I Don’t Care What Google Thinks I Should Do With My Content

Posted on July 6, 2009 by Comments Off

Tac Anderson, Digital Consulting Director

I’d like to ask your forgiveness while I reuse an overused analogy here.

If your only marketing objective is to drive awareness of your message then why do you drive people to a site?

This is like going to a cocktail party and trying to get a girl to come back to your place for small talk.

If there’s no conversion, no purchase, no download, then why do you care if someone comes to your site to get that message? I would argue that in many cases it would be better if they didn’t come to your site to find the message.

When I asked Steve Rubel why he decided not to keep both his Life Stream and his blog, his initial response was because Google penalizes you for duplicate content.

I was kind of surprised that was his reason. I haven’t worried about duplicate content or SEO in general for my blog in almost a year. The only two “stats” I really care about are RSS subscriber numbers (because I don’t think RSS is dead) and comments, be they comments on the blog, Twitter, FriendFeed or somewhere else. (BTW if you haven’t, please feel free to subscribe to my RSS feed.)

Other than my own name I don’t care anymore what key words I rank highest for. If this site were trying to sell something or run advertising, then I’d care.

I care more about people reading my next post than I do about who read my last post.

And I don’t really care if they do that here or somewhere else.

And if Google’s not smart enough to tell the difference between good content repurposed on a good site, versus good content scraped on a spam site, then that’s their problem, not mine.

My personal take is that I want my content all over the place. That’s why you’ll see this post on my life stream, on my blog and on the Thinkers and Doers blog. My blog is the main source, it’s why I wrote it, but it’s also relevant to those other sites. You’ll also see this post on Social Media Today and My Venture Pad. Plus if you or your company is a subscriber to Lexis Nexis or Thomas Reuters or you have a Kindle, you can find my blog, which is syndicated throughNewstex.

If that penalizes me in Google, then so be it.

Image via my Flickr Stream

This post was originally posted on New Comm Biz

Reblog this post [with Zemanta]

eMusic and Ambient Influence

Posted on June 4, 2009 by Comments Off

Nathan Misner, Vice President of Digital Strategies

If you’ve been following this blog for a while you’ve got a passing familiarity with the concept of ambient influence: the news/content/information that we lead with is going to be informed and morphed by constituent conversations, the social nature of the web memes that naturally develop.

eMusicFrom Techdirt today we get this gem — a good example of ambient influence in action and the wrong way to try to regain control of a meme: In short, eMusic — known heretofore as a cool indie music e-commerce site, announced that Sony would be the first major label to make music available on their site. In short order they also announced a price increase for the cost of downloading music, leading customers to believe that the addition to the big bad major label to the catalog was the cause of the price increase.

Users were, um, not happy, and pretty vocal. No surprise. Hundreds posted to the comments section of eMusic and used the hashtag #emusicfail in posts to the site and on Twitter. This in and of itself could probably be managed by being transparent in the messaging, responding about the reasons of an increase in pricing. Ambient influence in full effect. Communicators need to be flexible enough to refine campaigns based on engagement and conversations happening “out there.”

Unfortunately that’s not what happened here. How did eMusic manage this potentially simple communications fix?

“It apparently made them disappear.

commenter on our post, pointed us to a comment on the eMusic blog noting that all of the comments that mentioned the Twitter tag had been deleted by eMusic — not only wiping out signs of the protest, but also screwing up the numbers of comments, which made the conversation confusing, since people are referring to other comments with the wrong number now.
So, rather than address the fact that there are a ton of angry protesters, eMusic simply decided to pretend they don’t exist? It’s hard to see that ending well.”

I’ll say that again.

← Back to WaggenerEdstrom.com