The success of content submissions on social media sites is often dictated by the tone of the comments that take place early on. Even if a great piece of content gets a few nasty comments right off the bat it will have a very hard time succeeding and making it to the homepage.
Users often view the first few comments before even clicking through to the content and begin to form their opinion based off of them. If the comments are bad they will automatically assume that the content is bad too, since other members of the community also feel that way.
The problem with this is that some of the social media sites have audiences that are generally very immature. Sometimes even if the content is remarkable someone will come along that doesn’t agree with it and start flaming it in the comments. Others will see this and follow suit and before you know it your submission will be buried into oblivion never to see the light of day again.
If this is something that you notice happening to your submissions then start asking some of your friends on these social sites to read the content and leave positive comments early on. This will help set a positive tone for the submission and keep people from voting your stories down.
On the flipside of this, bad content won’t make the homepage just because there are a bunch of positive comments that have been left. So it’s not a technique that works if you’re trying to spam your horrible content to the homepage.
What has your experience been with the tone set by comments on social media sites?
Over the past few weeks I have attended several conferences including SES NY, AMA Hot Topics and Ad:Tech San Francisco. Throughout each conference I have encountered tons of folks who are
interested in building or buying links, but most of them are going about it the wrong way. Here is what you should not do:
Same anchor text – if the majority of your incoming text links contain the same anchor text you probably are not going to rank highly for those terms. Search engines are getting more sophisticated and they can usually tell when people are trying to manipulate their search results.
Home page links – there is nothing wrong with having tons of incoming links to your homepage, but there is something wrong when the rest of your site has no incoming links. This does not look too natural so you should try and increase the number of links to your internal pages.
Growth – many of us are impatient (including me) which is why we want to grow our links 10 fold within a few days. Usually massive growth of incoming links smells of search manipulation, which is why you should try and grow at a natural pace. Granted you may get a burst of natural links rapidly from social sites like Digg, but if that happens there is really nothing to worry about.
Cross linking – linking your own sites together if they are related is a good idea if you want to increase each sites traffic, but not search traffic. In most cases all of your sites are probably owned by the same person or hosted on similar C-blocks. This doesn’t mean you shouldn’t link your sites together if it makes sense, but don’t do it just to manipulate search results.
Leveraging forums – one of the easiest ways to get paid links or link exchanges is by posting on forums asking for links. But by doing this you just created a written record that you are looking to build links. This is probably not a good idea, since the last thing you want to do is to give the search engines ammo against you.
There are probably many more things that you should not do when building links, but these are the ones that most people have asked me about at conferences. What other link building tactics should people not do?
Why: To learn from folks experienced in a broad
range of SEO topics to create a better action plan for your site. We will be
covering both conceptual and tactical topics. Each attendee will get some one on
one time in the "SEO bullpen" with one or more of the presenters, to review
their most pressing issues with regards to search engine marketing.
How much: The cost is $3000 (less $500 until next
friday) Additional people from the same company will be priced at $1800 (40% off
I’m not sure how many of you watch American Idol, but an Indian kid named Sanjaya got very far. With only a handful of contestants left, no one thought such a bad singer would get this far. There are many factors that caused him to get this far, but here is how offline and online media
played a role.
Before I go into offline and online media affecting the voting, let me dispel any rumors of him getting far just because of other Indians. I personally do not watch American Idol, but even I myself thought one of the main reasons he got so far was because he had a large following of Indians and as many of you already know there are tons of Indians in this world. Based on a survey I did of 50 random Indians, I concluded that isn’t the main reason why he got so far. The 50 Indians I surveyed watched American Idol, but only 1 voted for him because the rest did not either know how to text message or were afraid that American Idol would charge them for voting.
From my understanding (I could be wrong) you can also call by phone and vote without paying a dime… but either way many Indians were afraid of getting charged. Because of this the main two other factors that I can tell caused him to do so well were related to both offline and online
Offline and Online Media
As we all know the combination of offline and online media can be very powerful. With social media sites like MySpace, YouTube, Vote for the Worst, and Netscape covering Sanjaya it’s no wonder he racked in all those votes. People who use these sites as well as read blogs are very tech savvy and probably text
message (vote for Sanjaya) quite a bit. Then if you combine this people like Howard Stern telling America to vote for Sanjaya because he was the worst singer out of the group and his support from stars like Jennifer Lopez, no wonder he got so far. Here is the buzz he created through this last season of American Idol:
Over 1.4 million web pages have talked about Sanjaya Malakar, not counting those that misspelled his name.
There is a Wikipedia page (with over 581 incoming links) on Sanjaya Malakar.
If Sanjaya would have actually won American Idol it probably would have been humorous as well as ironic. I don’t think too many people would have bought his CD if he won, but we had a great laugh getting him this far or at least watching him get this far. Either way this just shows how powerful
offline media and online media are when they are combined, so the next time you do a marketing campaign try to combine both offline and online media.