Tynt Is A Cool Specialized Analytic Service

John Battelle’s recent post as well as an email from a friend turned me to Tynt. John goes into a bunch of detail that I won’t repeat here, but essentially what Tynt does is tracks what people are copying and pasting from your site’s content while also adding an attribution link to your site [...]

John Battelle’s recent post as well as an email from a friend turned me to Tynt. John goes into a bunch of detail that I won’t repeat here, but essentially what Tynt does is tracks what people are copying and pasting from your site’s content while also adding an attribution link to your site when they do so.

This is a great idea. It’s a little bit shocking nobody has thought of this until now, but it’s a very useful tool for publishers in a few different ways:

  • Generate more links and traffic to your site – Every time any of your content is pasted into email or a blog post Tynt’s code adds a link to the page the content was copied from. This will help drive users back to the original content, as well as potentially help search engine ranking if those attribution links make it onto web pages.
  • See what type of content is being copied – Tynt provides analytics that shows you what content is being shared and how much traffic it is driving. This can be useful to learn what type of content you should create more of, and what types of people are sharing it so you can see if you’re getting engagement from key audiences.
  • Generate revenue from searches – Tynt recognizes short pieces of copied text as likely searches, and intercepts the search going to one of the major engines and then plans to share the revenue from searches that result in ad clicks with the publishers. I’m not sure this is fully scaled yet, but it looks like a potential revenue stream for larger publishers that could be worthwhile.

That being said, I think Tynt would be more powerful built into a pre-existing analytics service. Having to go to another place to check out your “copy and paste” stats separate from the rest of your analytics is a pain. Additionally, having to place another code snippet on your page is not ideal either, it’d be much easier if this was part of an analytics package that already existed today. Maybe this makes Tynt an acquisition target down the road by either a larger analytic company or one of the search engines who wants to serve search results on Tynt copy and paste search queries. Interesting stuff.

http://www.conversionrater.com

Can New Websites Rank Well?

The search engines grow more and more littered with new websites, web pages and more blog posts and articles than we know what to do with. How is a new aspiring website ever supposed to be able to break into the search results for any type of keyword phrase? Even third string keywords with much [...]

The search engines grow more and more littered with new websites, web pages and more blog posts and articles than we know what to do with. How is a new aspiring website ever supposed to be able to break into the search results for any type of keyword phrase? Even third string keywords with much less search volume are becoming very tough to be visible for. This is why it is even more important to really focus on marketing and branding your business online and focusing much less on breaking into search results.

Prime example on why all businesses need to take a slightly different approach when trying to market a new business online. The days of only focusing on ranking for search results are slowly coming to an end and the need for strong branding and marketing is really starting to play a significant role in all SEO related campaigns. Don’t get me wrong, a well built and optimized website along with a strong effective link building campaign is always going to be a very important aspect for any growing and new starting business but websites are going to have to start taking a vastly different approach to market themselves in search results.

Rick DeJarnette from the Bing Community Search Blog had this to say:
“If you are in an industry that has a few heavy-hitter, powerhouse websites as competitors, whose webmasters have worked hard to develop great content and earn authoritative backlinks, it can be as frustrating as chasing your own tail for a smaller upstart to compete with those sites using the same primary keywords. Competing in the long tail can be a great way to mop up some otherwise untapped business and begin to develop a name and reputation for your website. It’s always better to compete for a high rank for a few keywords in the tail than to merely settle for a middling or worse rank for the most popular keywords in the head (settling for mediocrity is what most webmasters do, and thus why there’s so often good opportunities for the taking).”

This is important to understand because a new website is going to take some real time to rank for any primary keywords. Spend your focus worrying about some of the long tail keyword phrases that already exist in your industry that could be available for you to build your business now rather than later.

http://www.searchengineoptimizationjournal.com

The Definitive Guide To Styling Web Links


  

Hyperlinks (or links) connect Web pages. They are what make the Web work, enabling us to travel from one page to the next at the click of a button. As Web Standardistas put it, “without hypertext links the Web wouldn’t be the Web, it would simply be a collection of separate, unconnected pages.”. So without links, we’d be lost. We look for them on the page when we want to venture further. Sure, we pause to read a bit, but inevitably we end up clicking a link of some sort.

1hicks

When you style links, remember that users don’t read; they scan. You’ve heard that before, and it’s true. So, make sure your links are obvious. They should also indicate where they will take the user. Let’s start by looking at CSS selectors and pseudo-classes.

Smashing-magazine-advertisement in The Definitive Guide To Styling Web Links
 in The Definitive Guide To Styling Web Links  in The Definitive Guide To Styling Web Links  in The Definitive Guide To Styling Web Links

Hyperlinks (or links) connect Web pages. They are what make the Web work, enabling us to travel from one page to the next at the click of a button. As Web Standardistas put it, “without hypertext links the Web wouldn’t be the Web, it would simply be a collection of separate, unconnected pages.”. So without links, we’d be lost. We look for them on the page when we want to venture further. Sure, we pause to read a bit, but inevitably we end up clicking a link of some sort.

[Offtopic: By the way, did you know that Smashing Magazine has a mobile version? Try it out if you have an iPhone, Blackberry or another capable device.]

Styling Links

When you style links, remember that users don’t read; they scan. You’ve heard that before, and it’s true. So, make sure your links are obvious. They should also indicate where they will take the user.

Let’s start by looking at CSS selectors and pseudo-classes:

  • a:link { }
    Unvisited link.
  • a:visited { }
    Visited links.
  • a:hover { }
    The user mouses over a link.
  • a:focus { }
    The user clicks on a link.
  • a:active { }
    The user has clicked a link.

Tlc1 in The Definitive Guide To Styling Web Links
The TLC uses not only plaint text links, but also icons to communicate the corresponding file types.

Ensure Contrast

Links should stand out not only from the background but from the surrounding text. If the font color is black and the link color is black, you have a problem. Make your links stand out by using one or more than one of the following techniques.

  • text-decortation: underline;
    Underline.
  • font-weight: bold;
    Bold.
  • font-size: 1.4em;
    Enlarge.
  • color: #ed490a;
    Color.
  • background-color: #c0c0c0;
    Background.
  • border-bottom: 2px solid #a959c3;
    Border.

If you decide to make links blue, then make sure no other text (including headings) is blue, because users will expect it to be a link, too.

Also, don’t underline text that isn’t linked because users expect underlined text to be a link. And keep in mind users with poor sight. Red won’t stand out to someone who is color blind, so consider underlining or bolding links, in addition to changing the color.

Komodo in The Definitive Guide To Styling Web Links

Hicks in The Definitive Guide To Styling Web Links

A helpful technique that I always use is to slightly blur the focus. Links with good contrast should still stand out when you look at the page.

Don’t Forget About Visited Links

Visited links are often overlooked, but they are very helpful, especially on larger websites. Knowing where they’ve been before is helpful for users, whether because they want to avoid pages they’ve visited or to make a point of visiting them again.

Give visited links a darker shade of color, so that they stand out but aren’t as obvious as unvisited links.

Google in The Definitive Guide To Styling Web Links

Lee in The Definitive Guide To Styling Web Links

Use the Title Attribute

The title attribute is usually overlooked, but it’s a convenient way to add descriptions to your links and can be especially useful for those who rely on screen readers.

<a href="example.com" title="This is an example link">Example</a>

Use Button Styles

To make really important links stand out—say, a call to action or a “More info” link at the bottom—use a button style. And you can reuse the style again and again without having to edit any graphics.

Notable in The Definitive Guide To Styling Web Links

Ux in The Definitive Guide To Styling Web Links

For more information, check out “Super-Awesome Buttons With CSS3 and RGBA” and “Call to Action Buttons.”

Hover State

Offering feedback to users that they’re hovering over a link is good practice. The best way to do this is to change the background color, change the text color or remove the underline.

a:hover { text-decoration:none;
text-shadow: 0 0 2px #999;
}

Adii in The Definitive Guide To Styling Web Links

Cars in The Definitive Guide To Styling Web Links

The mouse pointer usually turns from an arrow into a hand when the user hovers over a link. But this functionality is sometimes lost; for example, in IE when the link contains a span element, or on “Submit” buttons. Fix this by adding the cursor type via CSS.

a:hover span { cursor: pointer }

Active State

Provide visual feedback to the user to indicate that they have clicked a link, so that they know to wait. One nice effect is to move the link down one or two pixels, which gives the link the appearance of being pressed.

a:active { padding-top: 2px; }

Tim in The Definitive Guide To Styling Web Links

Elliot in The Definitive Guide To Styling Web Links

Apply Padding

Here is a good usability tip. Add padding to your links. This way, the user doesn’t have to hover over the exact point of the text. Instead, they can hover in proximity and still be able to click. This works well for navigation links.

a { padding: 5px; }

Simple in The Definitive Guide To Styling Web Links

Use Icons for File Types

If your links point to files in various formats, inform the user of as much using icons. This prepares them for the file type they are about to open, whether it’s PDF or JPEG, for example.

Tlc1 in The Definitive Guide To Styling Web Links

For some great resources, check out “Fam Fam Fam Silk Icons” and “Social Media Mini Icon Pack.”

Use Icons for Recognition

Just as you would use icons for file types, use icons to identify where links go or what they do. This user can more quickly absorb a visual icon than text.

Sam1 in The Definitive Guide To Styling Web Links

Wufoo in The Definitive Guide To Styling Web Links

Make Anchor Text Descriptive

Use meaningful text, not “Click here.” The problem with the latter is that it forces the user to read around the link to understand why they should “Click here.” Anchor text such as “See Britney on a beach” speaks for itself. It’s also more SEO-friendly.

Clickhere in The Definitive Guide To Styling Web Links

Link Your Logo

Always link your logo to the home page. Most users expect this convention across the Web. That said, don’t assume that users know this. Regular surfers expect it, but a number of users still look for the “Home” link.

<h1><a href="/" title="Homepage">Site name</a></h1>
h1 a {
background: url(images/logo.gif) no-repeat top left;
display: block;
text-indent: -9999px;
width: 200px;
height: 60px;
}

Don’t Open New Windows

Just don’t do it. Let the user decide when and where to open a new tab or window. Users expect links to open in the same window. If you really must do it, at least add an icon to show that this will happen. There are exceptions; for example, it you don’t want to break the flow of a check-out process.

Micro-Formats

As the Web becomes more semantic, consider incorporating micro-formats into your link structures, to help machines understand how a link fits into a page and its relationship to other pages. For example, the following…

<a href="http://myfriend.example.com" rel="friend met">My Friend</a>

tells search bots that this text links to a friend who I’ve met, which is useful for discovering connections between links. You can also read more about micro-formats.

Showcase Of Links In Web Design

Komodo Media

1komodo in The Definitive Guide To Styling Web Links

Hicks Design

1hicks in The Definitive Guide To Styling Web Links

Notable App

1not in The Definitive Guide To Styling Web Links

UX Booth

1ux in The Definitive Guide To Styling Web Links

Max Voltar

Max in The Definitive Guide To Styling Web Links

Elliot Jay Stocks

1elliot in The Definitive Guide To Styling Web Links

The TLC

1tlc in The Definitive Guide To Styling Web Links

Sam Brown

1sam in The Definitive Guide To Styling Web Links

Adii Rockstar

1adii in The Definitive Guide To Styling Web Links

Forty Seven Media

147 in The Definitive Guide To Styling Web Links

Stefan Persson

1stefan in The Definitive Guide To Styling Web Links

Huge

1huge in The Definitive Guide To Styling Web Links

AWP

1awp in The Definitive Guide To Styling Web Links

Simple Bits

1simple in The Definitive Guide To Styling Web Links

Andy Rutledge

Andy in The Definitive Guide To Styling Web Links

Brian Hoff

Hoff in The Definitive Guide To Styling Web Links

Simon Collison

Simon in The Definitive Guide To Styling Web Links

Further Reading

(al)


© Lee Munroe for Smashing Magazine, 2010. | Permalink | 5 comments | Add to del.icio.us | Digg this | Stumble on StumbleUpon! | Tweet it! | Submit to Reddit | Forum Smashing Magazine
Post tags:

http://www.smashingmagazine.com

Google Reader Tracks Changes To All Web Pages: Tips on How to Block It

I live off RSS, live off of it. You don’t have an RSS feed, I don’t keep track of you. That is until Google Reader announced that they now can track changes to any web page out there (assuming they do not specifically block Google).

If the web page does not have an RSS feed, don’t worry. Take the URL, paste it into the subscription box at Google Reader and Google will create a custom feed out of the URL. It will then check the page for changes. How often will it check? Google doesn’t say, I assume it has to do with how often the page is crawled.

How is this useful?

  • Track product pricing changes on web sites
  • Track competitors web sites
  • Track terms of service or guideline changes
  • Track news feeds without them having a feed
  • Track anything!

There are other services that offer this type of service with even more features. However, it is nice to have them built into Google Reader.

A WebmasterWorld thread has feedback from Webmasters. In short, they do not like the opt out options. Either you block Googlebot completely from pages you do not want to be tracked, or you add a noarchive tag to the pages you do not want tracked. Noarchive will also remove the cache link in the Google search results. There is no specific tag to block only Google Reader from tracking changes to your pages – maybe there should be?

If you do not want to do any of these things and still do want to block Google Reader. Then set up an RSS feed and give that feed less content then you want. Google Reader should not override the auto-discover RSS feed and thus, it can stop people from tracking your pages.

Forum discussion at WebmasterWorld.


I live off RSS, live off of it. You don't have an RSS feed, I don't keep track of you. That is until Google Reader announced that they now can track changes to any web page out there (assuming they do not specifically block Google).

If the web page does not have an RSS feed, don't worry. Take the URL, paste it into the subscription box at Google Reader and Google will create a custom feed out of the URL. It will then check the page for changes. How often will it check? Google doesn't say, I assume it has to do with how often the page is crawled.

How is this useful?

  • Track product pricing changes on web sites
  • Track competitors web sites
  • Track terms of service or guideline changes
  • Track news feeds without them having a feed
  • Track anything!

There are other services that offer this type of service with even more features. However, it is nice to have them built into Google Reader.

A WebmasterWorld thread has feedback from Webmasters. In short, they do not like the opt out options. Either you block Googlebot completely from pages you do not want to be tracked, or you add a noarchive tag to the pages you do not want tracked. Noarchive will also remove the cache link in the Google search results. There is no specific tag to block only Google Reader from tracking changes to your pages - maybe there should be?

If you do not want to do any of these things and still do want to block Google Reader. Then set up an RSS feed and give that feed less content then you want. Google Reader should not override the auto-discover RSS feed and thus, it can stop people from tracking your pages.

Forum discussion at WebmasterWorld.


http://www.seroundtable.com/

Take Time to Focus on Your Website First

Have you taken the time to analyze every piece of your website before jumping into your link building campaign? Your search engine marketing efforts won’t mean diddly if your website has not been correctly structured for traffic. Remember that your search engine optimization campaign and your website go hand in hand. What this means that [...]

Have you taken the time to analyze every piece of your website before jumping into your link building campaign? Your search engine marketing efforts won’t mean diddly if your website has not been correctly structured for traffic. Remember that your search engine optimization campaign and your website go hand in hand. What this means that all the marketing in the world won’t make you successful if your website doesn’t have the right foundation in place.

Remember that every page of your website should be looked at as an entry point into your website. The search engines do not rank websites, they rank web pages so every page of your website should have good quality content along with all conversion aspects fully optimized so that every visitor has all possible options to create or start an action with your website. Whether that be to pick up the phone and call, submit their info or make a purchase it is really important to have these aspects in place. Your website must always be 100% optimized before you worry about external links or social media. I know the idea of hopping onto Twitter and Facebook and sending people to your website is very appealing but you have to make sure the website is ready for people. Did your website just get out of bed and people are knocking on your door? Or is your website sitting in the den wearing its finest blazer ready to mingle with company? Ask yourself this before you start focusing on the other marketing efforts.

Not only is it important to be ready for website traffic but in order for rankings to occur online you must have a well optimized website. The search engines can see what your website looks like and what features it has on it. If you don’t fit into those parameters you will not be allowed into the party. To many times I see people spending a great deal of time on social media and link building and then their website has been neglected since day one. If you are unsure about your website you should speak with a professional to make sure you are not just spinning your wheels.

http://www.searchengineoptimizationjournal.com

Sometimes Google Does Know Best: Use It To Your Advantage

Last week, I wrote about The Google Screw and how Google’s “intention engine,” as Tedster calls it at WebmasterWorld, can seriously hurt a business and the integrity of a solid search query. But Google is not stupid, they know what they are doing and they feel, for the most part, these types of changes will improve the overall search experience.

Tedster at WebmasterWorld has been one of the more vocal against Google telling you what you really wanted to search for. But he recently found a good use for it. Let me quote Tedster:

I helped a friend last week by cleaning up a smallish database (about 1,000 products) so that it could be used to generate web pages. The database was from his shipping facility and it was full of strange abbreviations so the field would print out on a small shipping document and a shelf label in the warehouse. So the product descriptions worked for the warehouse staff but they were far from doing the sales job they needed to do.

Google’s intention engine did the job. I just pasted in that mishmash directly and I usually got back what I was looking for, or at least I made enough progress so that I could make a second try and nail it.

Maybe Google’s idea isn’t so far off the mark after all.

Pretty neat – he plugged in the weird descriptions from the client into Google and Google told him what he really wanted to use for titles and descriptions. Not a bad use for this, don’t you think?

Forum discussion at WebmasterWorld.


Last week, I wrote about The Google Screw and how Google's "intention engine," as Tedster calls it at WebmasterWorld, can seriously hurt a business and the integrity of a solid search query. But Google is not stupid, they know what they are doing and they feel, for the most part, these types of changes will improve the overall search experience.

Tedster at WebmasterWorld has been one of the more vocal against Google telling you what you really wanted to search for. But he recently found a good use for it. Let me quote Tedster:

I helped a friend last week by cleaning up a smallish database (about 1,000 products) so that it could be used to generate web pages. The database was from his shipping facility and it was full of strange abbreviations so the field would print out on a small shipping document and a shelf label in the warehouse. So the product descriptions worked for the warehouse staff but they were far from doing the sales job they needed to do.

Google's intention engine did the job. I just pasted in that mishmash directly and I usually got back what I was looking for, or at least I made enough progress so that I could make a second try and nail it.

Maybe Google's idea isn't so far off the mark after all.

Pretty neat - he plugged in the weird descriptions from the client into Google and Google told him what he really wanted to use for titles and descriptions. Not a bad use for this, don't you think?

Forum discussion at WebmasterWorld.


http://www.seroundtable.com/

Increase the Power of your SEO Efforts

If you have been conducting search engine optimization efforts for your website for some time and you are wondering why things just are not working out like they should you might want to take a step back and take a look at some other factors that could be holding your website back from climbing in [...]

If you have been conducting search engine optimization efforts for your website for some time and you are wondering why things just are not working out like they should you might want to take a step back and take a look at some other factors that could be holding your website back from climbing in the rankings.

Here are a few important areas to consider when marketing your online business:

• Proper Steps?
– Did you dive into link building or did you take the proper steps to optimize your website first? If you’re trying to build links without taking the time to focus on your website first you will never see the results you are looking for. Link building before on-site optimization is a lot like putting the buggy before the horse.

• Brand Power – Have your tired to increase the power of your brand? Strong branding elements often times will get a website visitor to reconsider things when they make it to your website. Try either re-branding or branding your business website even more to get people interested what you have to say. Branding is playing an even more important role in today’s market place than it ever has before. Website traffic wants to see your logo and company info in many different places so make sure that you are branding your business actively.

• Website Structure – This is very important, have you taken them time to make sure the layout of your site is completely ready for your business goals. If your goal is online sales on your online store than you should have many ways for that website visitor to make it to your online store. If you want leads your lead form should be visible on every page of your website. You want to make sure your URL’s to all your web pages are clean and optimized and all content is clearly visible on all your web pages.

• Age of Website – Did you just launch your website a few weeks or months ago? If you just recently launched your website you will have to diversify your marketing approach until you start ranking in search results. Rankings are given to websites who have been around for some time and you have to have your expectations in order when launching a recently new website.

Search engine optimization requires a unique and carved out plan that requires some patience and time to get right. It is more than just building relevant inbound links to your website. It is building a business and on any platform building a business brings its own challenges.

http://www.searchengineoptimizationjournal.com

Google Link: Command – Busting the Myths

Posted by randfish

I’m a big Google fan – my wife often sleeps in their t-shirts, I speak on panels with Googlers all the time and I’ve even got a Google water bottle for working out (which happens all of once a month these days). However, I am NOT a fan of the Google link command, and I’m shocked by the number of folks who operate in and around the SEO, webdev and technology industries who haven’t realized this.

Here’s what Google themselves have to say on the matter:

You can perform a Google search using the link: operator to find a sampling of links to any site. For instance, [link:www.google.com] will list web pages that have links pointing to the Google home page. Note there can be no space between the "link:" and the web page URL.

To see a much larger sampling of links to any verified site in Webmaster Tools:

  1. On the Webmaster Tools Home page, click the site you want.
  2. Under Your site on the web, click Links to your site.

Note: Not all links to your site may be listed. This is normal.

Here’s what Matt Cutts (head of Google’s Webspam team) had to say in a video on the subject:

The short answer is that historically, we only had room for a very small percentage of backlinks because web search was the main part and we didn’t have a ton of servers for link colon queries and so, we have doubled or increased the amount of backlinks that we show over time for link colon, but it is still a sub-sample. It’s a relatively small percentage. And I think that that’s a pretty good balance, because if you just automatically show a ton of backlinks for any website then spammers or competitors can use that to try to reverse engineer someone’s rankings.

Google themselves is telling us not to pay too much attention to the link command, but that doesn’t seem to be stopping folks. Let the myth busting commence.

Myth #1 – The Google Link Command Returns Accurate Numbers

Nope. Not even close. Google themselves say the numbers aren’t accurate and that they’re showing a small sub-sample. The numbers show this as well. Check your link counts with the Google link command vs. the number inside Google’s Webmaster Tools (when you verify your account, you’ll see them shown). Here’s the stats for SEOmoz, for example:

Google's link command for SEOmoz

Google’s link command claims 1,590 links. Let’s see what Webmaster Tools says:

Google's Webmaster Tools Link Count for SEOmoz

Hmm… 381,403 seems slightly larger than 1,590. In fact, the link command is showing me 0.4% of what Webmaster Tools says exists. Running this analysis on another few domains that we have access to in Webmaster Tools, I saw numbers ranging from 0.1% to 4.4% (meaning there’s not even any consistency between in the percentage of links from the two counts). 

Myth #2 – The Google Link Command Returns Important Links

Tragically, a long time ago (pre-2004), Google did show only important links via the link: command, which created the myth that exists to this day. In fact, the links shown in the link: command have no particular importance or relevance. They are truly a random sample, including links that are nofollowed, links from pages that have had PageRank penalties applied to them as well as links that do pass link juice and value.

Myth #3 – The Google Link Command Returns Links in Some Kind of Order

No one in SEO has been able to show any ordering of any kind in the Google link: command’s results. Important, well-known websites may be listed on page 2 or page 20 of the results, and it is likewise with spam, scrapers and low quality sites that Google’s likely not counting. In Site Explorer and the web results, Yahoo! appears to do some type of ordering, tending to show more important links, pages and sites before less important ones (though not with great consistency). Unfortunately, many SEOs suspect that, should Microsoft’s deal to power Yahoo! with Bing results go through, Yahoo! is unlikely to maintain their own web index (and thus, link, linkdomain and site explorer will be gone).

Google's Link Command Results for Yahoo.com

As exemplified above, Google appears to be very random indeed when showing link: results.

Myth #4 – The Google Link Command Returns a Numerically Representative Count of Links

This is possibly the myth that’s most disturbing of all, primarily because so many operators in the SEO field belive it and track the link: command count as a reliable, useful metric. Nothing could be further from the truth – and here’s some data to help back it up:

Root Domain

Google Link: #
(external + internal?)

Yahoo! Linkdomain #
(external only)

Linkscape Count
(external only)

Yahoo.com 3,650 331,000,000 201,681,667
Recovery.gov 7,550 328,000 155,780
Facebook.com 165,000 567,000,000 116,748,934
Real.com 11,400 4,600,000 5,596,165
Adobe.com 51,200 124,000,000 78,550,468
Reddit.com 18,300 128,000,000 29,071,291
Twitter.com 224,000 515,000,000 132,528,763
Salon.com 12,300 3,420,000 1,535,342
SEOmoz.org 1,590 957,000 486,405
NYTimes.com 7,990 21,200,000 12,884,758
TurkeyDayRun.com 3 68 22
Ninme.com 539  42,000 3,149
Burgerking.com 942  106,000 23,761
Alaskaair.com 1,010 44,000 38,358
Smashingmagazine.com 8,730 1,130,000 592,054
Smithsonian.org 4,860 25,700 14,545

I collected the data above spur of the moment, so I won’t try to claim great statistical integrity. However, looking at Google’s link: command results, the best I can say is that Google has some relationship to the others within 1-2 orders of magnitude, though they may be directionally inaccurate much of the time as well. Just look at the NYTimes.com for example – Google claims they have 2/3rds the links that Salon.com has, yet Yahoo! and Linkscape agree that, in fact, NYTimes.com has 6X+ Salon.com’s link total.

These are not numbers you want to hang your hat (or any crucial business decisions) on.

Myth #5 – The Google Link Command Tracks Accurately Over Time

Unfortunately, I don’t have data points I can show, but our observations over time indicate that Google’s link count in Webmaster Tools might rise, along with the Yahoo! and Linkscape link counts, yet the Google link: command will show lower numbers. The reverse is sometimes also the case. Without directional consistency, even when compared against their own counts, it’s very hard to take the Google link: count seriously.

Myth #6 – The Google Link Command is Up to Date

Most SEOs & webmasters have noticed that the Google link: counts update infrequently, inconsistently and most often in correlation with toolbar PageRank updates (another data point I’ll need to takcle in a future post). These updates from Google occur every 2-10 months with little warning about when they’re coming or have happened. If you watch sites like closely, they’ll report many of these as they occur.


The next time someone tells you their Google link: command numbers as a metric for SEO, competitive analysis or anything else, make sure they read this post. Google’s not nearly as up-front with the information as they should be (honestly, removing the link command would save so much time and effort for poor site owners who get needlessly confused), but hopefully as a community, we can help build more awareness around this issue.

Do you like this post? Yes No

Posted by randfish

I'm a big Google fan - my wife often sleeps in their t-shirts, I speak on panels with Googlers all the time and I've even got a Google water bottle for working out (which happens all of once a month these days). However, I am NOT a fan of the Google link command, and I'm shocked by the number of folks who operate in and around the SEO, webdev and technology industries who haven't realized this.

Here's what Google themselves have to say on the matter:

You can perform a Google search using the link: operator to find a sampling of links to any site. For instance, [link:www.google.com] will list web pages that have links pointing to the Google home page. Note there can be no space between the "link:" and the web page URL.

To see a much larger sampling of links to any verified site in Webmaster Tools:

  1. On the Webmaster Tools Home page, click the site you want.
  2. Under Your site on the web, click Links to your site.

Note: Not all links to your site may be listed. This is normal.

Here's what Matt Cutts (head of Google's Webspam team) had to say in a video on the subject:

The short answer is that historically, we only had room for a very small percentage of backlinks because web search was the main part and we didn't have a ton of servers for link colon queries and so, we have doubled or increased the amount of backlinks that we show over time for link colon, but it is still a sub-sample. It's a relatively small percentage. And I think that that's a pretty good balance, because if you just automatically show a ton of backlinks for any website then spammers or competitors can use that to try to reverse engineer someone's rankings.

Google themselves is telling us not to pay too much attention to the link command, but that doesn't seem to be stopping folks. Let the myth busting commence.

Myth #1 - The Google Link Command Returns Accurate Numbers

Nope. Not even close. Google themselves say the numbers aren't accurate and that they're showing a small sub-sample. The numbers show this as well. Check your link counts with the Google link command vs. the number inside Google's Webmaster Tools (when you verify your account, you'll see them shown). Here's the stats for SEOmoz, for example:

Google's link command for SEOmoz

Google's link command claims 1,590 links. Let's see what Webmaster Tools says:

Google's Webmaster Tools Link Count for SEOmoz

Hmm... 381,403 seems slightly larger than 1,590. In fact, the link command is showing me 0.4% of what Webmaster Tools says exists. Running this analysis on another few domains that we have access to in Webmaster Tools, I saw numbers ranging from 0.1% to 4.4% (meaning there's not even any consistency between in the percentage of links from the two counts). 

Myth #2 - The Google Link Command Returns Important Links

Tragically, a long time ago (pre-2004), Google did show only important links via the link: command, which created the myth that exists to this day. In fact, the links shown in the link: command have no particular importance or relevance. They are truly a random sample, including links that are nofollowed, links from pages that have had PageRank penalties applied to them as well as links that do pass link juice and value.

Myth #3 - The Google Link Command Returns Links in Some Kind of Order

No one in SEO has been able to show any ordering of any kind in the Google link: command's results. Important, well-known websites may be listed on page 2 or page 20 of the results, and it is likewise with spam, scrapers and low quality sites that Google's likely not counting. In Site Explorer and the web results, Yahoo! appears to do some type of ordering, tending to show more important links, pages and sites before less important ones (though not with great consistency). Unfortunately, many SEOs suspect that, should Microsoft's deal to power Yahoo! with Bing results go through, Yahoo! is unlikely to maintain their own web index (and thus, link, linkdomain and site explorer will be gone).

Google's Link Command Results for Yahoo.com

As exemplified above, Google appears to be very random indeed when showing link: results.

Myth #4 - The Google Link Command Returns a Numerically Representative Count of Links

This is possibly the myth that's most disturbing of all, primarily because so many operators in the SEO field belive it and track the link: command count as a reliable, useful metric. Nothing could be further from the truth - and here's some data to help back it up:

Root Domain

Google Link: #
(external + internal?)

Yahoo! Linkdomain #
(external only)

Linkscape Count
(external only)

Yahoo.com 3,650 331,000,000 201,681,667
Recovery.gov 7,550 328,000 155,780
Facebook.com 165,000 567,000,000 116,748,934
Real.com 11,400 4,600,000 5,596,165
Adobe.com 51,200 124,000,000 78,550,468
Reddit.com 18,300 128,000,000 29,071,291
Twitter.com 224,000 515,000,000 132,528,763
Salon.com 12,300 3,420,000 1,535,342
SEOmoz.org 1,590 957,000 486,405
NYTimes.com 7,990 21,200,000 12,884,758
TurkeyDayRun.com 3 68 22
Ninme.com 539  42,000 3,149
Burgerking.com 942  106,000 23,761
Alaskaair.com 1,010 44,000 38,358
Smashingmagazine.com 8,730 1,130,000 592,054
Smithsonian.org 4,860 25,700 14,545

I collected the data above spur of the moment, so I won't try to claim great statistical integrity. However, looking at Google's link: command results, the best I can say is that Google has some relationship to the others within 1-2 orders of magnitude, though they may be directionally inaccurate much of the time as well. Just look at the NYTimes.com for example - Google claims they have 2/3rds the links that Salon.com has, yet Yahoo! and Linkscape agree that, in fact, NYTimes.com has 6X+ Salon.com's link total.

These are not numbers you want to hang your hat (or any crucial business decisions) on.

Myth #5 - The Google Link Command Tracks Accurately Over Time

Unfortunately, I don't have data points I can show, but our observations over time indicate that Google's link count in Webmaster Tools might rise, along with the Yahoo! and Linkscape link counts, yet the Google link: command will show lower numbers. The reverse is sometimes also the case. Without directional consistency, even when compared against their own counts, it's very hard to take the Google link: count seriously.

Myth #6 - The Google Link Command is Up to Date

Most SEOs & webmasters have noticed that the Google link: counts update infrequently, inconsistently and most often in correlation with toolbar PageRank updates (another data point I'll need to takcle in a future post). These updates from Google occur every 2-10 months with little warning about when they're coming or have happened. If you watch sites like closely, they'll report many of these as they occur.


The next time someone tells you their Google link: command numbers as a metric for SEO, competitive analysis or anything else, make sure they read this post. Google's not nearly as up-front with the information as they should be (honestly, removing the link command would save so much time and effort for poor site owners who get needlessly confused), but hopefully as a community, we can help build more awareness around this issue.


Do you like this post? Yes No

http://www.seomoz.org/blog

How Many SEO Tools Do You Need?

No matter what kind of job you are doing, having the proper tools is essential to its success. The same is true of search engine optimization. But what are SEO tools and which ones are the right ones for you?
This question can be answered in many ways. The basic SEO tools, of course, are a [...]

No matter what kind of job you are doing, having the proper tools is essential to its success. The same is true of search engine optimization. But what are SEO tools and which ones are the right ones for you?

This question can be answered in many ways. The basic SEO tools, of course, are a keyword research tool and your text editor. Why is a text editor an SEO tool? Because in that editor you create your web pages. You design your page designs and you put your keywords and links to good use. But that’s a very basic tool and is a bit of a no-brainer. Unless you are building your website with a content management system, your text editor can be viewed as an SEO tool.

But there are other tools. Many SEOs use Google Alerts for research. By subscribing to alerts for your important keywords, you can keep tabs on what people are saying about those keywords and use that information to build a better website.

Another tool SEOs often use, and should, is a tracking and analytics tool. Which one you use is largely a matter of preference, but you should find one that you are comfortable with and use it. An analytics tool (such as Google Analytics or Go Stats) can be useful in helping you find new keywords to target and to hone your marketing by focusing on keywords that your site users focus on in searching for information on your site. There are multiple uses for a good analytics tool, but every SEO should have one.

Link checkers are another SEO tool often found in a webmaster’s arsenal. The link checker is useful in making sure that your site links remain unbroken and actually lead somewhere.

Are these all the tools that you will ever need to perform SEO on your website? No. There are plenty more that you might find useful. But suffice it to say that with no tools at all you are likely not to succeed in your SEO efforts or your online marketing efforts. With the right tools, you’ll be much better equipped to handle your website’s needs.

Here is a great place to find excellent free SEO tools:
http://www.addme.com/tools.htm

http://www.searchengineoptimizationjournal.com

Page Load Time & Speed Will Likely Be a Ranking Factor in Google

Page load time (speed) is a factor currently in the AdWords quality score. But soon it may be coming to Google’s organic ranking algorithm. If you have a really slow site, it may impact how high you rank in Google. That was the main news coming out of PubCon last week, minus the Caffeine launch.

It is currently not in the algorithm, according to Matt, but who knows – maybe they are testing this already. Matt was clear that Google wants the web to be a faster place and Google does control much of what people see on the web. So Google can influence that people find faster web pages, over slower ones.

You can hear Matt talk about this 2 minutes and 52 seconds into this video:

Google also has a tool to test page speed at http://code.google.com/speed/page-speed/ – so get ready.

I should add, Google has hundreds of ranking factors. Adding one more, depending on the weight they assign to it, shouldn’t shuffle things up much for most sites. Just make sure your site loads fast – it is a good thing to have anyway.

Forum discussion at WebmasterWorld.


Page load time (speed) is a factor currently in the AdWords quality score. But soon it may be coming to Google's organic ranking algorithm. If you have a really slow site, it may impact how high you rank in Google. That was the main news coming out of PubCon last week, minus the Caffeine launch.

It is currently not in the algorithm, according to Matt, but who knows - maybe they are testing this already. Matt was clear that Google wants the web to be a faster place and Google does control much of what people see on the web. So Google can influence that people find faster web pages, over slower ones.

You can hear Matt talk about this 2 minutes and 52 seconds into this video:

Forum discussion at WebmasterWorld.


http://www.seroundtable.com/

Page 1 of 212»

Seth Godin: Sliced Bread

Malcolm Gladwell: Outliers

Anthony Parinello: Your Price is Too High

© Kaboodle Ventures LLC 2009
Blog WebMastered by All in One Webmaster.