Thursday, January 18, 2007

Tagging "ethics" and the effect of Google labels

Steve is making a call to bloggers to provide disclosure when they're getting paid to speak on behalf of a company. A commenter is questioning the motive of the post, which is coming on the heels of the Vista debacle disclosure debate.

But what is this, really? I'm going to call it for what it is - a hybrid SEO/PR campaign to try and own keywords like "Ethics" to cover up the mess. A top ranked blog + tagging specific keywords = "Let's leverage our current assets to hide any errors".

I've been discussing with a co-worker about the effect of Google's labeling function and how my search engine traffic has increased more than the 40% noted yesterday by John Battelle thanks to the separate label pages created by Blogger. Has the algorithm changed to help weight Blogger pages over other sites? I'd argue that yes, it did.

For example - based on my Sitemeter stats, the terms "true ads", "about.com sucks" and "BCS and Oklahoma" were driving traffic to my site long after the posts were created -- so much so that my page rank for each was in the top 4 results. Checking them today, I've been bumped down as many as ten places.

4 comments:

Jeremy said...

Who is Steve to talk? He rarely discloses, and I used to ping him on it all the time.

This is like having David Duke run a campaign for minority awareness.

Give me a break.

Steve Rubel said...

Sorry to disappoint, but you're flat out wrong here, David.

David Binkowski said...

You were much kinder to Canuck flack. Otherwise the practice should speak for itself without having to say "we're really taking this ethics thing seriously now" or by having a top PR blogger tell other bloggers how they should act. I'm not disagreeing, I just don't think your blog is the place where the discussion on behalf of the bloggers should be taking place.

Jeremy said...

Flat out wrong. No explanation, just flat out wrong. Neat-o!