Lets talk "An Ethical Approach to Search Engine Marketing"!!
Here is a page explaining the subject. I have no affiliation with the site but find the content of the page very interesting:
What is spam?
"Spamming" or "spamdexing" a search property is any practice that devalues the integrity and relevance of a search property's results. Search properties that discover someone using technology that surprises them, offends their sense of fair play, or leads search engines to believe that the practitioner has gained an "unfair" advantage over someone else is considered spam.
...leads search engines to believe that the practitioner has gained an "unfair" advantage over someone else is considered spam.
What exactly does that mean?
It strikes me as the sort of "catch all" clause that people use to make up the rules as they go along!
Search engine rankings are bound to encourage competition. It's a very thin line between "unfair" (in the sense of sour grapes) and "someone else doing a better job".
I certainly wouldn't like to be the poor chap at Google who keeps getting all these "my competitor's breaking the rules" type emails!
Cheers,
Charlie.
P.S. Surely if ever there was a term that meant different things to different people it's "ethics".
It could be argued, for example, that preselling was "unethical" unless all affiliate links were accompanied by a statement such as "if you buy through this link, I will get $X commission".
A bit extreme? Maybe, but editorial and advertising never mixed well in the paper media, so what's so different online? _________________ "Before I speak, I have something important to say."
- Groucho Marx
Hmm, last time I visited the KSB site, it recommended you rewrite your content. Just because people choose to not do so isn't a fault of the product.
Likewise, the creation of junk pages can easily be done with SBI, and is done. Again, this isn't a product fault. Furthermore, BOTH products recommend you use keywords and similar linking concepts in order to achieve high rankings.
Hmm, last time I visited the KSB site, it recommended you rewrite your content. Just because people choose to not do so isn't a fault of the product.
Likewise, the creation of junk pages can easily be done with SBI, and is done. Again, this isn't a product fault. Furthermore, BOTH products recommend you use keywords and similar linking concepts in order to achieve high rankings.
Agreed, however, SBI doesn't give you garbage articles to be included in your site automatically. You need to create the content, be it junk, spam, or quality content.
KSB does however promote on the basis of hundreds of free content articles that you can automatically include in your site. That's where the problem lies with KSB. As I said before KSB could be a quality product if the junk (MHO) content was removed entirely and people were forced to build their own content as SBI requires.
KSB gave the users a path to follow, as does SBI, however, KSB's path is potentially strewn with what dogs leave behind. Again, MHO.
Debs _________________ Learn how to turn keyphrases into quality, well-targeted articles your visitors and SE's will love with Gary Antosh's new ebook "Web Content Made Easy!"
Posted: Thu Sep 04, 2003 4:26 am Post subject: Re: Guilty as charged, but...
Quote:
Unfortunately, with junk sites, like those produced by KSB, the relevant sites are being pushed down.
No offense is meant here, but, who decides if a site is relevent? You? Me? Relevent to what? People have a right to create sites about pretty much whatever they wish. They have no obligation to provide informative, content-driven sites. Not everyone is trying to make a buck on the net, and junk sites, whether you like them or not, have just as much right to be listed as any other site.
Posted: Thu Sep 04, 2003 12:15 pm Post subject: Re: Guilty as charged, but...
Hello everyone.
Debs wrote:
Unfortunately, with junk sites, like those produced by KSB, the relevant sites are being pushed down.
Anonymous wrote:
No offense is meant here, but, who decides if a site is relevent? You? Me? Relevent to what?
Debs, I think it's one thing to condemn the generic pages created by KSB, but Anonymous hit's the nail on the head for me, when it comes to "relevancy".
Google (and the other SEs) go out of their way to create algorithms and filters to deliver results that they think searchers most appreciate, so let's leave any "censorship" to them. They've proved very good at it, thus far!
Also, regarding the cult of the content site...
As I touched on before, isn't there something slightly underhand (dare I say "unethical") about creating "helpful content" with the sole premeditated intention of promoting affiliate links (and probably taking active steps to disguise them in the process).
I'm far from certain I want to see the www of the future dominated by sites of this kind, either.
Just my opinion,
Charlie. _________________ "Before I speak, I have something important to say."
- Groucho Marx
I never meant to say that sites cannot be created the way anyone would want them to be, or censorship was something we should support.
It's interesting to see the perception both of you took from my posts, I had no idea it would read that way ... my apologies.
Part of my concern comes from a searchers point of view, and the frustration I feel when I am looking for information and get a site that is just a bunch of sentences, that make no sense, with keyword phrases. That is what I mean by relevancy ... how does this page help me? It doesn't because it provides no information.
When I am searching for a product to buy, and know what I want, then maybe it would ... but I feel "taken" when I arrive at a site and find repetitive content such as that provided by KSB. I don't necessarily know its an affiliate site, and if the content is junk, I don't even look for a buy button or cart, I just hit the back button and go looking for a site that is IMHO more professional where I would trust my credit card information.
Basically, my biggest complaint, is more about how newbies to online marketing can be drawn into spending money on questionable products than anything else I think. Now I always buy online with "Buyer Beware" in my vision so I take the risk. But when I started out wanting to do online marketing, I was a sucker. I just hate to see people starting out on the wrong path and getting discouraged because they happened to pick a product that could be questionable. _________________ Learn how to turn keyphrases into quality, well-targeted articles your visitors and SE's will love with Gary Antosh's new ebook "Web Content Made Easy!"
I shall write in general without aiming at a specific product(s).
The main question here is whether a webmaster provide misleading, irrelevant or junk content.
I don't think that we need to go into a complex discussion to find a definition for "misleading content", "irrelevant content" or "junk content". Savvy surfers and affiliates know exactly what those terms mean in practice.
What worry me most are those friends who are new to affiliate marketing and with limited knowledge of search engine optimization and ranking. Such friends might purchase or participate, in good faith, in spam-generating programs, both content-spamming and email-spamming.
And I'm not so much worried about the major search engines which have solid finance and professional staff to take care and protect their business.
The thing that make me sad is to see some "quick-profit-seekers" developing questionable programs which might destroy the reputation of the affiliate marketing market.
Posted: Thu Sep 04, 2003 3:17 pm Post subject: Re: Guilty as charged, but...
Charlie wrote:
As I touched on before, isn't there something slightly underhand (dare I say "unethical") about creating "helpful content" with the sole premeditated intention of promoting affiliate links (and probably taking active steps to disguise them in the process).
Hi Charlie,
I would prefer content sites with affiliate links than junk sites with affiliate links. If i am looking for some information, give it to me and i don't mind clicking through the affiliate links. I don't pay less if i buy directly. So in my opinion there is nothing underhanded about it. You give me what i want and i give you what you want. Of course, i buy from affiliates i trust. Many people think that affiliates need not have any product. Actually an affiliates product is trust and reputation. You should try to get the visitors trust. Trust and reputation are the lifeline of affiliate business. Even if they give out junk through their site, it shows through. So any affiliate in their right mind will not want to cheat the visitor into clicking. If not it sure does show through.
Quote:
I'm far from certain I want to see the www of the future dominated by sites of this kind, either.
So what other type of sites can you think of ? If you leave that out, you may find that not many people will be willing to do the research for you or even develop content to help you. They have their job and so may not concentrate much on this. Maybe a few will, but it will be that - very few. So the net might get dominated by merchant sites and few content sites. Of course many will be doing websites on the subjects of their interests. But we will also be missing out on many others who may have put in their time if they can earn some money through it. So any day, I would prefer content sites with affiliate links than junk sites.
Joined: 01 Aug 2003 Posts: 1126 Location: London, England
Posted: Thu Sep 04, 2003 4:09 pm Post subject:
Hi Gana,
I must say I very much agree with just about everything in your post.
As Charlie says it could be construed as " creating "helpful content" with the sole premeditated intention of promoting affiliate links" but then the same could be said for all forms and methods of business.
As a side issue to the point in discussion, the KSB pages that I have seen always strike me as being too keyword rich. I very tempted to copy a KSB page and run it through SBI's "Analyze It " to see the result.
I could be wrong but I've a feeling that it would be returned with the suggestion to remove XX keywords. Still, by all accounts, some KSB pages rank rather well.
Joined: 14 Jul 2003 Posts: 1761 Location: Bangor, Maine
Posted: Thu Sep 04, 2003 4:57 pm Post subject:
The KSB pages that rank well are probably those that the designer modified to suit their needs. Not the blanket KSB pages straight out of the duplicator. _________________ Eric D. Burdo They Made $6,513 a day With Clickbank Doing This...
I would prefer content sites with affiliate links than junk sites with affiliate links. If i am looking for some information, give it to me and i don't mind clicking through the affiliate links. I don't pay less if i buy directly. So in my opinion there is nothing underhanded about it. You give me what i want and i give you what you want. Of course, i buy from affiliates i trust.
Junk sites might be an irritating nuisance, but surely you can instantly dismiss them as, well... junk. The problem comes with sites that seem authoritative and impartial, but aren't. (See my comments later.)
Secondly, I think the issue of whether or not people prefer to buy through affiliate links per se, is another issue altogether. (Let's leave that one for another thread!)
Thirdly, if you discover an information site through a SE (as was being discussed here), this is probably a new encounter. How does "trust" apply, if there is no existing relationship to base it on?
Gana wrote:
So what other type of sites can you think of ? If you leave that out, you may find that not many people will be willing to do the research for you or even develop content to help you. They have their job and so may not concentrate much on this.
Why do people create these sites? To help other people, or to earn money? Come on, be honest!
This is the whole problem... surely it's idealistic self-delusion to expect complete impartiality where money is involved.
Also, you seem to be assuming that everyone is a part-timer trying to earn a bit of cash on the side. (Shh! Don't tell the taxman. ) What about those of us who actually do this as a full time job?
Larry wrote:
As Charlie says it could be construed as " creating "helpful content" with the sole premeditated intention of promoting affiliate links" but then the same could be said for all forms and methods of business.
Sorry Larry, I can't agree with that...
As far as I am concerned, at least when I read a sales letter, I know they are trying to sell me something, and I'm healthily suspicious! It's up front. What makes these sort of preselling affilliate link-embedded sites a potential problem as an information seeker/prospective buyer, is that the authority, credibility and impartiality of the page creator are so hard to guage.
I put it to you that it is the best preseller, not "the most honest reviever" who makes the most money from these sites.
Yes, I use presell info pages with affiliate links myself, and yes, I try to be honest and as impartial as I can, but I have to be honest and admit I do it for the money first and foremost. Isn't it better to admit this up front, than trying to take the "holier than thou attitude" that sites not created the SBI! way are somehow inferior and less deserving of success?
At the end of the day, aren't most of us here to learn to make more money, rather than become more efficient at providing other people with the best information available out of the kindness of our hearts?
Just trying to clarify my opinion,
Charlie. _________________ "Before I speak, I have something important to say."
- Groucho Marx
Joined: 01 Aug 2003 Posts: 1126 Location: London, England
Posted: Thu Sep 04, 2003 8:18 pm Post subject:
Hi Charlie,
Quote:
Sorry Larry, I can't agree with that...
As far as I am concerned, at least when I read a sales letter, I know they are trying to sell me something, and I'm healthily suspicious! It's up front. What makes these sort of preselling affilliate link-embedded sites a potential problem as an information seeker/prospective buyer, is that the authority, credibility and impartiality of the page creator are so hard to guage.
OK, I'll concede that you've got a point there. What I meant was that we are all selling something, and therefore have self interest at heart. This is not to say that I in any way condone misleading anyone, and I don't think that information/content pages do that, affiliate links or no.
Congratulations to you on being a full time marketer, I hope to be one myself before too many more wrinkles, but why is a part timer less honest about tax than a full time one? I know one or two self employed blokes (not in Internet marketing) that are earning several times my income but are paying far less tax! Maybe I did ought to inform the taxman what I'm up to, I've spent out far more than I've earned, so I might be in for a nice rebate.
And I don't think anyone is saying that SBI is the one true path, just that KSB seems to have some shortcomings.
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum
Your host: Allan Gardyne. Earning a good living from affiliate
programs since 1998.
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Private Messages
Log in
