<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" media="screen" href="/~d/styles/rss2enclosuresfull.xsl"?><?xml-stylesheet type="text/css" media="screen" href="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~d/styles/itemcontent.css"?><rss xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/" xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/" xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/" xmlns:media="http://search.yahoo.com/mrss/" xmlns:itunes="http://www.itunes.com/dtds/podcast-1.0.dtd" xmlns:feedburner="http://rssnamespace.org/feedburner/ext/1.0" version="2.0">

<channel>
	<title>Search Marketing, LLC.</title>
	
	<link>http://www.smseo.net</link>
	<description>Top Search Engine Rankings - Search Optimization - SEO</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sat, 27 Apr 2013 06:52:54 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en-US</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.5.1</generator>
		<atom10:link xmlns:atom10="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" href="http://feeds.feedburner.com/smseo" /><feedburner:info uri="smseo" /><atom10:link xmlns:atom10="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" rel="hub" href="http://pubsubhubbub.appspot.com/" /><media:category scheme="http://www.itunes.com/dtds/podcast-1.0.dtd">Technology</media:category><itunes:explicit>no</itunes:explicit><itunes:subtitle>Top Search Engine Rankings - Search Optimization - SEO</itunes:subtitle><itunes:category text="Technology" /><feedburner:emailServiceId>smseo</feedburner:emailServiceId><feedburner:feedburnerHostname>http://feedburner.google.com</feedburner:feedburnerHostname><item>
		<title>What’s latent semantic indexing?</title>
		<link>http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/smseo/~3/VEF6j6sDHHc/whats-latent-semantic-indexing.html</link>
		<comments>http://www.smseo.net/2010/05/06/whats-latent-semantic-indexing.html#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 06 May 2010 22:46:24 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Search Marketing, LLC.</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Search Engines...or Google]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[SEO Basics]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.smseo.net/?p=417</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The actual effect associated with latent semantic indexing (LSI) on your website rankings Latent semantic indexing (LSI) is a method which is used by all main search engines these days. Does your website take this particularly into account? How does it influence the position of your webpages within Search engine search results? What&#8217;s latent semantic [...]]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The actual effect associated with latent semantic indexing (LSI) on your website rankings</p>
<p>Latent semantic indexing (LSI) is a method which is used by all main search engines these days. Does your website take this particularly into account? How does it influence the position of your webpages within Search engine search results?</p>
<p>What&#8217;s latent semantic indexing?</p>
<p>LSI means that the search engines attempts in order to associate particular terms along with ideas when indexing webpages. For instance, Paris and Hilton are associated with a woman rather than a town plus a hotel, Tiger and Woods are usually related to golf.</p>
<p>To discover which other keywords Google finds related to a keyword, visit a key phrase and give a tilde before it. Search engines may indicate the actual related keywords in bold on the outcome page. It appears that Google finds the word &#8220;Nokia&#8221; associated with &#8220;phone&#8221;.</p>
<p>How does Google match keywords along with certain concepts?</p>
<p>Google offers billions of web pages within it&#8217;s catalog. If Google finds that many webpages contain both the word Paris and the term Hilton after that Search engines might presume these keywords refer to one another, so terms on these pages might provide Search engines the idea this special word combination is about a female.</p>
<p>Words that frequently show up very close to each other could get tighter connection. Search engines have a lot of information that allows them to determine the connection between different words.</p>
<p>What does this mean for the position of the webpages within Search engine results?</p>
<p>If you want to be listed for several key phrases, you must show Search engines that your site is relevant to a certain topic. There are several things that you can do to improve the actual relevancy associated with your website for a topic:</p>
<p>1. Enhance different webpages associated with your site for different keywords</p>
<p>If you&#8217;re focusing on the search phrase &#8220;used cars&#8221; it&#8217;s also wise to create webpages which are relevant to the actual keywords &#8220;auto&#8221;, &#8220;suv&#8221;, and so on.</p>
<p>The greater pages associated with your website that are relevant to a particular subject, the much more likely this is your webpages will be listed for keywords which are based on this topic. Make sure that keywords appear in the right elements in your web pages.</p>
<p>2. Get links through semantically appropriate pages</p>
<p>If you are selling vehicles then your &#8220;Cars&#8221; web page which links to your site shouldn&#8217;t be about the movie. Hyperlinks through topically associated webpages will be semantically beneficial to your website.</p>
<p>The link to your website that develops from a web page that contains hyperlinks with other web pages that deal with the same topic includes a greater effect on the actual ratings of your site a hyperlink from the web page that links to totally different webpages and your site.</p>
<p>Because of this, this is important that you try to obtain hyperlinks from associated websites. It is also very important that you submit your site to the right category in Web sites. If your site shows up within the wrong class, this could possess a negative impact in your rankings.</p>
<p>3. Use a sensible site architecture</p>
<p>Use a reasonable program to organize your website content. Create content material parts which deal with different parts of most of your topic and ensure that everything that relates to your topic is mentioned on your webpages.</p>
<p>Ensure that your own web pages are usually put in the correct groups upon your website which it&#8217;s easy to find the different categories.</p>
<p>4. Find out the reason why additional pages position better than yours</p>
<p>Should you ever wonder about why an another web page may be rated higher than yours even though your pages have been seo&#8217;ed for the search terms then you definitely ought to examine the actual inbound links from the best ranked webpages.</p>
<p>The number and also the authority of backlinks are essential. However, it&#8217;s also important the links result from semantically and topically related pages.</p>
<p>Don&#8217;t focus on just one key phrase when optimizing your own webpages. If you want to prepare your site with regard to improved search results then you have to produce a website that has been optimized for a lot of different but associated search terms.</p>
<p>Additionally, it is necessary that the links aimed at your website result from topically related webpages so that search engines like google place your site in the right niche.   We, at SMSEO.net can help you with this difficult task.   Give us a call.   </p>
<img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/smseo/~4/VEF6j6sDHHc" height="1" width="1"/>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.smseo.net/2010/05/06/whats-latent-semantic-indexing.html/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		<feedburner:origLink>http://www.smseo.net/2010/05/06/whats-latent-semantic-indexing.html</feedburner:origLink></item>
		<item>
		<title>Google Live Search (copied article, Google)</title>
		<link>http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/smseo/~3/TqNFnHdMXRY/google-live-search-copied-article-google.html</link>
		<comments>http://www.smseo.net/2010/02/25/google-live-search-copied-article-google.html#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 25 Feb 2010 22:25:35 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Search Marketing, LLC.</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Search Engines...or Google]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.smseo.net/?p=414</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The Official Google Blog &#8211; Insights from Googlers into our products, technology and the Google culture This week in search 2/21/10 2/21/2010 08:22:00 PM This is part of a regular series of posts on search experience updates that runs weekly. Look for the label This week in search and subscribe to the series. &#8211; Ed. [...]]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The Official Google Blog &#8211; Insights from Googlers into our products, technology and the Google culture</p>
<p>This week in search 2/21/10<br />
2/21/2010 08:22:00 PM<br />
This is part of a regular series of posts on search experience updates that runs weekly. Look for the label This week in search and subscribe to the series. &#8211; Ed.</p>
<p>This week, real-time search took center stage, along with a surging interest in the Winter Games in Vancouver.</p>
<p>Real-time search in Russia and Japan<br />
Since the release of real-time search in December, we&#8217;ve seen that finding real-time content — often the only source of online information at the time — can be quite profound. For example, recently when California experienced a few earthquakes, real-time content appeared in search results just seconds after the ground shook. As you can imagine, getting this functionality out to the rest of the world has been a top priority. Because of this, we recently launched real-time search with Russian and Japanese, the first of the languages we plan to support. We want to bring you this functionality globally, so stay tuned as we add more countries.</p>
<p>MySpace in real time<br />
Also in real-time news, starting this week we officially added MySpace content to real-time search. Now you can tap into the pool of news, photos and blog posts that MySpace users have chosen to publish to the world. These updates are all ranked to reflect the most relevant, freshest results, many of which are just seconds old. In all, real-time search includes more than a billion documents and processes hundreds of millions of changes daily. We&#8217;re quite excited to offer this enhancement so that real-time search becomes even more useful. You can find the MySpace updates in our real-time mode by clicking on &#8220;Show Options&#8221; and then &#8220;Updates.&#8221;</p>
<p>Example search: [myspace]</p>
<p>Better site searches for Images<br />
Based on feedback from users and webmasters, we have improved the [site:] operator for Google Images. In the past, the [site:] operator filtered based on the image URL, not based on the URL of web pages linking to the images. Now, the operator will run your search over web sites that include images, no matter where the images themselves are hosted, which removes a lot of noise from your results and gives you more control over what you&#8217;re searching for.</p>
<p>Example searches: [site:digg.com space shuttle], [site:morbidanatomy.blogspot.com], [site:flickr.com/photos/polvero]</p>
<p>Trends in searching for the Winter Games<br />
It&#8217;s been a week since the Winter Games in Vancouver began, and it&#8217;s clear you have great interest in finding out more about the games. From women&#8217;s downhill to curling rules, we&#8217;ve seen searches rise as people everywhere watch the quest for gold. Check out Google Trends to see what&#8217;s of greatest interest now.</p>
<p>Hope you enjoyed this week&#8217;s features. Stay tuned for what&#8217;s next!</p>
<img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/smseo/~4/TqNFnHdMXRY" height="1" width="1"/>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.smseo.net/2010/02/25/google-live-search-copied-article-google.html/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		<feedburner:origLink>http://www.smseo.net/2010/02/25/google-live-search-copied-article-google.html</feedburner:origLink></item>
		<item>
		<title>Google PageRank Update Toolbar 2010</title>
		<link>http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/smseo/~3/MU4wLjgzwcE/google-pagerank-update-toolbar-2010.html</link>
		<comments>http://www.smseo.net/2010/01/07/google-pagerank-update-toolbar-2010.html#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 07 Jan 2010 21:16:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Search Marketing, LLC.</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Search Engines...or Google]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.smseo.net/?p=392</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Almost exactly Similar last year, Google is pushing out a New Years PageRank Update currently. Mid-December we reported PageRank shifts or penalties and now, at hand are wide range reports of a PageRank update in the Google Toolbar. It is a Little funny, as The previous New Years, we reported in mid-December a PR Change [...]]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Almost exactly Similar last year, Google is pushing out a New Years PageRank Update currently. Mid-December we reported PageRank shifts or penalties and now, at hand are wide range reports of a PageRank update in the Google Toolbar.</p>
<p>It is a Little funny, as The previous New Years, we reported in mid-December a PR Change and afterward on December 31, 2008 we reported an approved PageRank update in the toolbar. It is almost exactly the same way this year. At present, December 31, 2009, we are reporting the 2010 New Years PageRank update.</p>
<p>The previous toolbar PageRank update prior to today was in October. Like I constantly say, Toolbar PageRank is not of significant use to SEOs. It is often months out of date and does not determine a rank of a web Site. So please do not obsess on Toolbar PageRank.</p>
<p>For individuals who saw their toolbar PageRank move up, Congratulations on the Button and here is to an even superior PR in 2010!</p>
<p>I didn&#8217;t say it was irrelevant.  I am sure Google will find a way to make it relevant or create something new we will all chase next month!</p>
<p>Good luck!</p>
<img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/smseo/~4/MU4wLjgzwcE" height="1" width="1"/>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.smseo.net/2010/01/07/google-pagerank-update-toolbar-2010.html/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		<feedburner:origLink>http://www.smseo.net/2010/01/07/google-pagerank-update-toolbar-2010.html</feedburner:origLink></item>
		<item>
		<title>Google Caffeine Update…What?</title>
		<link>http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/smseo/~3/24uKfX1q4TA/google-caffeine-update-what.html</link>
		<comments>http://www.smseo.net/2010/01/04/google-caffeine-update-what.html#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 04 Jan 2010 22:51:15 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Search Marketing, LLC.</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.smseo.net/?p=386</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The new Google Caffeine update information.]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The solitary thing that moves as fast as the Internet is the throng of competing search engines trying to render logic of it. Fresh off the launch of Microsoft’s head-turning novel search engine Bing, search giant Google has responded with the authoritative launch of Google Caffeine. Google’s take on next-generation Web search has approved the testing period, launched in one data center and will roll out little by little across the others subsequent to the holiday season.</p>
<p>For the most part users will not notice any visual changes to Google. However, behind the scenes is a further subject. Caffeine’s revamped search construct will boost the tempo of providing search results and increase Googlebot’s capability to crawl and index the Web and incorporate real-time search.</p>
<p>What is the Difference between the old and the contemporary Google algorithm?</p>
<p>PageRank plays a sizeable part in Google’s current algorithm. Google considers the quality and quantity of Web sites linking to your site a very strong indication about how valuable and pertinent you are to a particular search term. Since Caffeine will allow Google to crawl even more of the Web in a reduced amount of time, Google can instantly consider other signals besides links. Recent factors include the ratings of your organization and how users are tagging or commenting in relation to your content, especially through social media outlets such as Facebook and Twitter. With Caffeine, you will even Begin to see Twitter posts (tweets) in search engine results. Therefore, it is Crucial to Include social media into your Internet marketing Plan.</p>
<p>As every time, Google prefers mystery. They don’t desire us to know specifically how Caffeine works or what effects it will control on real-time search. At this moment, we can merely speculate on how this recent search configuration will affect your Web site.</p>
<p>While we do not anticipate Serious changes, we can expect to witness unique, informational and systematically updated content function better in the search results with Google Caffeine, especially if this content is actively engaged by users. Therefore, managing your Web site rankings on a Ongoing basis and Accumulating content continues to be a crucial aspect in your Internet strategy.</p>
<img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/smseo/~4/24uKfX1q4TA" height="1" width="1"/>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.smseo.net/2010/01/04/google-caffeine-update-what.html/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		<feedburner:origLink>http://www.smseo.net/2010/01/04/google-caffeine-update-what.html</feedburner:origLink></item>
		<item>
		<title>Don’t fake those reviews</title>
		<link>http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/smseo/~3/3m1x2UFyqnA/don%e2%80%99t-fake-those-reviews.html</link>
		<comments>http://www.smseo.net/2009/07/17/don%e2%80%99t-fake-those-reviews.html#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 17 Jul 2009 17:41:12 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator />
				<category><![CDATA[Internet Advertising]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Internet Law]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Astroturfing]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.smseo.net/?p=380</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Lifestyle Lift, a Michigan based cosmetic surgery company with 32 centers nationwide has settled a lawsuit brought by the New York Attorney General and will pay $300,000 in...]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Lifestyle Lift, a Michigan based cosmetic surgery company with 32 centers nationwide has settled a lawsuit brought by the <a href="http://www.oag.state.ny.us/media_center/2009/july/july14b_09.html">New York Attorney General</a> and will pay $300,000 in penalties for requiring their employees to write fake positive reviews about the company.</p>
<p><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Astroturfing">Astroturfing</a> as this technique has come to be known is now receiving a critical eye from state attorney generals.  Andrew Cuomo, New York’s state attorney general said in regards to the Lifestyle Lift case,  that the “attempt to generate business by duping consumers was cynical, manipulative and illegal.”</p>
<p>Reviews on sites like <a href="http://www.yelp.com/">Yelp</a>, <a href="http://www.citysearch.com/">Citysearch</a>, <a href="http://www.amazon.com/">Amazon</a>, etc. have become increasingly more important as consumers seek out biased free consumer reviews of products and companies they are thinking of doing business with.  Knowing this the temptation for a company to write glowing reviews on their own business or product is becoming ever greater.  However, with the Lifestyle Lift settlement companies need to think twice before they write their own reviews, not to mention that consumers are becoming savvier at spotting fake reviews.</p>
<p>Knowing the importance of reviews, especially in the local search market, we are encouraging our clients to seek reviews from existing customers by asking for them for a review and showing them where they can go to write a review.</p>
<img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/smseo/~4/3m1x2UFyqnA" height="1" width="1"/>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.smseo.net/2009/07/17/don%e2%80%99t-fake-those-reviews.html/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		<feedburner:origLink>http://www.smseo.net/2009/07/17/don%e2%80%99t-fake-those-reviews.html</feedburner:origLink></item>
		<item>
		<title>How PPC, SEM and SEO Work Together</title>
		<link>http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/smseo/~3/JV5Mww0lFrY/how-ppc-sem-and-seo-work-together.html</link>
		<comments>http://www.smseo.net/2009/07/15/how-ppc-sem-and-seo-work-together.html#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 15 Jul 2009 15:10:30 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator />
				<category><![CDATA[Internet Advertising]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.smseo.net/?p=372</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The financial world provides the perfect model for using PPC and SEO together to lessen risk and produce maximum results.]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Just about anyone who has an investment account, retirement account, 401k or an interest in the financial markets at any level will tell you that some investments are meant for the short term, while others are meant for the long term. A prudent investment adviser will never tell you to buy stock from only one company, but rather that you should spread out your risk by investing in a balanced portfolio consisting of many different types of investments.</p>
<p>What we know about finance and investing goes back over 200 years to the dawn of capitalism, but we&#8217;ve had only 10 to 15 years to formulate our understand of online marketing. But just because Internet marketing is relatively new doesn&#8217;t mean we can&#8217;t apply sensible prinicples and logical practices, even if we have to borrow them from another industry.</p>
<p>When we talk about investing in online marketing with our clients, we look at the full spectrum of opportunity. Pay-per-click advertising on the search engines has a short-term focus that delivers almost immediate results. Invest in a PPC campaign with a goal of data gathering, testing creative, measuring conversion, benchmarking site content, promoting upcoming events, seasonal or blow-out sales and other short-term goals. Unless your product or service involves a monthly recurring revenue model, the return on investment in PPC is extremely difficult to prove, especially given the fact that average cost per click just keeps getting more and more expensive as competition increases. Increasing costs is just one of the many reasons we never recommend that our clients rely exclusively on PPC/SEM. But the intrinsic reward of a strategically-designed pay-per-click campaign includes actionable, real-time, real-world hard data on which to base your more long-term online marketing strategies and investments.</p>
<p>In contrast to the instant gratification provided by a search engine marketing campaign, search engine optimization is the long term online marketing strategy that can provide an unlimited return on investment. Using the results and information gathered by an ongoing search marketing effort, an SEO strategy can be fine-tuned to include the optimal mix of key phrases, content, links and offers that proved most successful during the PPC tests. Armed with this knowledge, and backed by actual data on what worked best in the short term, a well-crafted SEO campaign will have the greatest likelihood of success, with the maximum possible return on investment.</p>
<p>Whereas an SEM strategy focusses on instant traffic to a site, SEO focusses on building a permanent home for the highest response keyphrases. Ultimately the two strategies work hand in hand. If you&#8217;d never make an investment without talking to a financial advisor who understands both your short-term and long-term goals, then so too should you never make an online marketing investment without talking to an SEO/SEM expert who understands your short-term and long-term marketing goals.</p>
<img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/smseo/~4/JV5Mww0lFrY" height="1" width="1"/>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.smseo.net/2009/07/15/how-ppc-sem-and-seo-work-together.html/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		<feedburner:origLink>http://www.smseo.net/2009/07/15/how-ppc-sem-and-seo-work-together.html</feedburner:origLink></item>
		<item>
		<title>Fallout from Matt Cutts noFollow Revelation</title>
		<link>http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/smseo/~3/QClQd7NHMKY/fallout-from-matt-cutt%e2%80%99s-nofollow-revelation.html</link>
		<comments>http://www.smseo.net/2009/07/10/fallout-from-matt-cutt%e2%80%99s-nofollow-revelation.html#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 10 Jul 2009 23:40:51 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator />
				<category><![CDATA[Blogging & The Blogosphere]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Search Marketing Issues]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.smseo.net/?p=359</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[During SMX Advanced 2009, Matt revealed that Google had changed the way PageRank was distributed when links on a page contained the noFollow attribute.  No longer... ]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>During SMX Advanced 2009, Matt revealed that Google had changed the way PageRank was distributed when links on a page contained the noFollow attribute.  No longer was there a benefit to <a href="http://www.mattcutts.com/blog/pagerank-sculpting/">PageRank sculpting</a> and even more of a revelation, this change was made a year ago.</p>
<p>Here is the important part of what Matt said:</p>
<blockquote><p>“So what happens when you have a page with “ten PageRank points” and ten outgoing links, and five of those links are nofollowed? Let’s leave aside the decay factor to focus on the core part of the question. Originally, the five links without nofollow would have flowed two points of PageRank each (in essence, the nofollowed links didn’t count toward the denominator when dividing PageRank by the outdegree of the page). More than a year ago, Google changed how the PageRank flows so that the five links without nofollow would flow one point of PageRank each.”</p></blockquote>
<p>Since then many in the SEO community have written about the fallout from this revelation.  Patrick from blogstorm had a great article about the effects this change could have on <a href="http://www.blogstorm.co.uk/pagerank-sculpting-blog-comments/">blog commenting</a>.  Basically if every noFollow link reduces the amount of PR the page can pass, then all a competitor would need to do is add a bunch of noFollowed links to a blog’s comments and all the followed links would lose value.</p>
<p>To deal with this some have suggested using plain html text instead of links.  For example instead of link like, our <a href="../">SEO Company</a>, just use the text our SEO Company www.smseo.net and let users copy and paste it.  Not very user friendly but addresses the concerns about noFollowed links hurting your followed links.</p>
<p>In response to all of this, <a href="http://www.davidnaylor.co.uk/blog-comments.html">Dave Naylor’s Search Marketing blog</a> has come up with an ingenious way of dealing with noFollow links along with comment spam.  If you are a regular commenter your links will be followed, if you are not you will just get plain text.</p>
<img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/smseo/~4/QClQd7NHMKY" height="1" width="1"/>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.smseo.net/2009/07/10/fallout-from-matt-cutt%e2%80%99s-nofollow-revelation.html/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		<feedburner:origLink>http://www.smseo.net/2009/07/10/fallout-from-matt-cutt%e2%80%99s-nofollow-revelation.html</feedburner:origLink></item>
		<item>
		<title>comScore Releases May 2009 U.S. Search Engine Rankings</title>
		<link>http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/smseo/~3/6pzAxKaJz7w/comscore-releases-may-2009-u-s-search-engine-rankings.html</link>
		<comments>http://www.smseo.net/2009/06/22/comscore-releases-may-2009-u-s-search-engine-rankings.html#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 22 Jun 2009 16:36:56 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Search Marketing, LLC.</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[General Marketing Topics]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.smseo.net/?p=340</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[comScore, Inc., a leader in measuring the digital world, released its monthly qSearch analysis of the search marketplace. In May 2009, Americans conducted 14.3 billion core searches.]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><strong>RESTON, VA, June 17, 2009 –</strong> comScore, Inc. (NASDAQ: SCOR), a leader in measuring the digital world, today released its monthly comScore qSearch analysis of the U.S. search marketplace. In May 2009, Americans conducted 14.3 billion core searches.</p>
<p><strong>May 2009 U.S. Core Search Rankings</strong></p>
<p>Google Sites led the U.S. core search market in April with 65.0 percent of the searches conducted, followed by Yahoo! Sites (20.1 percent), Microsoft Sites (8.0 percent), Ask Network (3.9 percent) and AOL LLC (3.1 percent).</p>
<table border="1" cellspacing="0" cellpadding="0" width="433">
<tbody>
<tr>
<td colspan="4" width="433" valign="top"><strong>comScore Core Search Report*</strong><br />
<strong>May 2009 vs. April 2009</strong><br />
<strong>Total U.S. – Home/Work/University Locations</strong><br />
<strong>Source: comScore qSearch</strong></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td rowspan="2" width="157" valign="top"><strong>Core Search Entity</strong></td>
<td colspan="3" width="276" valign="top"><strong>Share of Searches (%)</strong></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td width="96" valign="top"><strong>Apr-09</strong></td>
<td width="90" valign="top"><strong>May-09</strong></td>
<td width="90" valign="top"><strong>Point Change May-09 vs. Apr-09</strong></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td width="157" valign="top"><em>Total Core Search</em></td>
<td width="96" valign="top"><em>100.0</em></td>
<td width="90" valign="top"><em>100.0</em></td>
<td width="90" valign="top"><em>N/A</em></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td width="157" valign="top">Google Sites</td>
<td width="96" valign="top">64.2</td>
<td width="90" valign="top">65.0</td>
<td width="90" valign="top">0.8</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td width="157" valign="top">Yahoo! Sites</td>
<td width="96" valign="top">20.4</td>
<td width="90" valign="top">20.1</td>
<td width="90" valign="top">-0.3</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td width="157" valign="top">Microsoft Sites**</td>
<td width="96" valign="top">8.2</td>
<td width="90" valign="top">8.0</td>
<td width="90" valign="top">-0.2</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td width="157" valign="top">Ask Network</td>
<td width="96" valign="top">3.8</td>
<td width="90" valign="top">3.9</td>
<td width="90" valign="top">0.1</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td width="157" valign="top">AOL LLC</td>
<td width="96" valign="top">3.4</td>
<td width="90" valign="top">3.1</td>
<td width="90" valign="top">-0.3</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
<p><em>* Based on the five major search engines including partner searches and cross-channel searches. Searches for mapping, local directory, and user-generated video sites that are not on the core domain of the five search engines are not included in the core search numbers.</em></p>
<p><em>**May data does not include search activity at Microsoft Bing, which was launched on June 1. Microsoft Bing will be included with June qSearch data.</em></p>
<p>Americans conducted 14.3 billion searches at the core search engines. Google Sites accounted for 9.3 billion core searches, followed by Yahoo! Sites with 2.9 billion and Microsoft Sites with 1.1 billion.</p>
<table border="1" cellspacing="0" cellpadding="0" width="433">
<tbody>
<tr>
<td colspan="4" width="433" valign="top"><strong>comScore Core Search Report*</strong><br />
<strong>May 2009 vs. April 2009</strong><br />
<strong>Total U.S. – Home/Work/University Locations</strong><br />
<strong>Source: comScore qSearch</strong></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td rowspan="2" width="162" valign="top"><strong>Core Search Entity</strong></td>
<td colspan="3" width="271" valign="top"><strong>Search Queries (MM)</strong></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td width="91" valign="top"><strong>Apr-09</strong></td>
<td width="90" valign="top"><strong>May-09</strong></td>
<td width="90" valign="top"><strong>Percent Change May-09 vs. Apr-09</strong></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td width="162" valign="top"><em>Total Core Search</em></td>
<td width="91" valign="top"><em>14,751</em></td>
<td width="90" valign="top">14,327</td>
<td width="90" valign="top">-3</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td width="162" valign="top">Google Sites</td>
<td width="91" valign="top">9,476</td>
<td width="90" valign="top">9,307</td>
<td width="90" valign="top">-2</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td width="162" valign="top">Yahoo! Sites</td>
<td width="91" valign="top">3,008</td>
<td width="90" valign="top">2,877</td>
<td width="90" valign="top">-4</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td width="162" valign="top">Microsoft Sites**</td>
<td width="91" valign="top">1,208</td>
<td width="90" valign="top">1,149</td>
<td width="90" valign="top">-5</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td width="162" valign="top">Ask Network</td>
<td width="91" valign="top">563</td>
<td width="90" valign="top">555</td>
<td width="90" valign="top">-1</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td width="162" valign="top">AOL LLC</td>
<td width="91" valign="top">496</td>
<td width="90" valign="top">438</td>
<td width="90" valign="top">-12</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
<p><em>* Based on the five major search engines including partner searches and cross-channel searches. Searches for mapping, local directory, and user-generated video sites that are not on the core domain of the five search engines are not included in the core search numbers.</em></p>
<p><em>**May data does not include search activity at Microsoft Bing, which was launched on June 1. Microsoft Bing will be included with June qSearch data.</em></p>
<p><strong>May 2009 U.S. Expanded Search Rankings</strong></p>
<p>In the comScore May 2009 analysis of the top properties where search activity is observed, Google Sites led with 13 billion searches. Yahoo! Sites ranked second with 3 billion searches, followed by Microsoft Sites (1.2 billion) and AOL LLC (721 million).</p>
<table border="1" cellspacing="0" cellpadding="0" width="360">
<tbody>
<tr>
<td colspan="4" width="481" valign="top"><strong>comScore Expanded Search Query Report</strong><br />
<strong>May 2009 vs. April 2009</strong><br />
<strong>Total U.S. – Home/Work/University Locations</strong><br />
<strong>Source: comScore qSearch</strong></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td rowspan="2" width="212" valign="top"><strong>Expanded Search Entity</strong></td>
<td colspan="3" width="269" valign="top"><strong>Search Queries (MM)</strong></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td width="91" valign="top"><strong>Apr-09</strong></td>
<td width="91" valign="top"><strong>May-09</strong></td>
<td width="88" valign="top"><strong>Percent Change May-09 vs. Apr-09</strong></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td width="212" valign="top"><em>Total Expanded Search</em></td>
<td width="91" valign="top"><em>22,067</em></td>
<td width="91" valign="top">21,818</td>
<td width="88" valign="top">-1%</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td width="212" valign="top">Google Sites</td>
<td width="91" valign="top">13,041</td>
<td width="91" valign="top">13,035</td>
<td width="88" valign="top">0%</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td width="212" valign="top">Google</td>
<td width="91" valign="top">9,830</td>
<td width="91" valign="top">9,680</td>
<td width="88" valign="top">-2%</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td width="212" valign="top">YouTube/All Other</td>
<td width="91" valign="top">3,211</td>
<td width="91" valign="top">3,355</td>
<td width="88" valign="top">4%</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td width="212" valign="top">Yahoo! Sites</td>
<td width="91" valign="top">3,161</td>
<td width="91" valign="top">3,021</td>
<td width="88" valign="top">-4%</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td width="212" valign="top">Yahoo!</td>
<td width="91" valign="top">3,135</td>
<td width="91" valign="top">2,995</td>
<td width="88" valign="top">-4%</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td width="212" valign="top">All Other</td>
<td width="91" valign="top">26</td>
<td width="91" valign="top">26</td>
<td width="88" valign="top">0%</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td width="212" valign="top">Microsoft Sites*</td>
<td width="91" valign="top">1,250</td>
<td width="91" valign="top">1,194</td>
<td width="88" valign="top">-4%</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td width="212" valign="top">MSN-Windows Live</td>
<td width="91" valign="top">1,158</td>
<td width="91" valign="top">1,103</td>
<td width="88" valign="top">-5%</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td width="212" valign="top">Microsoft/All Other</td>
<td width="91" valign="top">92</td>
<td width="91" valign="top">91</td>
<td width="88" valign="top">-1%</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td width="212" valign="top">AOL LLC</td>
<td width="91" valign="top">795</td>
<td width="91" valign="top">721</td>
<td width="88" valign="top">-9%</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td width="212" valign="top">AOL Search Network</td>
<td width="91" valign="top">427</td>
<td width="91" valign="top">374</td>
<td width="88" valign="top">-12%</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td width="212" valign="top">MapQuest/All Other</td>
<td width="91" valign="top">368</td>
<td width="91" valign="top">347</td>
<td width="88" valign="top">-6%</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td width="212" valign="top">Ask Network</td>
<td width="91" valign="top">705</td>
<td width="91" valign="top">691</td>
<td width="88" valign="top">-2%</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td width="212" valign="top">Ask.com</td>
<td width="91" valign="top">402</td>
<td width="91" valign="top">382</td>
<td width="88" valign="top">-5%</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td width="212" valign="top">MyWebSearch.com/ All Other</td>
<td width="91" valign="top">303</td>
<td width="91" valign="top">309</td>
<td width="88" valign="top">2%</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td width="212" valign="top">craigslist, inc.</td>
<td width="91" valign="top">583</td>
<td width="91" valign="top">651</td>
<td width="88" valign="top">12%</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td width="212" valign="top">Fox Interactive Media</td>
<td width="91" valign="top">666</td>
<td width="91" valign="top">644</td>
<td width="88" valign="top">-3%</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td width="212" valign="top">MySpace Sites</td>
<td width="91" valign="top">658</td>
<td width="91" valign="top">636</td>
<td width="88" valign="top">-3%</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td width="212" valign="top">All Other</td>
<td width="91" valign="top">8</td>
<td width="91" valign="top">8</td>
<td width="88" valign="top">0%</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td width="212" valign="top">eBay</td>
<td width="91" valign="top">654</td>
<td width="91" valign="top">634</td>
<td width="88" valign="top">-3%</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td width="212" valign="top">Amazon Sites</td>
<td width="91" valign="top">188</td>
<td width="91" valign="top">185</td>
<td width="88" valign="top">-2%</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td width="212" valign="top">Facebook.com</td>
<td width="91" valign="top">176</td>
<td width="91" valign="top">184</td>
<td width="88" valign="top">5%</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
<p><em>*May data does not include search activity at Microsoft Bing, which was launched on June 1. Microsoft Bing will be included with June qSearch data.</em></p>
<p><strong>About comScore</strong><br />
comScore, Inc. (NASDAQ: SCOR) is a global leader in measuring the digital world and preferred source of digital marketing intelligence. For more information, please visit www.comscore.com/companyinfo</p>
<img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/smseo/~4/6pzAxKaJz7w" height="1" width="1"/>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.smseo.net/2009/06/22/comscore-releases-may-2009-u-s-search-engine-rankings.html/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		<feedburner:origLink>http://www.smseo.net/2009/06/22/comscore-releases-may-2009-u-s-search-engine-rankings.html</feedburner:origLink></item>
		<item>
		<title>The Strange Boom in the Popularity of Shorter URLs</title>
		<link>http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/smseo/~3/Wp0zQ90U5OE/the-strange-boom-in-the-popularity-of-shorter-urls.html</link>
		<comments>http://www.smseo.net/2009/06/11/the-strange-boom-in-the-popularity-of-shorter-urls.html#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 11 Jun 2009 18:27:57 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator />
				<category><![CDATA[Social Media Marketing]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[bit.ly]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[tinyurl.com]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Twitter]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[url shortening service]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.smseo.net/?p=107</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[It was recently noted that bit.ly took over as the #1 “url shortening service” to twitter users, besting the oldest and most well-known of such services,  http://tinyurl.com/. Some 46%...]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>It was recently <a href="http://bits.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/05/07/bitly-eclipses-tinyurl-on-twitter/" target="_blank">noted</a> that <a href="http://bit.ly/">bit.ly</a> took over as the #1 “url shortening service” to twitter users, besting the oldest and most well-known of such services,  <a href="http://tinyurl.com/">http://tinyurl.com/</a>. Some 46% of shortened links redirect through the service.</p>
<p>Lately though, I keep stumbling onto more and more short URL services.</p>
<p>Here’s <a href="http://mashable.com/2008/01/08/url-shortening-services/" target="_blank">a post at Mashable</a> that lists… get this… 90 of them.</p>
<img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/smseo/~4/Wp0zQ90U5OE" height="1" width="1"/>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.smseo.net/2009/06/11/the-strange-boom-in-the-popularity-of-shorter-urls.html/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		<feedburner:origLink>http://www.smseo.net/2009/06/11/the-strange-boom-in-the-popularity-of-shorter-urls.html</feedburner:origLink></item>
		<item>
		<title>To blog or not to blog: That is the question:</title>
		<link>http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/smseo/~3/5kA8u08a8ls/to-blog-or-not-to-blog-that-is-the-question.html</link>
		<comments>http://www.smseo.net/2009/06/05/to-blog-or-not-to-blog-that-is-the-question.html#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 05 Jun 2009 21:28:45 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator />
				<category><![CDATA[Blogging & The Blogosphere]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[RSS]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.smseo.net/?p=87</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[When the team here sat down to discuss our blog, the conversation instantly went in a hundred different directions: What should we blog about?  How often should we blog?]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>When the team here sat down to discuss our blog, the conversation instantly went in a hundred different directions: What should we blog about?  How often should we blog?  What’s it going to look like?  How long should it be?  To comment or not to comment?  Finally we managed to get a few things down on paper…</p>
<p>1. We’ll blog about things that peak our interest.  As a cutting-edge Internet marketing company, things that get us excited are likely to also get you excited.</p>
<p>2. It should not only be fun to read but it should also fun to look at.  We’ll incorporate different colors, graphics, comment areas (oh yes, we’ve decided to take the plunge and open it up to all of you), and more.</p>
<p>3. We’ll just keep blogging until we run out of cool new things to tell you no matter how long it takes!<br />
So, now that we’ve got that settled, I think we’re ready to officially get started.  Make sure you bookmark this page, RSS it, or do whatever it takes to remind you to check back often, leave us comments, and help us really make this the happening new spot.  And hey, you might even have a good time while doing it but don’t say I didn’t warn you!</p>
<img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/smseo/~4/5kA8u08a8ls" height="1" width="1"/>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.smseo.net/2009/06/05/to-blog-or-not-to-blog-that-is-the-question.html/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		<feedburner:origLink>http://www.smseo.net/2009/06/05/to-blog-or-not-to-blog-that-is-the-question.html</feedburner:origLink></item>
	<media:rating>nonadult</media:rating></channel>
</rss>
