine rankings for pages and keywords, storing them for easy comparison later. In this fix, James shows you how to use this helpful tool to track keywords, save time, and improve your rankings.

Fix 3: How to Use the MozBar to Analyze Your Competitors' Site Markup

Schema markup helps search engines better identify what your (and your competitors') website pages are all about and as a result can lead to a boost to rankings. In this Daily SEO Fix, Jordan shows you how to use the MozBar to analyze the schema markup of the competition and optimize your own site and pages for rich snippets.

Fix 4: How to Use the Top Pages Report to Find Content Ideas

With Moz's Top Pages report in Open Site Explorer, you can see the pages on your site (and the competitions' sites!) that are top performers. In this fix, Nick shows you how to use the report to analyze your competitors' content marketing efforts and to inform your own.

Fix 5: How to Find On-Site Errors with Crawl Test

Identifying and understanding any potential errors on your site is crucial to the life of any SEO. In this Daily SEO Fix Sean shows you how to use the Crawl Test tool in Moz Analytics to pull reports and identify any errors on your site.

Looking for more?

We've got more videos in the previous three weeks' round-ups!

Your Daily SEO Fix: Week 1

Your Daily SEO Fix: Week 2

Your Daily SEO Fix: Week 3

Don't have a Pro subscription? No problem. Everything we cover in these Daily SEO Fix videos is available with a free 30-day trial.

Sounds good. Sign me up!

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!

No comment yet.
Scooped by Simon Dadia!

enterprise application

Enterprise applications are designed to assist an organization in solving enterprise problems. (e.g. CRM, ERP, BI). They integrate with other enterprise systems.

No comment yet.
Scooped by Simon Dadia!

Exposing The Generational Content Gap: Three Ways to Reach Multiple Generations

Posted by AndreaLehr

This post was originally in YouMoz, and was promoted to the main blog because it provides great value and interest to our community. The author's views are entirely his or her own and may not reflect the views of Moz, Inc.

With more people of all ages online than ever before, marketers must create content that resonates with multiple generations. Successful marketers realize that each generation has unique expectations, values and experiences that influence consumer behaviors, and that offering your audience content that reflects their shared interests is a powerful way to connect with them and inspire them to take action.

We’re in the midst of a generational shift, with Millennials expected to surpass Baby Boomers in 2015 as the largest living generation. In order to be competitive, marketers need to realize where key distinctions and similarities lie in terms of how these different generations consume content and share it with with others.

To better understand the habits of each generation, BuzzStream and Fractl surveyed over 1,200 individuals and segmented their responses into three groups: Millennials (born between 1977–1995), Generation X (born between 1965–1976), and Baby Boomers (born between 1946–1964). [Eds note: The official breakdown for each group is as follows: Millennials (1981-1997), Generation X (1965-1980), and Boomers (1946-1964)]

Our survey asked them to identify their preferences for over 15 different content types while also noting their opinions on long-form versus short-form content and different genres (e.g., politics, technology, and entertainment).

We compared their responses and found similar habits and unique trends among all three generations.

Here's our breakdown of the three key takeaways you can use to elevate your future campaigns:

1. Baby Boomers are consuming the most content

However, they have a tendency to enjoy it earlier in the day than Gen Xers and Millennials.

Although we found striking similarities between the younger generations, the oldest generation distinguished itself by consuming the most content. Over 25 percent of Baby Boomers consume 20 or more hours of content each week. Additional findings:

Baby Boomers also hold a strong lead in the 15–20 hours bracket at 17 percent, edging out Gen Xers and Millennials at 12 and 11 percent, respectively A majority of Gen Xers and Millennials—just over 22 percent each—consume between 5 and 10 hours per week Less than 10 percent of Gen Xers consume less than five hours of content a week—the lowest of all three groups

We also compared the times of day that each generation enjoys consuming content. The results show that most of our respondents—over 30 percent— consume content between 8 p.m. and midnight. However, there are similar trends that distinguish the oldest generation from the younger ones:

Baby Boomers consume a majority of their content in the morning. Nearly 40 percent of respondents are online between 5 a.m. and noon. The least popular time for most respondents to engage with content online is late at night, between midnight and 5 a.m., earning less than 10 percent from each generation Gen X is the only generation to dip below 10 percent in the three U.S. time zones: 5 a.m. to 9 a.m., 6 to 8 p.m., and midnight to 5 a.m.

When it comes to which device each generation uses to consume content, laptops are the most common, followed by desktops. The biggest distinction is in mobile usage: Over 50 percent of respondents who use their mobile as their primary device for content consumption are Millennials. Other results reveal:

Not only do Baby Boomers use laptops the most (43 percent), but they also use their tablets the most. (40 percent of all primary tablet users are Baby Boomers). Over 25 percent of Millennials use a mobile device as their primary source for content Gen Xers are the least active tablet users, with less than 8 percent of respondents using it as their primary device 2. Preferred content types and lengths span all three generations

One thing every generation agrees on is the type of content they enjoy seeing online. Our results reveal that the top four content types— blog articles, images, comments, and eBooks—are exactly the same for Baby Boomers, Gen Xers, and Millennials. Additional comparisons indicate:

The least preferred content types—flipbooks, SlideShares, webinars, and white papers—are the same across generations, too (although not in the exact same order) Surprisingly, Gen Xers and Millennials list quizzes as one of their five least favorite content types

All three generations also agree on ideal content length, around 300 words. Further analysis reveals:

Baby Boomers have the highest preference for articles under 200 words, at 18 percent Gen Xers have a strong preference for articles over 500 words compared to other generations. Over 20 percent of respondents favor long-form articles, while only 15 percent of Baby Boomers and Millennials share the same sentiment. Gen Xers also prefer short articles the least, with less than 10 percent preferring articles under 200 words

However, in regards to verticals or genres, where they consume their content, each generation has their own unique preference:

Baby Boomers have a comfortable lead in world news and politics, at 18 percent and 12 percent, respectively Millennials hold a strong lead in technology, at 18 percent, while Baby Boomers come in at 10 percent in the same category Gen Xers fall between Millennials and Baby Boomers in most verticals, although they have slight leads in personal finance, parenting, and healthy living Although entertainment is the top genre for each generation, Millennials and Baby Boomers prefer it slightly more than than Gen Xers do

3. Facebook is the preferred content sharing platform across all three generations

Facebook remains king in terms of content sharing, and is used by about 60 percent of respondents in each generation studied. Surprisingly, YouTube came in second, followed by Twitter, Google+, and LinkedIn, respectively. Additional findings:

Baby Boomers share on Facebook the most, edging out Millennials by only a fraction of a percent Although Gen Xers use Facebook slightly less than other generations, they lead in both YouTube and Twitter, at 15 percent and 10 percent, respectively Google+ is most popular with Baby Boomers, at 8 percent, nearly double that of both Gen Xers and Millennials

Although a majority of each generation is sharing content on Facebook, the type of content they are sharing, especially visuals, varies by each age group. The oldest generation prefers more traditional content, such as images and videos. Millennials prefer newer content types, such as memes and GIFs, while Gen X predictably falls in between the two generations in all categories except SlideShares. Other findings:

The most popular content type for Baby Boomers is video, at 27 percent Parallax is the least popular type for every generation, earning 1 percent or less in each age group Millennials share memes the most, while less than 10 percent of Baby Boomers share similar content

Marketing to several generations can be challenging, given the different values and ideas that resonate with each group. With the number of online content consumers growing daily, it’s essential for marketers to understand the specific types of content that each of their audiences connect with, and align it with their content marketing strategy accordingly.

Although there is no one-size-fits-all campaign, successful marketers can create content that multiple generations will want to share. If you feel you need more information getting started, you can review this deck of additional insights, which includes the preferred video length and weekend consuming habits of each generation discussed in this post.

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!

No comment yet.
Scooped by Simon Dadia!

Enterprise Linux

Enterprise Linux is the term used to reference any distribution (distro) of the open source Linux operating system that is targeted to the commercial market.

No comment yet.
Scooped by Simon Dadia!

Tomato firmware

Called Tomato, it is the name of a firmware for wireless routers, including the popular WRT54G family. Tomato is designed to replace the stock firmware loaded by the vendor.

No comment yet.
Scooped by Simon Dadia!

RAM - random access memory

RAM (pronounced ramm) is an acronym for random access memory and is the most common type of memory found in computers and other devices, such as printers.

No comment yet.
Scooped by Simon Dadia!

CPU - Central Processing Unit

CPU is the abbreviation for central processing unit (the processor). The CPU is the brains of the computer where most calculations take place.

No comment yet.
Scooped by Simon Dadia!

Competing With Content Marketing: 7 Steps to Success [Infographic]

Today, succeeding in inbound marketing means putting content at the heart of your communications strategy.

This is no secret, of course. Content marketing is now a well-established technique and the space has become pretty competitive. So, the question is, how do you invest wisely in content marketing to improve your capabilities so that you can compete and stand out from the noise?

It's predicted that 59% of B2C marketers and 55% of B2B marketers are increasing their spend in content. With more and more companies developing a content marketing plan for their business, it's important to understand how you're performing against industry standards. That's why we joined forces with Smart Insights and surveyed over 700 marketers across Europe to see how they've been aclimatising to the new age of content marketing.

The survey revealed a number of interesting trends. For example, nearly three quarters (71%) of businesses are creating more content in 2015 compared to 2014 [tweet this] and only 12% feel they have an optimised content marketing strategy [tweet this].

Alright. I'm going to grab a coffee and let the graphic do the talking from here.

(And feel free to download the full report here.)

Please feel free to share this infographic on your own site -- just copy and paste the embed code below!

<p><strong>Please include attribution to with this graphic.</strong><br /><br /><a href=''><img src='' alt='Content marketing success' width='600px' border='0' /></a></p>

No comment yet.
Scooped by Simon Dadia!

DLP – data loss prevention

Data loss prevention, or DLP, refers to technology or software developed to protect and prevent the potential for data loss or theft.

No comment yet.
Scooped by Simon Dadia!

11 Examples of Facebook Ads That Actually Work (And Why)

As a marketer, you know by now that most (if not all) of your potential customers are likely a part of Facebook's massive community. There are 890 million people signing into Facebook every single day. So, whether your target audience is college students or CEOs, they're probably using Facebook -- and some of them are using it daily.

The trouble is, posting on Facebook alone isn't enough anymore for most brands, especially for those just starting out.

No comment yet.
Scooped by Simon Dadia!

Can Buying Installs Aid Organic App Ranking?

In regular Google SEO, paid links and advertising are negative link-building signals, but sometimes Google works with double standards. It seems both Google Play and the iOS App Store love all your installs, paid or not.
No comment yet.