My general disdain for SEO industry vocabulary/jargon has nothing to do with the jargon itself (for the most part). Rather it is the application thereof that I find annoying: SEO’s like to come up with neat terms and creative phrases solely to impress each other.

This pointless show-n-tell for ego stroking is a common trait within the industry that I have commented on many times. If you would like to delve further into SEO circle-jerking please read my post on Search-Masturbation-Expo.

Accordingly I tend to resist incorporating any fancy SEO wordsmithery into my own professional interactions and communications; even within my own private work. However I often find that a certain language barrier does exist; certainly with many clients and especially so with potential clients.

For example the term SEO2g, which I use to distinguish high-end, scientific SEO from common SEO, is a term that is essentially meaningless to persons who are unfamiliar with my work. Furthermore an explanation that SEO2g stands for Second Generation SEO, offers little remedy (Worse still I have noticed that most people slip into a kind of trance as soon as anything remotely technical enters the conversation. The eyes just glaze over…). This is no good for a technical guy like myself and is one of the reasons that I prefer the solitude of a brains-behind-the-operation type role for most projects. I am exaggerating a bit, but you understand.

The industry at large offers almost no assistance as the common SEO vernacular is mysterious at best, and possibly even laughable in certain company and therefore remains of little use when in discussion with non-SEO’s (i.e. clients. Clients and potential clients are, after all, the only people that I am interested in discussing SEO with.). So it seems that when it comes to effectively communicating the finer points of SEO2g to the world, I’m on my own. Fair enough.

If I turn my attention to communicating the distinctions between SEO2g and common SEO with the SEO industry itself (which I occasionally find myself required to do), I am faced with a variety of problems. Most of which seem to stem from the personalities at work within the industry. It has been interesting to note the caustic reactions that my ideas tend to incite (especially to some of the definitions found in my SEO Glossary).

Therefore I have decided to work within the framework of common SEO vocabulary in an attempt to create a palatable packaging for my brand of SEO.

Building upon the two most popular distinguishing terms used by SEO’s:

• White-Hat SEO: Used to describe SEO’s that adhere to search engine terms of use and webmaster guidelines.
• Black-Hat SEO: Used to describe SEO’s that focus on aggressive exploitation of susceptible algorithmic features of search engines.

I would like to introduce a third denomination of search engine optimization. One that describes scientific, research-based, advanced search optimization in easy to stomach language (This should not be taken as a retirement for the term “SEO2g”. SEO2g will continue to describe truly advanced and evolved SEO practices.)

For the SEO world at large; I am pleased to introduce to you:

Notice anything “funny”? Hint: I’m not talking about “ha ha” funny.

I thought; “Could this be the latest and greatest example of fancy search marketing lingo?”

Convertion

mmmmm…. Notice how it just rolls off the tongue? Convertion. Imagine the possibilities:

“As you can see Mr. Smith, your Convertion rate is up 300%”

“Cost per conversion? You’re living in the stone-age. Let’s talk about Cost per Convertion.”

“Sorry baby, we just don’t Convertion anymore.”

However after clicking on the word (the velvety, scrumtrulescent, singularity of linguistic power that it is) ; and following the hyperlink it contained, I was sorely disappointed to find that it was just typo (so much promise, what a shame).

My sorrow however quickly faded as a realized that I was staring at none other than “The Complete Agenda Information for SMX Advanced”!

How Exciting! Yeah! Another opportunity for would-be SEO’s and other interested parties to watch the “leaders” and “top thinkers” of the Search Marketing world perform a dazzling three-ring spectacle sure to awe and delight even the most rigid spectator. (In the tradition of it’s predecessors, siblings and familiars) This event is certain to include :

IR Secrets (Information Regurgitation): Exciting hands-on workshops in which today’s top SEO’s reveal closely guarded SEO “secrets” like: Put keywords in Title tags (they must be crazy to share this stuff!).

followed promptly by:

Exclusive Networking: Watch with awe and wonder as SEO’s tell each other how clever they are, then pat each others heads and otherwise jerk each other off.

wrapping the event up with a nice game of:

Get Them Digits: This wondrous spectacle is then concluded with a mass exchange of business cards.

“Why?” You may ask, “would a professional SEO, collect so many useless contacts…”

Well In the weeks following the conference, you may find yourself in need of a good SEO circle-jerk.

Worse still; the next conference is 5 agonizing days away! What to do?

Fortunately, you got-them-digits at SMX and your competitor’s contact information is close at hand! Your fellow SEO is sure to oblige. Give a call! Hell, how about a conference call?!?!
The description above, effectively summarizes and distills ALL of the SEO, SEM, SMO, Expos, Conferences, Workshops, etc. etc. ad nauseum, for years to come. Furthermore, I have done this all for you free of charge! The Search Ninja will accept your generous tokens of gratitude in the form of exceptional backlinks, research grants and of course instruments of the silent assassin.

Imprecision
Incompleteness
Inaccuracy

Imprecise queries are inexact or ill-defined searches in that they do not effectively describe the specificity of an informational need.

For example let’s say that I had to find an annotated diagram of the supramarginal scutes of the Chelydra serpentina osceola; and I approached this by searching Google Images for “Turtle Shells”. The search results returned would be imprecise (in regards to my informational need). Therefore imprecise queries will return results that are technically correct, however their lack of granularity makes them useless.

Incomplete queries are lacking key terms that describe the informational need. This is easy to confuse with Imprecision, however it is very much its own unique devil.
Returning to our turtle example: If I needed to find a good synopsis about turtle shells; their structure, general appearance, sizes common to major species, etc. and I approached this by going to Wikipedia, ha ha… just kidding I would never go to Wikipedia if I needed reliable information. So I go to Google or possibly Google Scholar and type in “Shells”. Here the topical-realm of shells is so vast and diverse that it does nothing to represent an informational need for turtle shells.

Inaccurate queries lack contextual elements of word sense that are essential to proper classification and association with relevant documents. Polysemes and homonyms are a significant obstacle in information retrieval and word sense disambiguation (WSD) represents a large piece of the IR/WebIR puzzle.

Help the search engines (and yourself) out a little! If you want to do a little fly-fishing and need to find a listing of prime spots to cast your line; DON’T search for “Local Banks” (bank could be a financial institution, a stockpile; such as a blood bank or yes even a shoreline as in river bank).

After completing a simple registration process and adding some personal data I was up and running. My start page (pictured below), featured information from multiple Internet based accounts allowing me to conveniently track everything from one interface.

I have only added a handful of accounts at this point; Gmail, Yahoo, Banking, POP3, but it is already apparent just how useful the common interface is going to be. One major benefit is that I don’t have to lookup my login information to check my various accounts. Or worse, rely on my browser to remember for me. It’s all stored in one simple, secure common interface.

PageOnce allows you to add just about any type of Internet based account; financial, travel, shopping, social and of course email.

The core benefit of using PageOnce is obviously saving time by reducing browsing and login activity. Accordingly the service is probably best suited for frequent business travellers and online business professionals.

One particularly interesting aspect of this has been studying the various types of goals that each campaign was focused on.

Notable examples include:

• Raw Traffic Increase: The client wishes to generate inbound search traffic.
  

  Very little attention is given to focus/targeting. The client just needs to see big numbers and couldn’t care less about what those numbers mean or how to monetize the traffic. One’s first assumption might be that the client doesn’t understand monetization concepts such as conversion, and equates traffic with success. Surprisingly this was not always the case; in fact this type of campaign often served a very strategic (even surgical) role in the client’s big picture.

• Sales Improvement: The client is seeking (improved) revenue from online sales channels.
  

  This type of campaign always appears to be pretty straight-forward on paper, but quickly evolves in complexity and scope when the campaign is being hammered-out. Comprehensive analytics solutions, clever market research, industry-specific intelligence and a novel testing platform are just part of the arsenal required to see this type of campaign to success.

• Reputation Repair ( i.e. “Make it go away”): The client is generally suffering a bad run of negative PR.
  

  The SERPS are populated with not-too-flattering opinions/information related to the client’s brand/product/officers, etc. Making the bad PR go away (or rather making the bad PR invisible) and replacing it with more favorable resources and information is the name of the game.

• Image Destabilization (Smear Campaign): The client has an interest in damaging a competitor’s image.
  

  Summary Description: The opposite of reputation repair. In practice its not quite that black and white and there are a multiplicity of factors to consider when planning your attack, or rather, your “public enlightenment initiative”.

• Branding: The client is seeking reach, impressions and brand recognition.
  

  This type of campaign is usually composed of multiple strategic initiatives each of which addresses a specific critical target or market segment.

There are many more campaign types that could be classified and perhaps when I find the time I will explore a campaign type classification system further.

In real-life SEO campaigns, it is rare for a campaign to focus its aim so narrowly that it can be classified exclusively within a particular campaign type/goal. As the campaign evolves, it is common to see multiple directions and goals emerge in response to the changing needs of a maturing web entity.

Free-IQTest.net - IQ Test

In your Search Ninja blog you mention that “If todays top SEO’s really are doing well for their clients, they don’t have a clue why.” You also mention that SEO firms have a shady reputation, etc. My question is… How could you feel this way and still have worked at an SEO firm? e.g. Pole Position.Thanks,

Reader

Hi Reader,Thanks for visiting the blog. Regarding your question:
When I stated that “If today’s top SEO’s really are doing well for their clients, they don’t have a clue why.”
I was voicing my frustration at the SEOMoz ranking factors v2; a document which was produced
as a collaborative effort between the top SEOs in the world. It’s information was largely misdirected
and/or vague and at other times a flat-out embarrassment to the industry.

On a personal level it made me realize how fundamentally different my approach is when contrasted
with that of most SEOs. This is why I felt compelled to coin the term “SEO2g (2nd Generation SEO)”,
which refers to a next-generation, R&D driven, scientific approach to SEO (As opposed to SEO1g which
defines the prominent best-guess/rumor-mill/ultra-linear approach that dominates the industry).

Secondly: In regards to the public perception of SEO, that is exactly what I was referring to:
the public perception. I myself proudly accept the title of SEO (2g). Accordingly I am proud of my
work with Pole Position and am grateful to have had the opportunity to help evolve that business.

I sincerely appreciate your inquiry and thank you again for visiting the Search Ninja blog.

Regards,

Jason J. Green

Interesting. Thanks. Where can I find more info about 1G vs. 2G? I’m not sure I see the difference. Or, more accurately, I’m not sure I understand 2G.Lastly, if you were an online retailer with an SE friendly site, etc., would you hire an SEO firm to help you? i.e. Would the $20K-to-$50K-and-more you’d pay them per year be a good investment? If yes, how do you differentiate between an SEO firm that’s a good investment vs. a scam? Do you know of good SEO’ers or SEO firms?

Thanks,

Reader

Hi Reader,As far as 1G vs. 2G; you will not likely find direct information so titled. I would direct you to investigate areas such as Web IR, Search Engine Design, Consumer behavior, standards compliant extensible web development, etc. SEO2g is a synthesis of technical skills and education across a broad range of subjects. For example:

Standard (1g) SEO Campaign might look like this:

1) Perform simple site analysis, check for crawlability issues, meta data, etc.

2) Brainstorm many keywords that are probably relevant, research their traffic volume and select those with the highest search volume and lowest competition.

3) Include the selected keywords in page titles, meta data, text and internal links.

4) Support the on-page effort by soliciting links, submitting to article repositories, link buying, etc.

5) Check progress monthly and make adjustments in an attempt to find an optimal state.

An SEO2g Campaign might look like this:

- Preliminary Research

• In-Depth Site Analysis covering: On-Page, Link Analysis, Usability, Spider Simulations, etc.
• Industry Analysis
• Topical Community Analysis
• Coverage, Authorities, Arena
• Competitor Technical Analysis: Term/Doc Matrix creation, Lemmatization, NVN Patterns, visual link geometries,etc.
• S.E. Behavior Discovery
• Search Marketing Plan and Campaign Development
• Competitive Advantage Development
• Determination/Development of project specific Metrics
• Targeted Search Phrase Research: Multiphase Refinement, Expansion, Correlation, Semantic Relation Index, etc.

- Domain Optimization:

• Name Selection
• Registration Length
• analysis of hosting provider (screen for IP block bans, etc.)
• Registrant History analysis.

And that’s before a single line of code is touched on the existing site, and its still just the tip of the iceberg in regards to what actually takes place.

Concerning the online retailer scenario: The answer is emphatically yes, assuming that I was able to locate a suitable firm/professional. That is what will make or break the value of a 20k-50k annual investment. However given an ideal situation with a truly skilled professional SEO: it’s worth every penny and more.

The problem rests in finding a professional that is the real deal and not a snake-oil salesman. Not an easy task for most potential clients in the market for search engine optimization. This is because SEO is still largely, as they say, a “black art”. No industry standardization, formal academic programs, etc. This makes “best-practices” hard to define explicitly and universally.

Thank you again for your interest and interesting discussion.

Regards,

Jason J. Green

There seems to be quite a buzz about Google’s now “official” policy which bans reciprocal linking.
The policy has not been well received by SEO’s and Webmasters alike.
A campaign has even been suggested which recommends adding the rel=”nofollow” attribute to any hyper-links that point to Google properties.

Additional suggestions include using the phrase “Web Apartheid” in any content which discusses Google.

Personally I think this is a case of (well-intentioned) bullying on Google’s part.
That is I believe Google’s motives are not “evil”, in as much as they are trying to clean up the quality of the Internet Link Graph.
I believe that they are operating under the assumption that “Google knows Best” and are instituting a policy that they believe is for the greater good of the web (despite the kicking and screaming of the SEO community who have reacted as if they were given a sound ‘over the knee’ paddling by Google).

This of course does not make the decision necessarily “right” if such an evaluation can even be made, as the bottom line is that Google is simply a service and has no “official” obligation to appease the web at large.

One could also argue that reciprocal linking (as is practiced by the SEO community at large) serves no purpose other than to manipulate rankings (and offers no real value to visitors).

There does (or should) exist however a certain responsibility to not abuse the awesome power that the search giant wields. Handing down decisions such as this and operating under the “Father Knows Best” policy just may be an abuse of that power, at least in principle.

Personally this does not affect my work at all and is therefore a non-issue in my eyes.

If however the new Google policy affects you or your clients please do the following:

• Click here to download your PDF Dunce Cap.
• Print the PDF and follow the instructions for building your Dunce Cap.
• Go home and stand in a corner.
• Place Dunce Cap on your head.

You should be ashamed of yourself: You have done your clients a disservice and mis-represented yourself.

If you are relying on reciprocal links for SEO, then you are not an SEO.

If you make people think they’re thinking, they’ll love you; But if you really make them think, they’ll hate you.

- Don Marquis