Posted by FluxxToday I'm pleased to announce the release of Private Messaginghere at SEOmoz.  Starting now, you'll be able to private message other users using the sexy "Private Message This User" button (pictured on the right) on their profile page.  You're also able to compose a message without clicking the button at the Write a Messagepage.  Just start typing in the username of the person you're trying to message and the right person should come up automagically.NOTE:If you're unable to see the private message button on a users profile page, most likely you have cached our stylesheet.  To fix this, hold down the "Shift" key and click the refresh button.  That should cause you to reload the stylesheet and show the image.Once you receive a new private message, you'll get an email notifying you of the message and offering a direct link to go view the message.  Controls over email notification, along with controls to either accept/deny all private messages entirely, are both available on your Edit Accountpage in your profile.  Currently everyone is set up to receive private messages and receive email notification.As with all new features that we launch here at SEOmoz, your feedback is welcome.  Please let me know about any bugs or problems you encounter while using private messaging.  Also, we already have some feature additions on our to do list for the PM system, but feel free to suggest others you think would be helpful.Also, I wanted to give you a sneak peek at the next SEOmoz product that we have coming down the pipeline.  Expect a release in the upcoming few days.It's gonna be rad. :)Technorati Tagsseomoz, private messagingDo you like this post? YesNo

  Posted by Sarah Bird, EsquireMay It Please the Mozzers,Apparently I'm on a bit of a copyright kick these days. Copyright is stuck in my head like an annoying song. Does this ever happen to you? No, seriously. There were some excellent follow-up questions and concerns raised after my last post on international copyright issues. For example, folks had important questions about whether copyright can effectively protect "the little guy" given the costs of suit and what you could gain from filing suit. I want to touch on these issues while giving you some "Best Practices."Still not convinced that this is worth a read? How about scare tactics? Did you know that the difference between registration and non-registration could be you owing your attorney 15k versus you getting $150,000 in statutory damages? That's right. If you don't register, you could end up in the hole, even if you win. Alternatively, you could register, get your attorneys' fees paid for and maybe actually get some cash back in your pocket. I think this post is worth your time, don't you? So, let's all take a deep breath, grab our caffeinated beverages of choice, and jump back into the exciting and riveting world of copyright registration. Here's what I want to cover:What the schmee can I copyright?How trademark is like copyright and how trademark is notlike copyrightIf my original content is automatically protected, then why on earth would I go through the trouble of registering it and putting a notice on all my pages? I have other things to do with my time!What exactly is "notice of copyright" and is this the same thing as registering my copyright?What should my copyright notice contain?How do I register my online copyright?What?! I need to "deposit" my online content?!Do I need an attorney to register my copyright?Can I wait until after I want to sue someone to register?I never, ever want to go through the trauma of trial, so what do I care about statutory damages?What to do if you just can't get enough of copyright lawOh, I almost forgot the obligatory CYA paragraph: I am not giving you and cannot give you legal advice. Legal advice is applying the law to a specific set of facts. I am giving you information about the law. If you have a copyright issue, I urge you to seek qualified legal counsel. (Phew. I'm rather attached to my bar license and don't fancy losing it over you lot.)Let's do this.>> What the schmee can I copyright?In the online context, you can claim copyright for your original content, including text, graphics, and sound. This includes your emails, your blog posts, and your webpages filled with original content. This is the general rule. Now let's talk about the exceptions.     ⇒ Exceptions to CopyrightCopyright does not protect ideas, procedures, systems, or methods of operation. Thus, copyright does not protect my ideas for future blog posts or my delicious recipe for smoked cake. Copyright does not protect facts and purely mechanical, clerical content. The phone book is a great example of this.Copyright does not protect really trite content. Pop music titles/lyrics are often banal to the extreme. If you wrote a song with the lyric "I love you baby," don't count on copyright protection. Copyright does not protect content that is in the public domain. What the schmee is in the public domain? This deserves a more detailed post down the road, but generally it's content that is very old and the copyright has expired. There are a lot of different rules that determine how long copyright will lasts. Thus, I have to break out the "it depends" answer. But if the content was first published before 1923, it's in the public domain by now.Copyright does not protect content authored by the U.S. government. Thus, we can quote government reports, laws, etc. extensively without crediting the U.S. federal government. Interestingly, this is not true about other governments; the U.K. for example.Copyright also does not protect so-called "fair uses." This is definitely the topic of a future post because it is an important, controversial, and evolving concept. To put it generally, you can use other people's copyrighted materials, but only for fair uses such as news reporting and teaching. In the U.S. you can also use other people's material for parody. (Yay!)>> How trademark is like copyright and How trademark is notlike copyrightI want to briefly address the distinction between trademark and copyright because there is a special relationship between them in the advertising context. These concepts are easily confused for SEMs because they are often used in conjunction. Trademark and copyright are similar because both are legal regimes designed to protect tangible intellectual copyright. Trademark is not like copyright because trademark is designed to protect branding, one specific form of IP. Copyright, on the other hand, protects content more generally. Thus, trademark is more likely to cover names and short phrases. The common example here is Kleenex. "Kleenex" is a brand name protected by trademark law. It is not original content protected by copyright.I am talking today exclusively about copyright, but you should know that if you ever get sued for a copyright related issue, there will probably be a trademark claim in there too. >> If my original content is automatically protected, then why on earth would I go through the trouble of registering it and putting a notice on all my pages? I have other things to do with my time!It's true that your original content is automatically protected by copyright law even if you never give notice that it's protected and you never register it. You'll hear me say this and you'll read about it all over the web. Consequently, people don't go through the extra steps of drafting notice provisions and registering their copyright.This is a major problem because notice and registration are what give U.S. copyright law teeth. Sure, you're protected without it, but what kind of protection is it if all you get at the end of the lawsuit is a piece of paper from a judge telling you that you were right and a large bill from your attorney. Such a pyrrhicvictory is not the way to run a business.In order to really benefit from copyright law, you need to give notice and register your content. If you do these things, then you can take advantage of the law's provisions providing that the infringer must pay the copyright holder's attorneys' fees (yay!) and you can get money awards without having to hire a team of expensive experts to testify about how you were harmed financially. By giving notice of your copyright claims and registering your content with U.S. Copyright office, you are making the copyright laws work for you. >> What exactly is "notice of copyright" and is this the same thing as registering my copyright? "Notice of copyright" is a short statement that informs would-be infringers that your work is protected. Giving notice of copyright is not the same thing as registering your copyright with the U.S. copyright office. However, it is something relatively simple that you can and should do to protect your interests. By giving notice to the world that your content is protected, you eliminate the infringer's potential defense that the theft was unintentional. How can the defendant successfully argue that she "didn't know" the content belonged to someone else if it states in plain view that the content belongs to someone? She can't. If she can't demonstrate that the infringement was unintentional, you have a better chance of proving that it was "willful." If you can prove it was willful, then Ka-Ching! You getmore statutory damages. Best Practice: Even if you're too lazy to go through the registration procedures, you can and should AT LEAST be providing copyright notice on your material. >> What should my copyright notice contain?It doesn't have to be a treatise, but it should communicate the following:    1. The fact that the content is copyright protectedUm, yeah. It should state the work is protected. [Duh. Aren't you glad you're still reading this?] You can do this with many words: "This work is owned and copyright protected." Alternatively, you could do this with as little as the symbol: © [note: this approach has global appeal for our non-English speaking friends.]I'm partial to the elegant and simple approach: "Copyright"I think that abbreviations are tacky, but I'm snobby about things like legal notices: "Copr." [boo!]If you want to go for the TKO, include both: "Copyright ©"    2. Who owns the contentThis is the original author. If you wrote it on your personal time for personal uses, then you're the owner. If you wrote it for work, then your employer owns it. For example, I'm drafting this post, but SEOmoz, Inc. retains the copyright to it. SEOmoz, Inc. is on the copyright notice, not Sarah Bird.If multiple people work on the content, you list them all: "Copyright 2007 by John Doe and Jane Doe."    3. When the content was first publishedObviously, for first publications, this is pretty easy. For example, the date for this post will be November 29, 2007.Now, when I revise this post a year from now, I will include the date of revision andthe date of the original post: Copyright by SEOmoz, Inc. Originally published November 29, 2007. Revised on November 30, 2008. And if I obsessively tweak with this post every day for the next year, I just might write: Copyright by SEOmoz, Inc. November 2007 to November 2008. Some people like to go crazy nuts and do the date in Roman numerals. This approach is classy, but I just don't want to work that hard. But that's just me. >> How do I register my online copyright?Register your online copyright at the U.S. copyright office. This involves filling out some forms, paying some money, and sending all the materials and copies to the copyright office. I don't want to go into too much detail about the registration process because the process changes and you can all read, so I'll just refer you to the U.S. copyright office's websiteand tell you the following general things:    1. Get the right form.Assuming that most of you are going to be registering content for websites, and assuming that the content is predominantly text (as opposed to graphics or music), you're probably going to use the Form TX. This is a basic fill-in-the-blanks process. You will need to know things such as the title of the work, a description of the content, the name and nationality of the author, the identity of any known claimants to the work, and whether the work is a revised copy, a derivative, or a compilation. Here's some more specific advice. Remember that this may be used in court some day. It should be legible and it should be accurate. Take special care in writing down the correct legal name of the owner. Don't approximate here. Also, if the owner is a corporate entity, you do not need to include a date of birth, even though they have incorporation date. [Don't get cheeky with the form!] Also, for the love of all that is sacred, please keep a copy of everything you send. Also, when describing your content, don't just say "website." Indicate the kind of content on the website. For example, SEOmoz.org could describe its content as "Primarily text and some graphics published as a website." You would be wise to ask, "What exactly am I registering? A whole site? A Page? A blog?" Well, yet again, the law has not caught up with the technology. In fact, the copyright office isn't even publishing a policy clarifying the issue. But if you can get someone on the line, they will tell you to go ahead and copyright the whole website so long as it is not gigantic. You could also choose to do it a page at a time. For example, you will probably need to start by registering your whole website. Then, as you add content, you have to register the new content. You can't re-register the content that's already been submitted and accepted before. So, don't update your website registration for minor revisions, only for substantive changes.Blogs are also a problem for the current system. They don't fit well into the policies for copyrighting other kinds of serials (magazines, newspapers, journals). Thus, while it's not entirely practical to register a new post every time you publish, you should be registering the new entries. One approach is to register all of your new materials on your website/blog every three months. Remember that you cannot re-register content that has been previously registered (or, shouldn't anyway). Thus, you only need to register your new content. One thing is certain: we can expect substantial overhauls in copyright registration policies in the future. The current methods are simply impractical for our current media. I promise to keep you all updated.    2. Pay the Fee. There is a charge for registering copyright. Currently the charge is $45 per work. Thus, you probably don't want to register every email, but you do want to register your more valuable content.     3. Mail in copies of the work, the fee, and the application. Make two copies of your work. These are deposited at the copyright office. Package your copies, the money, and the form, and mail to the copyright office at the address noted here. Your package is going to be pawed through by all kinds of people, so make sure everything is stapled together and that you send your CD in a sturdy case. It never ceases to amaze me how much stuff gets "lost" or "ruined" in the mail.If you want more detailed information on registering online works, go straight to the fount of knowledge, circular 66. >> What?! I need to "deposit" my online content?! Yes. That's part of the process. It gets worse: the U.S. copyright office doesn't allow you to electronically register anything yet. Rumor has it that CORRDS (Copyright Office Electronic Registration, Recordation, and Deposit System) is under development, but not yet operational. The copyright office is looking for beta testers if you are interested.  Until CORRDS is operational, you've got to send in a paper print-out [the horror!] or a CD of the materials. These materials will not be returned. And they may be scanned for anthrax.>> Do I need an attorney to register my copyright? Probably not. It depends on how much your time is worth and the nature of your project. If you're trying to copyright something pretty standard, such as a webpage with all original content, you probably don't need expert advice. But if you're trying to make a compilation of other people's work, or revise some previously copyrighted work, you should probably consult with an attorney. >> Can I wait until after I want to sue someone to register? You can register your copyright after infringement, but you won't be able to benefit from the attorneys' fees and statutory damages provisions. Since these provisions are what make copyright suits financially viable for most people, you must must must register before infringement. >>I never, ever want to go through the trauma of trial, so what do I care about statutory damages?If you're thinking that you would never file suit against someone, so this doesn't really apply to you, think again. There are two theories of why this is important to do, even if you never step foot in a courtroom.⇒ Deterrence. The deterrence theory is that potential infringers will be less likely to steal your material if they know they may have to pay statutory damages. Further, they will be deterred by the sheer intimidation of having to potentially defend against a foe who has been on the offensive in protecting their IP. That's right. You will stun them into inaction by your sheer genius! I'm not sure I believe this theory because it assumes that people who steal copyright understand the finer subtleties of copyright law. Do people who knowingly infringe check whether the IP they are planning on stealing is registered first? This doesn't seem realistic to me. I think most [I didn't say "all"] infringers are either (1)  innocent  (i.e., they are uninformed about the law) or (2) run spam farms from foreign countries and are relying on those complicated jurisdiction and conflict of laws rules to protect them. ⇒ Settlement.The settlement theory is that your case is much more likely to settle if the stakes are higher for the guy faced with defending the claim. I've seen this in action and it's definitely part of the settlement equation. This factor should be enough to motivate you to register your more valuable material. For  example, imagine that Tybalt is on the defending side of this equation. Perhaps  he copied large portions of something brilliant Mercutio wrote and mixed it in with some of his own ideas. Tybalt then posted the materials on his personal blog. Let's say that Mercutio files suit against Tybalt for copyright infringement. Now, if Mercutio never registered his copyright, Tybalt might choose to defend the case because he thinks he has a pretty good shot of defending the suit under the "fair use" doctrine. Further, Tybalt knows that Mercutio is going to have a really hard time convincing a judge to give him lots of money, even if he does prove that Tybalt's conduct infringed his copyright. After all, besides being offended, how has Mercutio been hurt by the infringement? How can Mercutio translate his hurt into provable, monetary damages to the judge? It's not easy. Thus, Tybalt knows that Mercutio's attorneys are going to tell Mercutio that this is not a good case to take to trial and that if Tybalt doesn't agree to settle, he should probably just drop the suit. Tybalt is more willing to risk going to trial because the potential outcome is not so very bad. One the other hand, let's assume that Mercutio read his SEOmoz blog religiously and had timely registered his content. In that case, Tybalt's attorneys would be telling him that it's not worth risking a loss at trial because Tybalt could end up having to pay Mercutio's attorneys' fees and tens of thousands of dollars in statutory damages (all this in addition to his own attorneys' fees! Holy bankruptcy, Batman!). Even if Tybalt had a sporting chance to prove to a judge that his use of Mercutio's material was fair use, it's not worth the risk considering the potential outcomes. Tybalt would be well-advised to swallow his pride and pay Mercutio some nuisance settlement amount.Thus, these statutory fees go a long way towards keeping people out of court simply by raising the stakes. I submit to you that this is often good thing. I happen to enjoy trials, but I know that my clients have not enjoyed trials, even when they had a good case. Trial is harrowing and there is a lot of "waste" towards attorneys fees. Is this justice? Probably not. But is it the best outcome considering all the factors? Probably so.  >> I just can't get enough.If you too just can't get enough of copyright and you're a fan of funny cartoons, then check out this vidput out by the U.S. government. Great for getting your kiddies on the path to Nerddom. Alright folks. I hope that I've scared some of you into action. If you put copyright notices on all of your work and register your valuable content, your future attorney will thank you. Thanks again for your attention. I know copyright isn't the sexiest topic in the world, but it may be one of the most important for people in communication professions. Please keep your questions and comments coming along. I really enjoy the feedback and direction from the community. Best Regards,SarahDo you like this post? YesNo

  Posted by great scott!We've got a doozie for you this week folks. Search Engine Land's very own Danny Sullivan dropped by the Mozplex for a little Whiteboard Friday guest spot. Before I knew it, the camera batteries were running dry and he and Rand had talked for almost an hour, so this is going to be a multi-part Whiteboard extravaganza!In Part I, Danny & Rand discuss Facebook's new ad strategy and what it could mean for search, including discussion of why advertisers are so gung-ho to adopt new, gimmicky ad channels while only begrudgingly adopting search.I'll try to have Part II (of five or six) up by the end of the day.UPDATE FROM RAND:Here's a link to Danny's article on AdAge - Forget Facebook, Search Ads Are the Revolution. Also - here's the Facebook Social Ads page. I think we at SEOmoz will probably try to do some Facebook advertising in the near future to give it a test, but until then, Jon Mendez covers the subject admirablywith a case study on his blog -Do you like this post? YesNo

  Posted by great scott!As promised, here's a bonus edition of Whiteboard Friday, Part II of Rand's interview with the one, the only, Danny Sullivan.  Part II covers what Danny would like to label "Search 3.0," that is to say Vertical Search, Universal Search, Integrated Search, Blended Search, etc (of course, most of those are trademarked, hence the need for a generic term like Search 3.0).Beyond 3.0, the guys go on to discuss what may evolve in the future into Search 4.0, 5.0 and beyond. Oh, and Danny makes a colossal effin' mess of the whiteboard.We'll bring you the rest of this interview (parts 3-5) next week, as we'll all be at Pubcon. I may also hit you with some other video content throughout the week because what happens in Vegas, stays on video ;-)Do you like this post? YesNo

  Posted by randfishThis week, the SEOmoz crew and I are heading to Pubcon in Las Vegas for one of the search industry's more advanced conferences. However, before departing, I felt an irresistable urge to do some coverage of a tough competition from the world of search marketing and use it to illustrate how search-savvy analysts can use the engines to get insight about multiple brands in an industry.The inspiration for this comes from two sources, both worth a read - this interview from Lee Odden with Kevin Ryan & Kevin Heislerfrom Search Engine Strategies & SearchEngineWatch, respectively - and this one - SEL vs. SEW: And the Winner Is?by Matt McGee. The interview suggests to me that there's is considerable defensiveness, hubris and contention over the competing conference series, and Matt's post (along with the water cooler gossip of lots more threadson the subject) tells me the search industry is particularly fascinated by the conflict (no surprise, as our niche has a seemingly unquenchable thirst for drama).First off, I want to take issue with Matt McGee's post. Matt's an incredibly smart guy, but I think he does a bit of disservice by using a single metric to calculate a brand's reach in comparison to another. Yes, comparing feed subscriptions through Bloglines over time is a reasonable data point to use, but when so much information is available at our fingertips, shouldn't we go all the way?Here's how I'd analyze competing brands in the search marketing space:First, you want to see where the overlaps are between the businesses. From the chart above, I'd say that SEW and SELand are directly competitive, as are SMExpo, SES & Pubcon. The other businesses target similar groups, but probably don't overlap to the same degree. The founding year is very important, because it will help us as we look at comparative data to make guesses about the speed of growth or stagnation.Here's a key to the data columns above:URL- the domain of the various properties (note that I've shortened these to fit) G#s (6m)- the number of Google results for a search for the domain name (including the extension) for the last 6 months, excluding the domain itself. Here's an example of how to perform this search - "searchenginewatch.com" -site:searchenginewatch.comG#s (3m)- as above, but for only the last 3 months GBlog (All)- a Google Blog Searchfor the domain name, excluding the domain itself, on the default settings (no particular timeline) GBlog (1m)- as above, but for only posts that have appeared in the past month GPR- PageRank of the domain homepage as reported by the Google Toolbar This data gives us insight into the prevalence of mentions for the various domains. By referring back to this data, we can draw some conclusions about domain and brand popularity in general, including the respective brand penetration and saturation as well as an idea of who's "gaining" ground and how quickly.Again, some quick bullet points to explain the columns:URL- This is the same as the above chart. MS Links- Live says they're shutting down their link searches again in a few weeks, so I'm lucky to have this data. The format used for the search is +linkdomain:searchenginewatch.com-site:searchenginewatch.com to remove internal links. QUICK NOTE - The numbers here jump around so much that they may not be valuable. I just ran 3 queries for the searchenginewatch domain and got results ranging from 600K to 3.5million. Yahoo! Links- This link data comes courtesy of Yahoo! Site Explorer, where the search is performed with the parameters that include external links onyl to any page on the domain. The numeric data here appears far more reliable than the Microsoft/Live link data. Trati Auth- This is Technorati's Authority number, which derives from the number of individual, unique blogs that have linked to a site in the past 90 days. GfdSbs- Google's feed subscriber numbers, which can be found by searching for domains inside Google Reader. BLSbs- Bloglines' subscription numbers which derive, as above, from searches performed inside Bloglines. This data is a bit more domain and SEO-centric, but it also tells a great story about the success of the various domains from a web marketing perspective. Link data and feed subscribers are going to be highest for sources reporting the news and offering popular blogs, but even the secondary sites make for interesting comparisons between one another.Key to the Above Chart:Brand Name- this is the exact term or phrase I used to perform queries. In some cases, such as "search engine strategies" and "information world review," it appeared from the results that many mentions were meant to be general, rather than representative of the brands, but I've included the data nonetheless. G#s (6m)- A search at Google, restricted to the last 6 months, for the brand name term or phrase. G#s (3m)- As above, but for only the last 3 months. GBlog (All)- A Google Blog Searchfor the brand term/phrase using the default settings (no time frame). GBlog (1m)- As above, but limited to blog posts from the last 1 month. As much as the website metrics are valuable, the brand names themselves can sometimes provide even more insight. After all, not everyone is going to use the domain name when talking about a conference series or brand, nor will they all link. Thus, looking at brand mentions over the past few months can provide valuable competitive analysis.The numbers in this last chart come from the posted member numbers on pages like SEWatch Forum Members, Sphinn Members, an educated guess about WebMasterWorld, & SEOmoz's internal figures. The "user engagement" data is a pure guess on my part, based on the amount of user-generated content and activity on the sites. The last column, brand recognition, is also a pure guess, based on my experience of talking to, emailing, and visiting folks in the search marketing world.This kind of data is valuable because it helps us realize the level of interaction users have with these various sites on a regular basis. Not every site is going to have data like this, but if you're analyzing competing domains that offer user engagement, don't overlook this information.Takeaways from this analysis:Third Door's Search Engine Land property is clearly a runaway hit. According to nearly every metric above, it's taken only a year to grow to a size similar to SearchEngineWatch, though the latter had a ten year lead. Search Marketing Expo isn't yet of comparable size to Pubcon or SES, but again, the growth rate over the past 6 months (the first SMX was June of 2007) would indicate that if it stays on this path for 2-3 years, it could leapfrog both. It would appear that Third Door Properties and SEOmoz both have faster growth curves than either of the other two (although SEOmoz doesn't really compete directly with any of these sites). Between the two, however, Third Door is clearly on the faster path of growth. Revisiting these numbers in 6 and 12 months would probably be incredibly interesting :) Hopefully this example serves not only to satiate the curiosity of search marketers wondering about the X vs. Y battles, but also illustrates how to perform a more robust competitive analysis on domains and brands.BTW - As a pre-emptive strike against the inevitable, let me point out that I have good cause not to trust any data from Alexa, QuantCast or Compete, and I would suggest that savvy brand analysts stay away from these services until they prove themselves to have greater accuracy.FULL DISCLOSURE:Although we at SEOmoz don't directly profit from any of the conference series or businesses mentioned above, we have had professional and financial relationships with all three organizations in the past, and have currently active relationships with both Pubcon & Third Door Media's properties.p.s.Joe still has a few tickets leftfor shows in Vegas tomorrow night, so if you're itchin' to see Spamalot or Blue Man Group, make sure to visit his blog.Do you like this post? YesNo

  Posted by randfishToday at Pubcon, I'm speaking on the Link Buying Panel, but here on the blog, you're getting a sneak peak at one of my topics for the presentation.It's my feeling that we (search engines and search marketers) have hit some intransigence on the paid links debate. The marketplace hasto exist - and search engine have to fight against what they perceive to be manipulative, non-editorial votes. But, what if there was a solution that could make both sides happy? A place where money changed hands between parties, but editorial decisions still came into play?I'm calling this idea "Sponsored Editorials." The concept is simple:Create a marketplace where those seeking to have their web-based content reviewed, written about and possibly linked-to can connect with website and blog owners interested in earning money off their investment of a review Buyers (who want their content reviewed) pay up front. Reviewers get paid to review the content, whether they write about it (or link to it) or not. If the reviewers like the content, they can use a nofollow link to tell search engines that they're not editorially endorsing it. If the reviewers LOVE the content, they can remove the nofollow and editorially endorse the content. Here's a couple graphics for those who prefer visuals:__The idea isn't perfect, but I think it has some potential, and I'd be thrilled to participate in a system that essentially rewards content creators and reviewers precisely how the engines might intend.Naturally, feedback is welcome - constructive is preferable, but critical is fine, too, of course. I'm not sure if this a project that SEOmoz would take on (though our new marketplace would be a fun place to give it a spin), but I certainly hope that in freely sharing the idea, it can grow and become even more valuable and interesting.Do you like this post? YesNo

  Posted by Mel GrayHowdy, from fabulous Las Vegas!Rather than spend the next week jumping puddles and listening to flood warnings, the Mozzers will be embarking on a trip to sunny Las Vegas for Pubcon!Since we'll be out and about for the next week (and for the most part are twitter free), keeping up to date on where we'll be at certain times is a task that could seriously cut into some primo table time.  We anticipated this well in advance and have a solution for the problem....The SEOmoz Events Calendar!The Events Calendar lets you easily schedule social gatherings and invite users to them.  On the opposite end of the spectrum, you can also easily RSVP and discuss other events that users have created.This software is still very much beta, so if you do encounter any problems with it or have any suggestions to offer, please forward them to sitesupport@seomoz.orgIt is very much encouraged that you party hard this next week.  It is also encouraged that you use the events calendar to schedule your party (and invite us!).  This calendar is open for any events you wish to schedule. We at SEOmoz strongly endorse the act of partying.Please party responsibly.Do you like this post? YesNo

  Posted by JaneCoplandPlease excuse the post's title. It's been a long day already and I'm terrible at writing titles at the best of times. From the nineteenth floor of the Wynn in Las Vegas, my fried brain decided that an off-topic title for an on-topic piece was just fine.Most of you know why we're here. It's Pubcon. This conference marks the first time I've been "back" to an industry event: my first journey to Pubcon took place seven weeks after I was hired in 2006. Things are a little different this time around. This time, I know who most people are. Some people even know who Iam. They speak to me now, instead of looking at my badge and asking, "Where's Rand?"I went to three sessions today. I may attend one more, but I had to leave the convention centre and return to the Wynn to write this, since the Internet connection at the conference is pretty awful. On my return to the hotel and after my purchase of twelve-dollar Internet access (thanks, SEOmoz!), I discovered that being offline for twelve hours creates a rather unmanageable email situation. However, I shall ignore the clogged, waterlogged inbox in order to tell you about my day...I know that many people are tired of hearing the same presentations with "heard-it-before" content every time they attend a Pubcon, SMX or SES. Acknowledging this, Rand attempted to bring some social media to a session on social media and pitched two speeches to the crowd, asking them to vote on which they'd rather hear. They chose to skip SMM 101, voting for a presentation on sixty websites that larger, in-depth social media campaigns can use for live links, reputation-management profiles and the like. One of his profile-building sites, SlideShare.net, often ranks on page one for my name, although I don't know how much of that is due to its "freshness", how much is due to links to my SMX London presentationand how much is due to domain strength. We'll see how long it stays there for! Rand also mentioned creating Digg profiles for reputation management's sake, although I've noticed some oddities when it comes to this. I see Digg profiles jump around quite a lot. In one instance, a Digg profile lookedas though it had been hit with a - 30 penalty when it had been ranking on page one for a certain keyphrase. Its irrelevancy must have had something to do with this, but irrelevant results sit prettily at the top of the SERPs all the time, so I'm not sure why a Digg profile should drop thirty places overnight.It was more social media during the next session for me, which is probably appropriate since I somehow managed to be titled SEOcial Butterfly in the "silly SEOmoz titles" contest. It is on my business card and my conference pass. And Dax, what you drew on my card last night was not funny. Well, it was kind of funny, but only in the most inappropriate way...Gosh, I get rather off topic on five hours' sleep and lots of coffee. But yes: conference sessions. My next stop was Monetizing Social Media with Vanessa Fox, Michael Gray, Alexander Barbaraand Laura Fitton. One theme ran throughout: Diggers will not click on your Adsense. DO NOT EXPECT THEM TO DO SO! Alexander mentioned removing ads from linkbait before its launch, since ads can often alienate social media participants. I was relieved that the panelists mentioned this, because the name of the session worried me. I was a bit concerned that the name alone may prompt discussion of how to get social media surfers to click on ads and buy things straight away. Thankfully, Michael Gray mentioned just how many times people need to see branding before the brands stick in their minds. I think people lose sight of this because we see our own brands every day. They're on our homepages and our desktops. They're embedded in our email signatures. We often don't realize that everyone else needs to see our brands over and over again before they'll remember them and recognize what they stand for.Laura Fitton's presentation revolved around how social media branding can be insanely profitable. Her entire consultancy was built around social media marketing: her participation at Twitter has made her and her brand particularly strong. While this wasn't exclusively monetization-oriented, Vanessa Fox and Laura Fitton both brought up a great point about backup material. In different ways, both of them advised that one or two pieces of neat linkbait isn't enough to make a site sticky. Backup material consists of all the things a website has to offer which don't constitute the original content that brought someone to the site. Older posts, newer posts, resources, tools and community features can be backup material.  It has to exist, as people look at this when determining whether they'll subscribe and / or return. Another important point, made by Michael, was about failing to deliver on a promise. This can happen accidentally, especially with linkbait. His example was Microsoft, who apparently offered USB sticks to people who took part in an offer. Microsoft did not expect the offer to reach the homepage of Digg, and were thus caught short when their small stock of USB sticks ran out.Having a server that can't handle social media traffic is almost like failing to deliver on a promise. A link at Digg, Slashdot or Reddit promises super content, but your server's less than valiant death means that the promise goes unfulfilled. Most of us have heard this before, but the panel were sure to mention the importance of quality servers and cached content. No one mentioned hosting pictures elsewhere, which is a great help.This afternoon, I sat through half of a Link Building Strategies session, but had to leave after Raespoke due to the fact that I caught the plague whilst in London. Sometimes it gets the better of me and I can't stop coughing. Before I left, I heard Jim Boykin, Greg Hartnettand Rae's presentations. Some highlights?The Yahoo! Directoryis worth it, assuming you're making money from your website. A blog about kites and knitting? Not so much.Prayer is your best bet in the "getting into DMOZ" strategy game.Appearing as though one is really human is good when conducting link-building campaigns and sending out emails.Ignore the low traffic levels from directories. Providing it's a good directory, the traffic will be more savvy, more targeted and more likely to convert.Ramble ramble ramble. I haven't eaten enough and I have had lots of coffee. I'm about to go and get some more. You know what is weird about Vegas? Everything.Do you like this post? YesNo

  Posted by randfishTomorrow at 11:35am here at Pubcon, I'll be joined on a panel by Mike McDonald from WebProNews, Andy Beal from MarketingPilgrimand Lee Odden from TopRank. It's an open forum where the four of us take questions and give our opinions on the subjects affecting the search world.Naturally, as Mike and I were hanging out in the speakers room this morning, we felt that it would only be fair for folks who can't attend to ask their own questions about the search and search marketing world. SEOmoz's own Rebecca Kelley will be doing coverage of the session (as will Tiffany Doughty from WebProNews), so even if you're not here at Pubcon, you can get all the answers.So please feel free to leave comments with any questions you've got. Topics are completely open, but potential arenas might include:Changing Directions & Business Models in the IndustryThe Impact of the SEO BlogosphereChanges or Updates to Search Engine GuidelinesHot Techniques or TacticsBlog Monetization StrategiesIndustry Insider IssuesMarketing/Search Tactics for Blogs vs. Non-Blog SitesOr anything else!p.s. Quick side note - read this- it's awesome.Do you like this post? YesNo