If we regulated ourselves…
No doubt most of you will have read the techcrunch article by now, proposing that it’s time to regulate search marketing , and quite possibly dismissed it like I did. The article does make some good points around google dominance, but makes unworkable conclusions.
As a generalisation, I don’t agree with regulation (or most forms of government interference for that matter), and I much prefer voluntary industry standards boards that have some ‘teeth’.
For those that haven’t seen my Youmoz comment, my basic suggestion was to create a body which, if we all threw our weight behind it, could gain awareness with clients and enforce standards to it’s members. I don’t pretend the idea wouldn’t be extremely difficult to implement practically , but the theory of what ’standards’ we should work to is interesting.
I’ve spent time on both sides of the fence (agency & client side) as well as my own consulting, so I’d like to think I’m not too biased either way. Here are some of the things I’d like to see stamped out of ‘mainstream’ seo agencies that I think standards would be ideal for :
Risk Taking with clients money & brands
Probably my number 1 bugbear with SEO agencies is when they employ risky techniques risking either a clients brand, or their substantial link budget without making the client aware of the risk element. Many companies will operate with agencies in a 3 month or similar trial period before committing to a longer term, which leads many agencies doing anything possible to lift traffic in time for their review. Unbalanced anchor text profiles or buying links from big brokers are usually used to achieve this, since both can work in the short term and sometimes only get penalised by a manual review or major algo shift later down the line.
It wouldn’t be easy for any independent standards board to call out agencies for doing this since it’s difficult to prove it was the agency doing this activity. A further complication is that clients have different appetites for risk and in some cases clients actually want their agencies to do this stuff. Either way, promoting the importance of this conversation taking place is worthwhile in itself.
Misleading advertising
Ok, so this applies to almost every trade known, but I suspect we are known to be worse than average for this – Probably on par with Banks & APR’s. There are many forms of miss-selling in SEO that I’ve seen is the cheeky way some agencies pitch PPC as SEO. Where this is the case, it’s really simple – no agency or consultant taking advantage of this type of confusion should be able to obtain/retain membership of such a body. Claiming affiliation with Google , due to having GAP qualified individuals should also be stamped out.
Unethical/illegal practises
I’m all for Grey or Blackhats (if that’s what the client actually wants), but I do have a problem with things that negatively affect other people, and I don’t think they have a place in SEO. I’m talking the extreme tactics here – hacking sites to add invisible links, or emailing companies asking them to switch links while pretending to be the client. Comment spam, while not particularly extreme or unusual, also didn’t ought to be a part of mainstream SEO – it’s a pain to moderate/cleanup and can carry penalties for the blog if it slips through.
So there’s my assortment of rants, what would you like to see stamped out? and would it really make a difference to our perception as an industry, or should we just get on with being snake oil salespeople?
I left a comment on youmoz that was deleted (which is what I get for replying to a double post when Rebecca isn’t there to keep things in order)which touched on this.
Going back to the mid 90’s there was a big uproar, watchdog got involved and everything, over builders and plumbers, the pre web snake oil salesmen. Large groups had got together and created self regulating bodies, which was all well and good, but they couldn’t all agree on the rules, so a number of bodies was put in place. This first stage was done by reputable co’s with good intentions,a nd they proudly displayed their membership on their yellow pages ad’s.
It didn’t take long before the bodgit&scarpers realised they could set up their own professional body, with a membership of one, and display that on their yellow pages ad. Consumers didn’t know the difference and the whole process was a waste.
I am convinced that an SEO self regulation would be doomed to be history repeating itself.
@Yoshimi_s
Interesting point Sarah, there are a lot of fly by nighters or inexperienced types out there still which could scupper this well intentioned plan, however if there was a champion of the cause with enough weight in the industry to kick the others out there might be hope…
I think the main problem as you’ve pointed out is getting a body which is instantly recognisable to someone who is not an SEO geek…
P.S. Great first post Matt! Did someone say you’ll be writing one a week?
Interesting article. I think best practice guidelines would be great, I can’t count the number of times I’ve heard ropey SEO companies try to lure in clients with nonsense claims of keyword positioning (“We got position one for ‘long green pleasure boats!’”) and anything that calms down these dodgy selling practices can only be a good thing.
I agree with your point about the risky strategies, unfortunately I think most agencies don’t have the time to try this kind of thing in their R&D allotment, so end up running these things with real activity for real clients and hope for the best.
I think most of these dodgy selling techniques, etc. can only be stopped by the buyers being more knowledgeable of their area – I know that probably defeats the object, but a client that at least knows the difference between black and white hat, and knows what good natural results are is much less likely to end up becoming a victim of one of these methods.
@stuartpturner
Really though Stu, that’s a complete catch 22, the only people who would want that job would have to be crazy, and no one who was crazy would be given the job
@Yoshimi_s
Hmm, maybe you’re right Sarah – you never know though. Some people actually want to be health and safety officers, and that job is like being the fun police.
@Adam Tudor
Hey Adam,
I think that’s the point really, we (as in SEOs who actually do it professionally) have industry best practice guidelines of a sort, but communicating that to a client in a simple, consistent fashion is very hard when you are coupling it with an explanation of what SEO is and how it works and why you can’t give an exact date when you will rank number 1.
In some cases there is so much explanation to do that I don’t think client education is an option – a lot will hire an agency becuase they don’t want to know about it, they just want the results. That’s where you get real value from an independent regulatory body; the independent ’stamp of approval’.
I think the main barrier to any central or govt sponsored regulation is that there is no real will to look into this, no real expertise to get to grips with this and no money to fund it. So much in SEO is subjective, and disputes between agencies or agencies and clients would be very hard to resolve. The fast pace of change in the industry and the slow pace of regulatory implementation are at odds with each other.. by the time the regulations are put in palce they would likely be out of date.
I think in reality it is just an impossible task, the only real protection a site owner can gain is through gaining an understanding of how SEO works to help them make informed decisons about the use of outsourced assistance.
Perhaps what is really needed is “online buying consultants” that is people who are familiar and well versed in online marketing (including ppc, SEO, SMO, affiliates & display) who charge a fixed fee to work with companies to help guide them in the buying decision, but who are independant from any agencies and don’t conduct any marketing themselves.
Then again, that’s just another cost to the business, and IMO it’s the ones looking for a cheap and easy fix who get taken in so they are the least liekly to look for help (for that matter would those types of customer bother checking a companies accreditations before they got burned?)
I dont think regulation is the key, and in any case shouldnt design agencies and design studios be the first to undergo such a reform as theres much a do in this longer standing arena.
Regulation is the cry of technologists who put SEO/SEM under the remit of an IT based service, a mistake often made as its Marketing. Too often i hear Developers whinge and whine about SEO as if its a finite service with a definate outcome, sure its programatic in its nature but unlike development the variables and platform are shifting, theres no real defined process (google wont make it as easy as a+b=c) instead it relies on intuition and fuzzy guidelines.