When we start a new program for a RepEquity Online Reputation Management client, we follow a standard checklist for getting their program up and running. Once we’ve collected all relevant information from the client, we begin by claiming or building out any existing social media profiles. We then build the client a complete bio website that highlights their involvement in business, philanthropy and other arenas. These two steps are the foundation of nearly every ORM program we run and become our leveraging points for cleaning up the search engine results for individuals, corporations and nonprofits.

An online reputation issue is not something that can be quickly fixed and then ignored. It is a constant battle to keep positive results at the top of the search engine results and as an ORM company we remain vigilant for new rankings and strategies that would help our clients.

Updates to Google’s Algorithm

This year, we saw two major algorithm updates by Google that shook up organic search engine results.

Originally released in 2011, the Panda algorithm update was updated to lower the rankings and visibility of low-quality sites and push higher-quality sites up in the search results. This benefitted our clients by increasing rankings for their social media profiles, but in some cases it also increased visibility of potentially harmful, untrue, or out-of-date content on news websites.

Google updated its Penguin algorithm on April 24, 2012.  Similar to Panda, Penguin was intended to decrease search engine rankings of websites found to be in violation of Google’s Webmaster Guidelines by using black-hat SEO techniques like keyword stuffing, cloaking, and deliberate duplicate content. Penguin affected an estimated 3.1% of search queries in English—hugely impactful for an algorithm update. Penguin prompted us to take a closer look at some client websites that were in place before signing with RepEquity. We helped clients eliminate duplicate content and analyze their backlinks for potential red flags. Continue Reading…

Over the past few months we’ve noticed that about 10% of the time, fewer than 10 results display on Google’s first search engine results page (SERP).  Why are fewer domains making the all-important first page of Google results?  Yesterday Google answered that question:

We’re continuing to work out the best ways to show multiple results from a single site when it’s clear users are interested in that site. Separately, we’re also experimenting with varying the number of results per page, as we do periodically. Overall our goal is to provide the most relevant results for a given query as quickly as possible, whether it’s a wide variety of sources or navigation deep into a particular source. There’s always room for improvement, so we’re going to keep working on getting the mix right.

In a recent article on SEOmoz Peter J. Meyers, the president of User Effect, points out that historically 1% to 4% of SERPs have displayed fewer than 10 results. But that percentage jumped to over 18% early last week. While some of these SERPs displayed eight or nine results, most displayed just seven.

Meyers notes that the SERPs impacted are mostly for branded keyword searches (i.e., searches for company names).  The SERPs for branded keywords tend to lack diversity in domains; that is, many of the top 10 results are from the same domain.  He speculates that Google eliminated three search results to increase domain diversity, or the variety of domains that rank on the first page.  He also points out that many of the SERPs displaying fewer than 10 links include sitelinks displayed within the top ranking.

What this Means for You

On the plus side, we already work with our clients to ensure domain diversity by maintaining active accounts on well-known social media sites and distributing content across multiple domains.  For example, the Google search results for “RepEquity” (pictured below) include the RepEquity Blog and RepEquity Labs sites in addition our main site, www.RepEquity.com.

This change could also mean a huge win for clients fighting false reports on sites like Ripoff Report, Scam.com and others.  According to a Search Engine Watch report, Google is looking hard at verified data when deciding what content ranks—or not. “Verified data in this case seems to be any source that has to go through a fairly rigorous verification process,” writes associate editor Danny Goodwin.  Sites with unverifiable sources of data, like Ripoff Report, may be penalized and have a harder time ranking on page one.

It’s not unusual for Google to favor content on certain domains that it deems to be highly relevant and credible.  On the SERPs that include fewer than 10 results, we are seeing evidence that Google may favor well-known domains like wsj.com or usatoday.com, even if the content (in this case news) is outdated.  This could negatively impact clients who may be haunted by negative press from long-ago indiscretions.  If this is a problem for your brand, please contact us.

Recommendations

As Google continues to work on the SERPs, these tips will help you weather the storm, even if Google returns to displaying 10 results on each page.

• Use Google Webmaster Tools to implement sitelinks for your branded pages.
• Claim your company name on social media sites like Twitter, Facebook and LinkedIn.
• Ensure all of your web sites and microsites are content-rich and optimized for search.

If you have questions about the recent changes in Google’s SERPs or need help managing your brand’s online reputation, contact us.

Quick response (QR) codes add interactivity to offline placements including magazine ads, posters, billboards, price tags, and even t-shirts and beer cans.  QR codes are at a crossroads in the U.S.: Will they turn out to be a fad or will they eventually become as common as Facebook and pay-per-click (PPC) advertising? We don’t expect to know the answer to that question in 2012 and will continue to monitor how brands use QR codes to deliver interactive mobile experiences.

While QR codes are certainly the buzz in our industry, today they are not widely understood or adopted in the U.S. In June 2011, roughly 14 million U.S. mobile users scanned a QR code with their phone, according to data from comScore MobiLens. That number, while large, represents only 6.2 percent of the country’s total mobile audience. In a study by Lab42, 58 percent of respondents answered “no” to the question “Are you familiar with QR codes?”  Of those, 43 percent said they did not know what a QR code is. Continue Reading…

This week, the New York Federal Reserve Bank announced its plans to begin a social media monitoring project to gauge online sentiment about the Fed’s actions and general economic policy. Some people (i.e. civil libertarians and activists against big government) are irate and are likening the Fed’s actions to those of Big Brother. But can you really fault the Fed for wanted to know what people are saying about them online? The private sector has been doing it for years.

As an ORM company, we were interested in finding out just what monitoring tactics the Fed was interested in using. Going beyond basic article gathering to gage public sentiment, the Fed wants to know what individuals are saying, and was intelligent enough to target Facebook and Twitter as the perfect realm for learning the truth. Of course they’ll also track their repute as judged by news sources like the Wall Street Journal, CNN and the Associated press (all named in the request for proposal), but it shows that the corporation cares about more than economists or financial bloggers. And most interestingly, they also requested that vendors offer a monitoring system that allows people monitoring the project for the Fed can login to and track results (hey, that sounds kind of familiar…).

We commend the decision of the New York Federal Reserve Bank to be active in the monitoring of their online reputation. While they’ll likely find that many people aren’t happy with the economy and the actions of large financial corporations, hopefully the Fed will find ways to interact with individuals online to alter their tactics and hopefully eliminate some of the angrier sentiments floating around online. Fast Company has a great look at the Fed’s program as well.

As mentioned in a previous blog post, the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) will begin accepting applications for new generic top-level domains (gTLDs) on January 12, 2012. By most estimates, the domain space will increase as never before and some groups fear that cyber squatting abuse will rise with this expansion.

The Coalition Against Domain Name Abuse (CADNA) has recently drafted a letter asking for the U.S. Congress to reexamine existing cyber-squatting legislation, and the Anti-cybersquatting Consumer Protection Act (ACPA) from 1999. In the words of the organization:

“In order for the ACPA to be effective today and in the future, it needs to be revised to make cyber-squatting unprofitable and too risky to undertake. CADNA’s campaign aims to spur Congress to sufficiently improve ACPA before domains in new gTLDs become available for registration – this way, cyber-squatters in .COM and other popular extensions will be forced to return or delete infringing domains and abandon the practice before they have the opportunity to expand into the new gTLD space. CADNA believes that resetting the bar in this way will lessen the burden on trademark owners because there will be less urgency to register their trademarks defensively in new gTLDs like .NYC, .MUSIC and .ANYTHING else that comes to light.”

What are your views on this most recent move by ICANN? Do you support CADNA? Do you see this new opening will become a new outlet for nefarious internet activity?