Building Your Product Through Social Media Marketing

Users of social media applications are increasing everyday. These applications are also getting more popular as newer features are added. Being available all over the world make them perfect for advertisements that require low budget. With millions of registered and active users there is a great chance of gathering more clients and visitors to increase your revenue.

However, before any company or individual can take the most out of social media marketing, there should be a strategy implemented when doing the promotion. Let us consider some of it through this article.

Knowing your environment. Before participating in any social media application, it is strongly recommended to research about it. This will build your expectations once you become a member of it. Also, other applications might not be appropriate for your product.

Focusing on the right market. As a webmaster of a travel and tourism website, it is recommended that you choose social media applications that are related to your website. Same applies to other webmasters whose websites have different themes. Thousands of forums and blogs are available for you to be a member and participate. Your participation will count most. This is where other members get to know you and the service or product that you are promoting. Leaving relevant comments and recommendations will give you authority to your field.

Presenting your product. Once you have chosen the right environment and settled a name for you, it’s time to think on how to present your product. Mostly in forums and blogs a product can be presented through signatures with active links linking to your own website. For applications such as Facebook and MySpace, you can create a simple sales copy or a review of your product and incorporate it to your personal space.

Referring your product. The best way to spread what you have is to let others know it. Surprise your network with your product by asking them to visit your website and make their own review. If they find it reliable and effective, you will surely get referrals to their friends.

Remain Professional. Although social media applications are open to the public, it is not advisable to harass other members when promoting your product. Discretely place information about your product to your network without disturbing their view and invading their privacy.

Do not spam emails. Most products presented through social media applications are directed through emails. Do not ever send spam emails discussing about your product. This will annoy your recipients and will be a deduction to your credibility. Instead do it properly and professionally.

These techniques will definitely help you in presenting your product by taking advantage of social media marketing. There is no need to spend hundreds or thousands of dollars in marketing your product. Just a simple imagination mixed with creativity will result to good a social media strategy.

LinkBuildingService.info is a leading Social Media Marketing agency. This Social Media Marketing company having a team of 21 professionals, provides social media marketing, link building services and article syndication services to over 55 clients globally.

Matt Cutts: A few thoughts on SSL Search

I’m incredibly happy that Google has added the option to search over SSL by going to https://www.google.com/ — note the “s” in “https.” I’m writing this blog post in a hotel right now because I’m in Europe for a week doing a series of tech talks, but I could just as easily be working down at local Dublin cafe with an open WiFi hotspot. In both cases, I might want to do a private search that the hotel or local cafe can’t see. A Secure Sockets Layer (SSL) connection provides an encrypted tunnel between my browser and Google, so other people can’t sniff what I’m searching for.

I believe encrypted search is an important option for Google searchers. The Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) has asked for secure search in the past (see this post from 2009), and I credit them for helping to put this on Google’s radar. Another inspiration that helped to spark this project was Cory Doctorow’s book “Little Brother.” It was one of my favorite books of 2008 and while I won’t go into the book’s plot here, it’s a quick, fun read. “Little Brother” also makes a compelling case for encrypting HTTP traffic on the web.

Some people don’t yet fully understand how SSL search works. I saw one commenter say “If they still pass in the search parameters in the URL (Get), what’s the point? People can still see what you queried, if they made them “post” messages it might actually do something.” It’s important to realize that even though you as a surfer can see the query in the url, the sites between your browser and Google can’t. Google OS demonstrated that by sniffing a regular HTTP query and an HTTPS query in Wireshark to show that the query can’t be seen going over the wire.

Thanks to all the people at Google who did the all the hard work and heavy lifting to deliver this. One of the main engineers behind the effort was Evan Roseman, a member of the webspam team who you might have met at previous search conferences. In fact, Evan was originally scheduled to be on our site review session at Google I/O this past Thursday, but we decided that launching SSL search took priority. I also wanted to say thanks and congratulations to the other Googlers (for example Andrew Widdowson, Nathan Dabney, and Murali Viswanathan, but also many, many others) who generously gave their time and effort to make the launch happen and happen smoothly. You might think that switching on SSL for websearch is easy, but for a website with the complexity and scale of Google, it’s really not. The launch wouldn’t have happened without a ton of assistance from Googlers from many parts of the company, and I sincerely appreciate it.

I hope you enjoy https://www.google.com and find it useful.

The Golden Rules Of Link Building

The recent SearchKing case illustrates how much the issue of links and search engines, in particular the perception of Google’s use of links, has gotten out of hand. For many, the original reason of linking has been lost out of the desire to simply do whatever they believe Google might like.

All major crawler-based search engines leverage links from across of the web, but none of them report a static “importance” score in the way Google does via its Google Toolbar. That score, while a great resource for surfers, has also provided one of the few windows into how Google ranks web pages. Some webmasters, desperate to get inside Google, keep flying into that window like confused birds, smacking their heads and losing their orientation.

As illustrated in my Google Sued Over PageRank Decrease article, site owners are using the toolbar to find “good” sites that they should get links from, regardless of the fact that link context is also important, not to mention many, many other factors that are used by Google to rank a web page. Other site owners, getting a gray PR0 toolbar for their site, immediate assume the worst, that they’ve been blacklisted.

Enough, please, enough. Forget the Google Toolbar meter. Forget about worrying over “good” links and “bad” links according to Google. Just forget Google, when it comes to link building. Instead, here are my “Three Golden Rules Of Link Building” which I hope will restore some clarity to those feeling lost.

Rule 1 – Get links from web pages that are read by the audience you want

Here’s an example. One site owner I spoke with recently asked whether he should get a link from an Open Directory category that seemed appropriate for his site. The problem? It was “only” a PR2 page, as rated by Google. My advice. So what! Did he think the audience he wanted might read that page? If so, good link! Try to get it.

Rule 2 – Buy links if visitors that come solely from the link will justify the cost

Sometimes, you may have purchase a link. That’s fine — people want to earn of their web sites. The issue is more about why are you buying the link? For search engine ranking purposes or to get traffic directly off the link?

For example, one person posting to a forum in August spoke of having paid to get listed in Yahoo for the “PR2″ value in it. If that’s why the purchase was made, it was poorly decided. The listing in Yahoo should have been purchased because the person felt it was going to be worthwhile in terms of the traffic solely that Yahoo would send to them, not because he thought it would help with Google. Maybe it might help with Google, but if so, that would be the icing on the cake.

Rule 3 – Link to sites because you want your visitors to know about them

The first two rules cover “inbound” links, those aimed at your site. The third rule covers “outbound” links, those that lead out from your site. Some people have believed that linking to “good” sites will boost them in rankings, which is an absurd thought, if you think it through. Since anyone can add a link to “good” sites, it’s an easy mechanism that could be used to manipulate search engines.

A more growing concern is that outbound links could possibly hurt your web site. Several of the crawlers have made statements that linking to “bad” sites might be harmful to your rankings, and Google’s has been especially vocal about this, I would say.

So what if you accidentally link to something a search engine thinks is bad? The Google Sued Over PageRank Decrease article examines this issue more. But in general, you probably don’t need to worry about this. That’s because if you have a variety of good sites pointing at you, you’ve got a pretty good reputation and one that’s unlikely to be harmed because you link out to a “bad” site accidentally.

In the end, if it makes sense to tell the type of visitors you have about a link, you are really unlikely to be pointing to something that will hurt you in Google and other search engines.

Link Building Tips

Need more advice on actually building links? Our Search Engine Placement Tips page has a summary of the simple way to do this. For Search Engine Watch members, the Link Analysis & Link Building page provides an in-depth look at appropriate link building, along with much more information on how search engines measure links and a round-up of articles and resources on the issue.

………………….By Danny Sullivan, Search Engine Watch, Nov 4, 2002

Share
|

Matt Cutts: Site review for Google I/O attendees

If you’re attending Google I/O next week then you might enjoy the SEO site review session that we’ll be doing. If you’ll be attending Google I/O, you can now submit your website for review. I’ll also include the form below:

By the way, if you’re attending Google I/O you’ll probably want to install the very spiff Android app for it. You can search for [Google I/O] in the Android Market. And if you want to know what to expect in the SEO site review session, here’s the video from the panel we did last year:

If you see me at Google I/O, please say hello and tell me what you wish Google would do that we’re not doing. 

Do Links From Expired Domains Count With Google?

From time-to-time, issues about how domain names can impact Google rankings come up. Is it true that if you buy a name, all the “link equity” that name has gained is lost? Below, a look at this and some related questions.

Several years ago, Google sparked some concerns when it said that buying an established domain name meant that links to that domain before the purchase were effectively lost. In other words, say someone bought a domain today that was registered in 2003 and which had built up hundreds of links over the years. All those links were effectively slapped with an invisible nofollow tag, passing along no credit. But links from after the purchase date would accrue credit.

Why did Google do this, way back then? Many people were buying old domains simply for the links – in some cases, also because they were listed well in the Yahoo Directory, when that was far more important than it is today. Putting the word out that buying domains wouldn’t gain link credit was a way for Google to dash cold water on the tactic.

Since that time, there have been any number of web sites that have had domain names change hands for various reasons, such as through acquisitions. For example, Company A absorbs Company B, which causes the domains owned by Company B to transfer to Company A. Was all that link credit was really lost?

That didn’t seem to be the case, so it’s been on my list to get the current state of how domain transfers impact link credit from Google. And that is? Google’s Matt Cutts told me:

There are some domain transfers ( e.g. genuine purchases of companies) where it can make perfect sense for links to transfer. But at the same time it wouldn’t make sense to transfer the links from an expired or effectively expired domain, for example. Google (and probably all search engines) tries to handle links appropriately for domain transfers.

Adding further, he said:

The sort of stuff our systems would be designed to detect would be things like someone trying to buy expired domains or buying domains just for links.

Let’s take those statements and see how likely it is that different types of domain acquisitions will pass link credit.

Buying Expired Domains: Don’t Expect Credit

Have you picked up a domain that was once owned by someone, not through buying it directly from them but because it had expired and went back into the common pool of domains for purchase by anyone? That’s an expired domain – and chances are, the backlinks aren’t going to pass credit according to Matt’s statement.

Buying Domains & Redirecting Links: Probably No Credit

Did you see a tasty domain and think it would be nice to get it, in order to obtain its links for a different site, such a redirecting them? Sounds like there’s a good chance that Google is going to notice the purchase date, take note of the redirection as well and decide those “historic” links shouldn’t count. What about if you just paid someone to keep the domain going under their name but closed down any existing content and point to another location? Might work; then again, Google might note the change, the oddity of one site to completely point at another, and it might be that the links won’t count.

Buying Domain & Running Web Site As Usual: Credit Likely

Did you buy a web site from someone else and are maintaining the business on that site as normal? Despite the fact that your domain name registration will have changed, since the site is carrying on as usual, there seems to be a good chance that link credit will continue as normal.

Getting Domains Through Acquisition: Credit Likely

Have a domain that changes hands, due to a company acquisition – company A buys company B? You should be OK, thought it’s unclear how Google tells the difference here from an ordinary transfer. And no, Google wouldn’t share more on how they can tell the difference.

Does Domain Registration Length Matter?

Finally, from time to time I’ve seen suggestions that the length of domain registration is a factor – domains registered for longer are rumored to be more trusted by Google. In the past, I even saw one domain registrar claim this as fact. Matt said about this:

To the best of my knowledge, no search engine has ever confirmed that they use length-of-registration as a factor in scoring. If a company is asserting that as a fact, that would be troubling.

He also added:

The primary reason to renew a domain would be if it’s your main domain, you plan to keep it for a while, or you’d prefer the convenience of renewing so that you don’t need to stress about your domain expiring.”

by Danny Sullivan (Apr 20, 2009 at 1:10pm ET)

Matt Cutts Confirms Paid Links & Google PageRank Update

Matt Cutts emailed Search Engine Journal last night to let us know that in fact, the partial Google ‘Toolbar’ PageRank update which happened last week was a result of Google’s campaign against paid linking and advertisement links which influence PageRank.

The partial update to visible PageRank that went out a few days ago was primarily regarding PageRank selling and the forward links of sites. So paid links that pass PageRank would affect our opinion of a site.

Going forward, I expect that Google will be looking at additional sites that appear to be buying or selling PageRank.

No word from Matt Cutts or Google yet on how exactly sites are targeted for Google’s change of opinion, or how a site can redeem itself (if it wants to do so, as PageRank seems to have no effect on rankings or Google search traffic).

This is however, one of the first responses from Google on the PageRank update, and its effect on sites which sell paid links, so if you have any questions or comments, please feel free to share them below.

Read more: http://www.searchenginejournal.com/matt-cutts-confirms-paid-links-google-pagerank-update/5906/#ixzz0nc234vS4

Original Content : http://www.searchenginejournal.com/matt-cutts-confirms-paid-links-google-pagerank-update/5906/

Matt Cutts: Gadgets, Google, and SEO

In an earlier post I said that “The best links are not paid, or exchanged after out-of-the-blue emails–the best links are earned and given by choice.” Given the recent discussions of paid links, I wanted to talk about this issue in more depth.

SEO geeks may remember the SearchKing lawsuit regarding link selling that was filed in 2002 and dismissed in 2003. Or they may have read through our quality guidelines, especially the part that says “Don’t participate in link schemes designed to increase your site’s ranking or PageRank.” Those people can probably guess that Google does consider buying text links for PageRank purposes to be outside our quality guidelines.

But for everyone else, let me talk about why we consider it outside our guidelines to get PageRank via buying links. Google (and pretty much every other major search engine) uses hyperlinks to help determine reputation. Links are usually editorial votes given by choice, and link-based analysis has greatly improved the quality of web search. Selling links muddies the quality of link-based reputation and makes it harder for many search engines (not just Google) to return relevant results. When the Berkeley college newspaper has six online gambling links (three casinos, two for poker, and one bingo) on its front page, it’s harder for search engines to know which links can be trusted.

At this point, someone usually asks me: “But can’t you just not count the bad links? On the dailycal.org, I see the words ‘Sponsored Resources’. Can’t search engines detect paid links?” Yes, Google has a variety of algorithmic methods of detecting such links, and they work pretty well. But these links make it harder for Google (and other search engines) to determine how much to trust each link. A lot of effort is expended that could be otherwise be spent on improving core quality (relevance, coverage, freshness, etc.). And you can imagine how the people trying to get link popularity have responded. Someone forwarded me an email from a “text link broker” that included this suggestion:

Most people use words like, SPONSORS, PARTNERS, FEATURED, ADVERTISERS, ADS and other synonymous terms related to advertisers. Our suggestion is to use ‘different’ titles for these ads. Something like RELATED SITES, COOL SITES, RESOURCES, ALTERNATIVE LINKS and so on.

The email later suggests “to use unique locations for ad links like within content.” At the point where people are recommending ways to make paid links less detectable (e.g. by removing any labels or indication that the links are sold), I wouldn’t be surprised if search engines begin to take stronger action against link buying in the near future.

A natural question is: what is Google’s current approach to link buying? Of course our link-weighting algorithms are the first line of defense, but it’s difficult to catch every problem case in adversarial information retrieval, so we also look for problems and leaks in different semi-automatic ways. Reputable sites that sell links won’t have their search engine rankings or PageRank penalized–a search for [daily cal] would still return dailycal.org. However, link-selling sites can lose their ability to give reputation (e.g. PageRank and anchortext).

What if a site wants to buy links purely for visitor click traffic, to build buzz, or to support another site? In that situation, I would use the rel=”nofollow” attribute. The nofollow tag allows a site to add a link that abstains from being an editorial vote. Using nofollow is a safe way to buy links, because it’s a machine-readable way to specify that a link doesn’t have to be counted as a vote by a search engine.

Orginal Comment : http://www.mattcutts.com/blog/text-links-and-pagerank/