WebConnoisseur

I’ve been impressed with the marketing tactics The Simpsons movie has employed. Back in July, by word of mouth I heard about the Simpsons 7-11 promo where select 7-11s were transformed into Kwik-E-marts including one in my hometown, Seattle (shame on the 7-eleven site for removing the page from their site) where you could buy pink donuts, buzz cola, krusty-os, etc. (I still think they should have made Duff beer).

Then, last week before I went to see the movie, I visited the official simpsons movie site which also had some great viral marketing elements built in. For example, you can create your very own Simpsons character. Here’s my Simpsonized family:

They made it really easy to create avatars, jpgs, video and other web elements that you could add to your blog or social networking profile. I love it when movies go beyond creating a site that only contains a movie trailer and a couple stills. Allowing your fans to promote their love for your movie is a smart marketing tactic. Massive marketing still works for Hollywood, but it seems like the movies that are most successful rely mostly on Word-of-Mouth. Why not use the web to promote word-of-mouth activity?

The movie was also enjoyable. As a filmmaker, I loved the beginning. Television actors & movies are often considered undesirable for feature films because the audience is used to seeing them for free. In true Simpson’s style, they actually poke fun at the audience for paying for the movie during the first 30 seconds of the film.

I just added my 200th LinkedIn connection and I must say it feels good. I’m proud of it because it is an indicator of my networking skills and general likeability, especially considering I’ve always worked for very small companies, have never hired a consultant, rarely consult others, and rarely get to go to conferences. 98% of my network consists of people I’ve had several in-person discussions with and the other 2% are people I share common interest or situations with (more on this topic below).

According to LinkedSEO, I’m the 2nd most well-connected SEO in the Greater Seattle area. I’m sure my buddy Rand will catch up to me soon, but for now Dana Melick is the only person listed above me and it appears that Dana Melick is more of a salesman of SEO services than an SEO practitioner.

LinkedIn is definitely hitting critical mass. In the past couple months, I’ve seen tons of people jumping on the service. Social networking for business seems to have caught on. LinkedIn is doing a great job of staying focused on launching features that compliment their core focus. LinkedIn Answers is working well, groups are cool, recommendations make complete sense and the ability to find unbiased references when hiring people is awesome.

My tips for anyone looking to grow their LinkedIn network:

• Connect with only people you know or trust. This isn’t like myspace where having tons of friends makes you look cool. People are weary of connecting with people with large networks and recommendations from a stranger are essentially worthless.
• If you have a good conversation with someone and get their business card, send a LinkedIn request within 3 days and remind them exactly who you are. Don’t wait to long because you may forget who they are and they may forget who you are, which greatly reduces the likelyhood of a connection.
• Use LinkedIn as your rolodex. It is where you keep all your important contacts.
• Don’t recommend people you don’t believe in. I haven’t done it, but I am confident it will come back to bite you.
• Avoid linking up with recruiters unless you want to scare your boss or co-workers.
• Don’t be afraid to connect with a competitor. Being connected to them allows you to see who they are working with based off their new connections. Besides, you never know when a competitor will become an ally when tackling an issue that affects you both.
• If you participate in Answers, know what you are talking about. Stupid answers (or even questions) can leave a scar on your entire career. No pressure ;).
• Help people out in your network.

And, of course, if you know me or think you should know me, definately check out my LinkedIn profile and send me a request. My email is my [first name]@[the website address you are visiting].com. Here’s a link to my profile:

It seems a bit premature to have tips for the Search Marketing Expo considering the first-ever SMX doesn’t take place until next week, but it is taking place in my hometown and I’ve been to enough search conferences to know how to make the most of them.

Below are my tips for those who are new to search conferences and those who aren’t new to search conferences but are new to SMX (should be the rest of us). If you are new to search, I think you are at the wrong conference (SMX Seattle is geared towards advanced search marketers).

New to Search Conferences:

• Some of the best search information is gained outside of the conference rooms – in hallways, at the parties and in the bars. Danny realizes this, and has set up three networking events. Attend them all.
• Many of the brightest minds in search will be at this conference (both search engine employees and those whose lifeblood is tied to search). Listen and remember, not all experts will have a microphone in front of them, some will be sitting right next to you.
• No matter how brilliant or “famous” the people at the conference may seem to you, don’t let that deter you from introducing yourself. I’ve found people in our industry to be incredibly welcoming. Remember, these people aren’t famous outside this industry and they are as much of a geek as you and I are.

New to SMX:

• After being beautiful and in the 80s all week, the weather is expected to flip completely to rain on Monday and Tuesday. It’s really a conspiracy. Seattle wants out-of-towners to tell everyone it rains here all the time. Regardless, we’ll probably be spending most of our time indoors anyways.
• The Bell Harbor conference center rocks. Great views and good location. Wifi is free, so bring a laptop so you can connect to the web during a conversation to show people what you are talking about.
• Andy Beal claims he’ll be videotaping everything. Jump on camera if you’ve got a spare moment, but shoo him away if the camera is taming down your corner conversation. Don’t forget about the WebProNews guys either.
• If you want to try a local favorite beer, ask for a Mac and Jacks (it’s only available on tap).

Other people excited about the upcoming SMX Seattle Conference:
Google Webmaster Central
SEOMoz
Karl Ribas
Todd Mintz
Scott Clark
SEO Chicks
Adam Killam
Matt Cutts

SEOmoz released the results of the 2nd Annual Web 2.0 Awards yesterday. I’m happy to announce that I was one of the 25 judges. I’ve judged the Webby Awards for a number of years and even judged an online Miss World competition a few years ago, but I must admit that judging the Web 2.0 Awards was a refreshing change. It’s fun to see how people are changing the web in exciting ways.

I highly recommend you take a look at the 2007 Web 2.0 Award Winners, especially if you are still unsure what a “Web 2.0 site” is. I think every company with an online presence could benefit from paying attention to sites that are leading the movement towards Web 2.0 experiences.

Think about how you might be able to integrate elements of what these other sites are doing into your site, especially if it adds value to your existing user base.

The 11th annual Webby Award Winners have been announced. 69 sites and 11 videos have been blessed with the web equivalent of an Oscar. As a judge for the awards, I’ve flown to NY for the past two Webby Awards Galas and must say they are THE coolest web event to attend. Unfortunately, this year I’m not making the trip thanks to SMX Seattle being scheduled on the same two days.

Hitwise correctly predicted people’s voice winners for MiniClip Games, Manchester United, TripAdvisor, BBC News, Great Schools and Facebook. If you look at the list of nominees and winners, you may notice some that were notably missing (Zillow for the Real Estate category, for example) and I’d like to make it clear that the sites go through a pre-screening process and sometimes don’t make it to the list of sites for judges to choose from. The people’s voice also has a similar restriction: people can only choose from the 5 nominees.

In the future, I hope the Webbys will re-introduce write-in votes for the people’s voice awards and that Judges can review the voting eligible lists before the voting begins to nominate any noticeable gaps. While I’m giving feedback, I’d like to offer the following advice to judges and people’s voice voters to help eliminate bias:

Webby Judges: please place more weight on site usability and repeat visit likelyhood. Ask yourself, “is this a site that I would come back to?” As a judge, I find it tempting to let the first-visit “wow” factor play too big of a role, especially considering the number of sites we look at. For my vote, sites have to do more than just dazzle me with flash eye-candy.

People’s Voice Voters: please don’t vote just for the sites you are familiar with. Take the time to visit the other sites. Sometimes the best site for a given category isn’t one you are familiar with. Use the awards as a way to discover some great new sites.

Sometimes being so entrenched in the search industry, it is easy to forget how skewed people’s thoughts are regarding search engines. Even people who work for Web companies that rely on SEO & word-of-mouth for all their new traffic. Here’s a great example from my work the other day when discussing article titles:

“There is also a difference between writing for a search engine crawler and a real person. What is attractive to the search engine may not be the same thing as what is engaging to a person.”

I have a feeling she is not alone. Some people think of the search engine as literally an engine or a robot or an appliance. They have trouble understanding why we spend so much time worrying about it and probably hate this non-human thing that rules so many decisions.

Here’s what I told her:

• In my 10+ years of doing SEO, I’ve never written an article for a search crawler.
• Don’t think of a search engine as an appliance or device. Think of it as real people. For example, if you called me on the phone, I wouldn’t think of that conversation as a conversation with a telephone wire – it was a conversation with you!
• There’s no better indicator of what people want, then what they search for and the words they use.

It’s true that SEOs will format a page or architect a site a certain way to aid in search crawlability, but when writing an article, good SEO’s think more about the user, the ways users think about and search for the content (keywords), and then various factors that play into ranking algorithms (which includes engagement more and more each day).

People scan headlines or titles. Titles should include the keywords, concisely tell the user what they are about to read and be attractive enough to draw them in. You can sometimes get away with creative headlines (especially when teamed with images), but in order for an article to have legs (last beyond the one-time editorial push) they should be SEO-friendly and click-through friendly.

The title of this post is a bit silly. Search engines aren’t human. But they do represent humans. Hundreds of millions of them. There’s no better indicator of how humans think or what they are looking for then the searches executed on these “engines.”

The WSJ reports that CD sales for the first three months this year are 20% down from last year. Though digital music purchases are up about 50% Y/Y, overall music industry revenues are said to be down about 25% Y/Y. It appears the RIAA’s lawsuit bully tactics are having a reverse effect on sales. From the Journal:

The sharp slide in sales of CDs, which still account for more than 85% of music sold, has far eclipsed the growth in sales of digital downloads, which were supposed to have been the industry’s salvation… In recent weeks, the music industry has posted some of the weakest sales it has ever recorded. This year has already seen the two lowest-selling No. 1 albums since… 1991.

Whether the music industry likes it or not, things are only going to get worse. The good news is that people still like music—maybe more than ever. What’s really changing here is that those who had control over distribution are losing control. More and more, the middlemen can be cut out and small bands (much like small businesses on the Web) can reach a worldwide audience without incurring much in the way of costs.

The movie industry has just started feeling the sting of a digital world. As it becomes clearer and clearer that Hollywood’s monopoly over movie distribution lessens, Hollywood will be tempted to take control of the inevitable movement towards new distribution models. Hollywood would be smart to learn from RIAA’s mistakes and take a more participatory role in giving people movies the way they want them, at fair prices. $20 New Release DVDs and $10 movie theater tickets may sell for now, but I don’t see that lasting long.

Far too often I hear people quoting Alexa data. Even last week, at the 2007 Omniture Summit I witnessed Tim O’Reilly using Alexa charts to prove Web 2.0 success in front of 1,000 smart web analytics professionals. I know I couldn’t have been the only person in the crowd to notice. For Tim’s benefit, and anyone else who uses Alexa Data, please take note:

ALEXA DATA IS TREMENDOUSLY FLAWED

I touched on this in a competitive intelligence metrics post back in October, showing that Alexa’s data is less accurate to determining true site traffic then the # of characters the domain name, but now I’d like to really illustrate how far off Alexa’s data is.

Many people have pointed out Alexa’s data is biased towards a certain crowd and can be manipulated (see the links at the bottom of this post), but none have illustrated the margin of error that I’m about to. Below I take a look at two very different sites with very different traffic stats.

Site 1: Allrecipes – Allrecipes is a leading food site – as you might expect, Allrecipes users are similar to what you might see on the Internet as a whole, though slightly more female.

Site 2: SEOMoz – SEOMoz is a site that caters to the SEO and online marketing community – a crowd more likely to install the Alexa toolbar.

Using Alexa, you might conclude that SEOMoz receives more traffic than Allrecipes:

Alexa Reach Chart:

Alexa Rank Chart:

Both sites are very popular within their target audience, but despite what Alexa may show, Allrecipes has much more traffic. Let’s face it, more people cook food, then perform SEO! In fact, if you were to populate the above charts with actual data, SEOMoz would be a flat sliver near the x-axis. Here’s some real data from Dec. ‘06:

Allrecipes Unique Visitors: 11,023,187
SEOMoz Unique Visitors: 102,523

If you were to use Alexa charts to draw conclusions about either site based off real numbers for one site, your traffic estimates would be off by approximately 11,842%. Numbers that big are often difficult to grasp, so I like to put it in perspective. A mistake of that magnitude is the equivalent of:

• The CIA mixing up the population of Ohio for China.
• Your accountant saying you owe $1,000 to the IRS, when you really owe $119,417.
• A cop pulling you over for doing 60 in a 30, when you were really going half-a-mile-per-hour.
• Telling your spouse you’ll be home in three hours, then showing up 15 days later.

These are mistakes that none of us could get away with, so why should we let Alexa?

I’m not the first to prove Alexa data is flawed. Here are links to other Alexa skeptics:
Peter Norvig, Paul Stamatiou, Josh Pigford, Matt Cutts, Rand Fishkin (thanks for the data!), Greg Linden, Bruce Stewart, Alex Iskold, John Chow, and Markus Frind.

I remember about a year ago I was desperately searching for data on how people printed pages on the web. The reason I was curious, is because I noticed flash ads would often mess up pages printed straight from the browser, often not printing the content of the pages. This is a bad user experience which could cause visitors to start using a competitor’s site instead.

Unfortunately, I was unable to locate any studies. I thought with the millions of sites that have “printer friendly pages” that someone would have published the results. I decided to do the research myself and slip it into a survey during some pre-redesign research for a top 150 website. I surveyed over 2,000 users, asking them how they printed pages on the web. The results may surprise you.

Here are the results:
When printing articles or pages on the Web:

• 19% of users use File > Print in their browser
• 63.1% of users use the printer-friendly links on the page
• 2.5% of users use the Control-P command on their keyboard
• 12.3% of users copy and paste the text into Word
• 3.1% of users copy and paste the text into an email or other application

A couple notes about the survey participants. The site this was conducted on would be considered a sampling of the average Internet user. A site catering to web-savvy users would have different results. The site has also long had “printer-friendly” links, so long-time users would be more likely to use them. To remove some of the long-term user bias, here are the same results but filtered by only users who have used the site for less than 3 months (over 375 users).

Here are the results for newer users:
When printing articles or pages on the Web:

• 25.3% of users use File > Print in their browser
• 49% of users use the printer-friendly links on the page
• 3.1% of users use the Control-P command on their keyboard
• 17.5% of users copy and paste the text into Word
• 5% of users copy and paste the text into an email or other application

I realize a survey isn’t the most accurate method to get at this data, but this data is difficult to collect any other way because it is impossible to track anything other then the printer-friendly pages of a site without conducting an expensive in-person behavioral study (preferably on the users own computer).

If you know of any other research on this topic, please share it in the comments.

I believe there is an untapped opportunity in video disbtribution for local news stations. When it comes to unexpected events, news station camera crews can not possibly be in the right place at the right time. If someone were to build a video upload service aimed towards local news syndication, I think many stations would be willing be interested in buying rights to the videos.

There are plenty of sites that facilitate the sale of video clips, but I have yet to see one target distribution to television stations. For example, take a look at this video from Oregon after yesterday’s storm hit:

Oregon Drivers Crashing on Slick Streets Video

I imagine the person who captured this video had to go out of their way to get the video to the news station (hopefully they didn’t drive down that street). The local news station may have paid them a small amount of money, then distributed it to their sister stations. Imagine if the user could have uploaded the video to a site, set their own price and let anyone pick up rights to use it or pay extra for exclusive rights.

News stations desperate for video could simply visit the site, preview the video in a flash player, download the video and edit it as they please. Far too often news stations lack video so they pull out old videos or play the same exact video throughout the day, over and over and over. My wife has been filmed working in the lab and I can’t tell you how many times we’ve seen the same video clip used for every DNA-related piece of news for the past four years. The video distribution service I’m imagining would not only connect traditional media with user-generated videos via the web, but it would be in a good position when the lines between the web and T.V. continue to blur.