There's been somewhat of a furor over the news that some large companies are using Google+ not as the "social hangout" that the large search engine purports wanting it to be, but as a tool for actually affecting search engine rankings and getting more of an SEO push on their own online presence. Starbucks was one company admitting to using Google+ for SEO purposes while "The Economist" was another.
In the article, Chandra Magee, a senior marketing executive at the Economist, stated that they recognized the ability for the social network to get their company in front of new users, but a big impetus in using it was to enhance their efforts at search engine optimization (SEO). SEO is the art of manipulating the Google algorithm to get your company featured high in the search results for certain targeted keywords.
There are several ways that Google Plus helps in this effort. As Magee highlighted in the interview, many of the Google+ posts actually rank themselves quite highly in the search engines. This is consistent with the very noticeable way that Google ranks its own properties such a Youtube videos and Blogger blogs higher in its search results than competing properties. There are many people crying foul at this practice because it brings up serious antitrust issues.
There has been quite a lot of push-back from users it seems after Google started requiring a Google Plus account to comment on YouTube videos. Many have stopped using the service altogether to avoid the big G from tracking their whereabouts across all the Google products like Gmail, YouTube and Google+. Some just see it as a minor inconvenience and continue on.
Each of these posts points searchers to the main site, creating some impressive SEO juice. Regardless of any talk about general fairness, Google wants its properties to rank well, meaning a Google+ post is going to be seen favorably since it gives Google more publicity in addition to the company putting up that particular post. This is the loophole "The Economist" is using - pushing Google's own self interest to help rank their own posts.
In the article, Chandra Magee, a senior marketing executive at the Economist, stated that they recognized the ability for the social network to get their company in front of new users, but a big impetus in using it was to enhance their efforts at search engine optimization (SEO). SEO is the art of manipulating the Google algorithm to get your company featured high in the search results for certain targeted keywords.
There are several ways that Google Plus helps in this effort. As Magee highlighted in the interview, many of the Google+ posts actually rank themselves quite highly in the search engines. This is consistent with the very noticeable way that Google ranks its own properties such a Youtube videos and Blogger blogs higher in its search results than competing properties. There are many people crying foul at this practice because it brings up serious antitrust issues.
There has been quite a lot of push-back from users it seems after Google started requiring a Google Plus account to comment on YouTube videos. Many have stopped using the service altogether to avoid the big G from tracking their whereabouts across all the Google products like Gmail, YouTube and Google+. Some just see it as a minor inconvenience and continue on.
Each of these posts points searchers to the main site, creating some impressive SEO juice. Regardless of any talk about general fairness, Google wants its properties to rank well, meaning a Google+ post is going to be seen favorably since it gives Google more publicity in addition to the company putting up that particular post. This is the loophole "The Economist" is using - pushing Google's own self interest to help rank their own posts.
About the Author:
Facebook.com - FB Easy is a social media site aimed at uncovering the advantages & disadvantages by providing an insightful FB Easy Review.
Tidak ada komentar:
Posting Komentar