Browsing "internet news"
It’s been a busy week working on the web with all of the heart attacks going on across the web. In case you were living under a rock for the last 5 days I’ll go through a quick recap for you.
The issue that popped up this weekend affected a absolutely massive portion of the web, some reports saying as much as 65% of all websites had the potential to be affected. When you’re talking about billions of websites and trillions of pages, it’s a huge amount of the web. Just to be clear about the issue, the Heartbeat bug affected sites that were using a specific security certificate from OpenSSL – the community driven option to paying for a security certificate for your website.
Without going into too much technical jargon and being confusing, the best description I found regarding the bug was this description of events.
The top portion of the exchange is how a secure connection works, it’s a very simplified version of events between your computer and the webserver you’ve connected to. The Heartbleed version of events that comprises the bottom portion of the image is where the exploit got it’s name. The process is the same, but via what’s called an overflow error a malicious user can request a longer string of information back related to your security code, called an overflow error.
The issue was found, corrected and there are multiple steps you can take if you feel that your personal web security was in question. CNet has a running list of sites which have been patched against the Heartbleed bug and if you should potentially change your passwords on those services. Have a look through their list and follow the proposed directions to minimize any potential security issues you may have in the future.
image credit : vox.com
Shots have been fired across the bow of the Google command ship and they came from a source that is not only extremely early, but somewhat unlikely – Facebook.
Just a short time ago Mark Zuckerberg came forward during the most recent Facebook earnings call to state in no uncertain terms that they will compete directly with Google to be the kings of search. Over the last year Facebook implemented their graph search which allows you to perform contextual searches based on your friends and what ever information they have shared with you, to hopefully find answers to what your question may be. They’re working on being more of a source of answers instead of a source of results all while targeting the mobile platform in order to facilitate mobile searches.
The Facebook graph search has by their records the largest index on hand, larger than any other web search engine. They estimate they have somewhere more than a trillion <em>connections</em> between their users, interests, groups etc. While the number sounds impressive to be sure, and while Zuckerberg believes that they happen to have the largest database on hand the proof will be found in the pudding as they say. The actual size of the index that Google has is difficult at best to try even try and envision as a number let alone an actual one, but the last count that seems to be passed around is somewhere in the neighborhood of 50 billion pages, growing at a rate of 5+ billion pages per year based on people creating, modifying and changing their web presence.
Where the house of cards that Facebook has built for themselves as an opponent in a giant versus giant battle is also tied to their earnings call unfortunately. The likely timeline that Facebook could pose a realistic threat as a web search engine is in 10 years. 10 years on the web is an eternity where technology is concerned, and at the rate that Google and other search engines are growing and adapting, Facebook is likely to be left out in the cold when the time comes to fight.
There is always a someone talking about how SEO is a dead industry, and more often than not the doomsayers used a very specific type of optimization methods.
When the online marketing game started it was a fairly simple matter to get almost any website listed. You didn’t even really need to have any content of merit or even any kind of following to your website. You didn’t even need to have an okay website never mind a high quality one and as for any kind of best practice guide it didn’t really exist in the beginning. There were no pure white hat methods, although there were many black hat methods and it took a while before the search engines even began to lay penalties to some of the worst offenders. This all started with real gusto across the web in the mid to late 90s.
As the web grew and expanded and as the search engine bots, crawlers and tech got better, the types of things that you should do and shouldn’t do began to become clearer. After a few years of clean up, the search engines and their algorithms fell almost into a routine. You could build a site, create or scrape some content, point any kind of a backlink at it and make a site start to show up in the results pages. It was at this point that the terms ‘search engine optimization’ really started to become widespread and the notion that you could make money from SEO started to become an avenue for people who frequented blogs and discussion forums about the quickest and easiest way to make a dollar online. This was in around 2005-2010 era of SEO, when the industry became suddenly inundated with experts in the field. It really shouldn’t be that much of a surprise, that these are the same folk who are calling SEO a dead industry these days.
In the last few years SEO has had some major shifts with the algorithm much the same as the industry saw in 2003 with the Florida update which cleaned up a great deal of the spam across the web. Penguin and Panda were the most recent additions to the Google algorithm which changed the world of SEO enough that the prior blogged about methods of spammy content and tons of anchor text and backlinks disappeared as a viable strategy. They were very simple methods, easy to implement and even easier to spam multiple sites to help drive a target to the top of the results pages. But since the means and the methods became unusable as a reliable way to rank a site, it is suddenly the end of SEO as a viable means of marketing. So the next time you’re approached by an agency who tells you that ‘SEO is dead’ take a moment and remember that the industry is far from dead – if anything it’s growing. It’s only the that the wheat has finally been separated from the chaff.
It’s one thing to read news and conjecture about the death of search engine optimization, but it’s another point all together when the provider comes forward and admits that their organic search is failing.
No the news hasn’t come from any major search engine, but it has come from the worlds largest social network – Facebook. It has really only been a year or so since Facebook has come out with their graph search – their newest search iteration that tries to show you what is included in your social circles in only a few keystrokes. There were two main points that they’ve shared that has raised the ire search marketers across the web.
We expect organic distribution of an individual page’s posts to decline over time as we continually work to make sure people have a meaningful experience on the site (Facebook). We’re getting to a place where because more people are sharing more things, the best way to get your stuff seen if you’re a business is to pay for it.
So in short, now that Facebook has the attention of somewhere north of a billion users, they’re telling business page owners that if you want to be seen, you’re better off paying them if you want to be seen.
So if you have a business page on Facebook, you aren’t completely lost with the surprising information – you do have options that you can exercise instead of just abandoning the Facebook ship. One of the primary things you can do if you don’t want to deal with the changes is to completely jump ship for the other social media services out there – LinkedIn, Twitter and Google+ namely. They all have their pros and cons, LinkedIn is a more professional social network and allows you to build a professional relationship around their network of users. Twitter allows you to speak instantly, and clearly to anyone who wants to listen, and Google+ while still relatively unused as a social service, has developed an almost rabid fan following of users.
Your other choice is to roll with the punches that Facebook is throwing your way and adapt to their upcoming changes and see where you come out on the other side. While paid advertising works on any network whether it’s social or search, you need to understand that a high portion of your budget is going to become general advertising overhead. It also needs to be understood that if you decide to use Facebook as a traffic generator, that your budget will have to also increase as you’ll essentially be paying people to see your page and website.
It is yet to be determined what the outcome for Facebook will be with this change to their organic algorithm, but with the change just being announced it has already caused some major friction in the search game, the social impact is yet to be seen.
When I arrived in Canada in August 2007 I got to speak with three print media giants in their own area, The Yellow Pages, Winnipeg Free Press & Winnipeg Sun, in that order.
I told each and every one of them that they needed to change outlook and the way they operate to make dollars and survive going forward, all thought I was some cocky nut from Blighty.
Funny how things work out, The YP, they owned autotrader at that time and took what I told them as a slap in the face on how they needed to change direction on how they advertise, worked online etc., they sold it to the Brits losing $500 million dollars. Full Story Here
Then I spoke with the Free Press on a couple of occasions thinking I might get more traction in my adopted city, they had a circulation of around 500,000 at the time if we believe the stats, again they thought this guy is nuts, all he does is go on about Online, Google and Social Media, we are starting our own stuff on our website selling cars, real estate and banner ads, we know what we are doing, a few years later they tell me they are doing their own app and this is going to be killer, I asked for who?, I learned last week they are changing again as all this has not panned out as expected, were losing revenue and oh we are building a new website too.
Thirdly the Winnipeg Sun, I had a great meeting with the then boss Kevin Klein, a nice guy who actually had some idea of what the future might hold, but unfortunately they were tied to some boat company and there advertising ways, not good either, so today they announce they are laying off 500 workers to save $45 million a year. Full Story Here
The morale of this story, don’t judge a book or the person even if the book might be slightly X Rated, if that book has been a best seller around the world, maybe, just maybe they could be something in there your missing that could help.
The world has changed dramatically on how we get news, tweets to our tablet hours before the main news announce it, mobile uploads at the scene, if you have not lived this way of life for the last decade it’s very hard to catch up.
Shit Kickers we are, we have never denied that, but it’s all for our clients, when they win we win and we win alot.
Okay so the search world has ended for some website owners out there with Googles latest algorithm update, Penguin. The update which was designed to cull spammy websites from the search results, had an (un)expected side effect on websites which had usually hired less than stellar SEO companies. There have been multiple threads posted on the Google forums, about how each website was wrongly infracted; in their view.
Google has made some drastic changes in their algorithm in the last year, the majority of which were implemented to help clean up the results page. Pandas, Penguins aside, the goals to clean up the results has started to shine a light on an SEO trouble spot. Search engine optimization is a greatly discussed, debated, and lucrative topic online. Because it’s such a high margin of profit enterprise, it’s seen as an added value feature for, mostly web development firms, and even for some who just like to ride the trend wave. The trouble begins, when you, as a business owner, begin to be taken in by a few buzz words in the market. Backlinks, social media, videos, all of these are definitely avenues to explore and work with to help raise your organic search worth, but they’re far from what matters the most to the engines. There are certain keywords that you should keep in the forefront of your mind, when discussing hiring an SEO for your firm.
The first of which is quick – proper, organic optimization is anything but quick. Part of the reason that the organic listings are so desirable is because, for the most part, they can be trusted as being authoritative. You don’t become listed in the top 10 of your niche overnight, and definitely not in the top 3 within a week unless you’re trying to rank for a 5-6 term, specific long tail search phrase; then you have a shot. But again, that’s not true search engine optimization, that’s a clever marketer, gaming the organic results by searching for a sentence on your website.
Another term you need to be wary of, is Google Partner – namely because Google doesn’t have partners. They’re Google, they buy and assimilate what they feel will improve their core product, search, and anything else they have cooking in their tech kitchen. If when you meet with someone trying to sell themselves as a Google Partner, it’s best to just bite your tongue, thank them for their time and then, instead of using the phone book to find an SEO, here’s a thought – use a search engine! You don’t have to be clever, you can type in exactly what you’re looking for, like search engine optimization Winnipeg, and from there you begin your phone calls. You find a plumber, or perhaps a local mechanic in the yellow pages, you should be looking online for SEO experts.
And in case you were wondering, here’s what your traffic looks like when you don’t play by the rules.
So Google has released a new twist in their search algorithm that it hopes will better catch people who spam the results or purposely do things to rank better that are against Google’s publishers guidelines. After all is said and done, Google says it will impact about 3% of search queries. That may not seem like a whole lot, but consider the fact they serve millions of searchers a day, 3% definitely adds up.
From their blog:
In the next few days, we’re launching an important algorithm change targeted at webspam. The change will decrease rankings for sites that we believe are violating Google’s quality guidelines. This algorithm represents another step in our efforts to reduce webspam and promote high quality content.
In the last day or so since their change has been online, some of the results are starting to be noticed. At the forefront, it looks like brands and genuine news sites, those that write the news, not aggregate it, are gaining rank back. At the other end of the site, we have those aforementioned aggregator sites, template sites which can be built and filled with scraped content in a matter of minutes, and news portal sites, those used to file searches into pages.
The over arching goal of this change in the algorithm is a simple one: Google wants creators of unique, quality content to get their chance to shine in the results. Up until this shift, and for the next while until it settles in to work, scraper bots and aggregators would just nab that great content and use it on their own sites, not linking back (most cases) to the original source. Just as a side note, this is not Google attacking or trying to circumvent any legitimate search engine optimization on yours, or anyone elses website. The real target are scrapers, black hat operators and those who try and game the system instead of trying to make it work for them.
It’s almost like a tragic love triangle, with Microsoft somewhere in the middle between Yahoo and Facebook. In case you missed the news, Yahoo is making a lot of fuss and bother over Facebook, and the more scrutiny that’s put into it it looks like it’s founded on some loose interpretations.
How is Microsoft stuck in the middle? While it doesn’t own Yahoo or Facebook, it does have it’s finger in both of their pools. With search and social sharing with Facebook and delivering the search results for Yahoo. Yahoo isn’t a stranger to suing others over what they see as patent infringement. They’ve also sued Google as well, which was eventually settled for some stock after a couple of years of duking it out. The difference there however, is that Yahoo may have actually won a case had they not settled. Google had began to use a similar idea to Overture’s pay per click and auction system, and Yahoo had bought the fledgling search engine. Even with changing, upgrading and innovating on the ideas, they were still taken from that basic idea that Yahoo effectively owned.
Where Facebook is concerned? Yahoo is on thin, shaky ground at best, and in la-la land at worst. Some of the points that Yahoo is going to attempt to sue? How about the “method and system for optimum ad placement on a page” which take literally on it’s own could allow Yahoo to sue any company or website using paid advertisements. If that isn’t a loose enough patent for you, how about the patent for dynamic page generation? PHP and any other database driven site or achitecture could technically be dinged on this point.
The key points which Yahoo has decided to press on in regards to Facebook infringing patents are hopefully met with a realistic view and not a literal one when the day comes. When all the points are taken together, Yahoo could almost translate any of them to suing the vast majority of the web, which is a twisted pipe dream in a literalists world.
Branding, it’s what makes your business and it’s purposes widely known, usually by mention of name and reputation only. It’s like when someone mentions the name Pepsi, or Coca Cola, you know immediately what is being talked about and can picture the products.
There’s a bit of a razing argument going around lately about how if you’re a “real brand” that you shouldn’t, or won’t have to worry about the search engines. The argument is basically online shoppers don’t search for brands nearly as often as they Google generic categories and phrases. Which is somewhat true, and the article goes on to argue that ‘everybody’ automatically knows that Amazon sells online books and knows that eBay is the number one online auction site. The problem with this argument, is that the average online user doesn’t strictly use a search engine to search for a single term. Most of the time users are searching for an article or they’ve seen a product or service which they want to research.
Even when a user is searching for a specific brand name or service, it’s typically typed directly into a search engine to quickly find their desired destination. It’s a fallacy to think that the only time a person uses a search engine is when they have no idea what they’re looking for. Small business, large business, branded and not branded all need to recognize that search engine optimization is more and more becoming a required marketing tool. To believe that your company, name and brand will be easily found online only because of your brand, is a misinformed position, typically trumpeted by old media advertisers. Do not get trapped in the idea that your name, your brand and your company are too big to fail in search, because more often than not it’s the little guys who rank better than the brands because they embrace the high return on investment where search is concerned.
As a daily user of the web, Google, Bing, Yahoo and a vast majority of their tools and services, I’m having trouble with the issues that are being brought up with regards to the new policy. When Google first introduced the idea, one of the first terms which needs to be satisfied in order to glean your personalized information was: sign into your Google account. If you don’t sign into your account, anything you search for via the search enging, any videos you view, will just be dumped into that already existing cache of trends and web usage. If you happen to be signed into your account, using Gmail, Docs or some other tool, then your search will possibly (likely) be used as an advertising tool at some point down the road.
I would have to admit, the confusion for me exists where users are calling it an infringement of privacy of what they are doing on the internet. But as someone so eloquently put it in a discussion I’d had about the new policy: Unless you’ve been living in the hills, hunting for your food and clothes and being completely cut off from *everything* in this techno world, you have a web history, it’s been recorded, and it is used to deliver advertising to you.