Black Hats: Robin Hoods or Hackers? December 21, 2008

In learning more about search engine advertising this week in class, I came across a term in my research that peaked my interest…black hat. Dictionary.com defines Black Hats, sometimes called Crackers or Hackers, as those who specialize in unauthorized penetration of information systems. Black Hats as related to search engine optimization use tactics to redirect search results to particular target pages in a fashion that is against the search engines’ terms of service (dictionary.com, 2008). White Hats, on the other hand, are those search engine optimizers that follow the rules of the search engine companies. The term is derived from the vision of movie villains who oftentimes donned a black hate while carrying out their crimes.

One blogger and self-professed Black Hat named SlightlyShady claims that her work is not unethical. Most Black Hats feel that the only winners in search engine optimization are those companies with deep pockets, and Black Hats are here to stop it. SlightlyShady claims the rules she breaks are corporate rules put forth by search engine companies and not the community as a whole. “Whose rules are they anyway?” she writes. She continues, “Search engines are not invited to sites. They copy/cache content, and do whatever they can to profit from this content they were never asked to access. With this idea in mind, why would I not do the same as them, and attempt to profit from them profiting off of me?” (June 4, 2008).

Based on her line of reasoning, ‘they steal so why can’t I?’ I get it, but I don’t know that particularly agree.

Black Hats can wreak havoc online and cause horrendous user issues. As one blogger stated in a response to SlightlyShady, “I think you miss the reason why many people despise black hat and black hat tactics… it’s because you provide a terrible user experience. Scraped content, arbitrage, spamming, etc. only makes the Internet a worse place for uses,” (June, 4 2008). Regardless of how you feel, myself included, about Google, Yahoo and these companies way of shaping their own rules related to search engine ethics, they offer us an invaluable service. They work to glean out spam and intrusive search engine results to ensure the best online experience possible.

Apparently this struggle between black hats and white hats and search engine companies will continue. Who’s right in their reasoning, though? If it’s possible, I think all sides are right.

References

Dictionary.com (2008) Retrieved on December 21, 2008 from http://www.reference.com/search?q=Black+hat.

SlightlyShady (June 4, 2008) BlackHat Ethics? Whose Rules are They Anyways? Retrieved on December 21, 2008 from http://www.searchenginepeople.com/blog/blackhat-seo-ethics.html.

Online ignorance…it’s worse than you think December 21, 2008

This week’s class discussion focused on the topic of search engine advertising. Specifically, our discussion was centered on whether or not this practice is ethical or not. I was probably one of the only students that actually considered this practice unethical. Let me clarify. I completely understand the purpose of search engine advertising and fully agree that companies like Google and Yahoo must utilized this advertising as a source of revenue, my issue is with their very subtle and hidden way of masking these search engine results as advertising.

One idea that was introduced through our class discussion was the notion of establishing a code of ethics, which search engine companies should abide by, obligating themselves to the rules and even displaying a seal that signifies their agreement with the code. This is an excellent concept and one that I think the FTC had hoped would happen after offering their own warnings to the industry on this topic. The most notable person behind this concept is Bruce Clay, who was an online practitioner that introduced his own code of ethics.

I still believe that search engine companies are preying on the overwhelming ignorance of most online consumers and should resort to clearly labeling ads as what they are, not sponsorships, not featured links, but instead advertisements.

To prove my point, here are some interesting facts regarding the knowledge base of American regarding the internet and online use. I recognize that I have cherry picked the stats that work to reinforce my point, but they are also valid and speak to the issue in this particular blog.

• According to a study earlier this year, 73% of adult American use the internet.

• 92% of those who use search engines say they are confident about their searching abilities, with over half of them, 52%, saying they’re “very confident” (Fallows, January 23, 2005).

• 68% of users say that search engines are a fair and unbiased source of information; 19% say they don’t place that trust in search engines (Fallows, January 23, 2005).

• A Pew Internet and American Project found that most Americans are not sure of what such terms as phishing, podcasting and RSS fees mean. Men, more so than women, tend to be familiar with terms like these. And younger users, ages 18-29, are more knowledgeable than older online users (July 2005).

• By reading this blog, you are one of only 33% of online users who do such an activity (Pew Internet, July 22, 2008).

• Only 29% of users are use an online social networking site like MySpace, Facebook or LinkedIn.com (Pew Internet, July 22, 2008).

My intention for sharing these statistics is to simply reinforce my belief that all companies, search engine brands and new media generators must be cognizant and not take advantage of this overall inexperience and ignorance of the internet when designing elements of their business, including search engine advertising. As Dr. Deborah Fallows points out in her study of search engine use, “Internet searchers are confident, satisfied and trusting – but they are also unaware and naïve,” (January 23, 2005).

References

Fallows, Deborah (January 23, 2005) Search Engine Users. Retrieved on December 21, 2008 from http://www.pewinternet.org/pdfs/PIP_Searchengine_users.pdf.

Pew Internet (July 2005) The average American internet user is not sure what podcasting is, what an RSS feed does, or what the term “phishing” means. Retrieved on December 21, 2008 from http://www.pewinternet.org/pdfs/PIP_Data_Techterm_aware.pdf.

Pew Internet (July 22, 2008) Internet Activities. Retrieved on December 21, 2008 from http://www.pewinternet.org/trends/Internet_Activities_7.22.08.htm.

Dead zone – Ugh. Now, Bluetooth marketing – Ugh. December 11, 2008

Everyday I drive home from the office; I have one hand on the wheel and another hand on my mobile device. I know, it’s unsafe, but I’m admittedly someone who must always to be connected. About one mile from home, I hit a dead zone. I hate it. I can’t get a cell signal. I can’t sync my email. And, if I’m on the phone with someone, the call immediately gets dropped. It’s frustrating.

Now, with the introduction of Bluetooth marketing, there may be another zone that I will dread even more. Bluetooth marketing, sometimes called proximity marketing is the ability to send short messages, images and applications to mobile phones, PDA, and PocketPCs over a given distance (BlueMagic, 2008).

So, besides my general dread of another geographic zone, what’s the problem with Bluetooth Marketing? Like I mentioned, I like to be connected. This is a different kind of connectivity, though. Imagine that I’m walking down the street and walk past a dress shop. All of a sudden, my phone beeps with a message letting me know that there is a sale taking place at the shop. Doesn’t seem too bad, right? Now, though I’m walking past four or five other stores which all send me messages on my mobile device. This could be maddening.

As a marketer, I get it. As a consumer, though I fear it. That’s where the problem lies. We, as marketers, must always put ourselves in the position of the consumer. As Hannah Gilchrist of BT Business Insight points out:

“Bombarding people with information isn’t always the best way to get their business especially at the cost of their privacy. And that is at the heart of the problem, marketing regulations state that you have to be able to either opt-in or out of receiving the information, a feature that Bluetooth does not incorporate, making it an impractical and perhaps soon illegal way of targeting your customers,” (December 5, 2007)

Bluetooth marketing is a powerful tool for marketers. But regardless of its amazing ability to reach out to consumers in new and exciting ways, Bluetooth is headed down a road of regulation and possibly failure.

References

BlueMagic (2008) What is Bluetooth Marketing? Retrieved on December 11, 2008 from http://bluemagiq.com/.

Gilchrsit, Hannah (December 5, 2007) Bluetooth marketing faces shut-down. Retrieved on December 11, 2008 from http://blog.btbroadbandoffice.com/archive/email-and-communications/bluetooth-marketing-faces-shut.php.

Nice website, but can everyone use it? December 10, 2008

So many websites out there are amazing. They have remarkable functionality and design. Extra focus has been given to ensuring the very best copy is integrated with engaging graphics and photos. But, after all this is incorporated into your website, what good is it if a portion of the population cannot use it? I’m not talking about web standards, which ensure that users from a variety of browsers can access your site. Instead, I’m talking about accessibility for those with disabilities.

For approximately six years, I worked in marketing for an agency that served people with mental retardation and developmental disabilities. Although many of the people served by our organization were severely disabled, it was chilling to know how many other people there are which also deal with disabilities. Estimates show that 54 million or 20.6% people in the United States live with some level of disability. Twenty-six million Americans have a severe disability (Joni & Friends, 2008). Computers open up many doors for people with disabilities. And, people with disabilities are an untapped revenue resource for all types of companies.

Accessibility on websites can come in many forms. Most focus on serving the needs of people with hearing or visual disabilities. Although legislation has been introduced to set guideline for these needs, there are several recommendations that web designers have collected on their own…

• Make sure all important content is text-based format. Many message embedded into graphic are not readable through accessibility software.
• Make sure images have alt tags. Alt tags describe what the image is allowing individuals with visual impairments the ability to access a description of the image.
• Test your site in black and white. People with color blindness should be ale to recognize text and hyperlinks without color.

Web designers must recognize that this is not a special effort needed for a minute group of online users. Millions of users will benefit from these accommodations, and in return the accessibility will work to build positive brand image of the company and expand sales and awareness. As Tim Berners-Lee of Web Accessibility Initiative stated, “The power of the Web is in its universality. Access by everyone regardless of disability is an essential aspect,” (Durand, August 22, 2004).

References

Durand, Leslie (August 22, 2004) Accessibility: Is your website causing you to loose potential clients? Retrieved on December 10, 2008 from http://ezinearticles.com/?id=909.

Joni & Friends (2008) Disability Information and Statistics. Retrieved on December 10, 2008 from http://www.joniandfriends.org/disability_stats.php.

Social media as a marketing tool – is there a future? December 2, 2008

Social media is defined as internet-based tools for sharing and discussing information among online users. The term most often refers to activities that integrate technology, social interaction, and the construction of words, pictures, videos and audio (Referencee.com, 2008). Although the beginning of social media can be traced back to early web logs on Usenet groups and Bulletin Board Systems in the 80’s, it really began to take shape in 90’s and has continued to grow at an exponential rate over the past few years.

What is unique about social media sites is that its intention and focus really lies outside of online business and industrial uses. Its focus was to remain on the outskirts of commercialization and center more so on the human to human interaction, much like clubs, personal discussions and groups of family and friends. That’s changing, though.

Marketers recognized almost immediately the unique power of social media networks. It provided them with distinct groups of users with shared interests. It offered a unique opportunity for these outspoken users to discuss more than just concepts, but brands. Former chairman of the Internet Advertising Bureau Lloyd Salmons stated, “Social media isn’t just about big networks like Facebook and MySpace, it’s about brands having conversations,” (Referencee.com, 2008).

Although millions, maybe billions have already been invested by brands into marketing through social media vehicles, I wonder if there is a future in this effort.

A study conducted by JupitorResearch of 10,000 European and American executives founds that the return on these marketing investments was low. An investment of $30,000 may only create a connection with 1,000 friends or less through a branded social network. The study also found that three quarters of all marketers are not measuring the success of social media marketing campaigns (Pfauth, May 15, 2008).

As I’ve pointed out in previous blogs, word-of-mouth is many times the most effective form of marketing. And, social media networks are essentially very large communities that rely on word-of-mouth. RoperASW pollsters Ed Keller and Jon Berry contend that word of mouth is still the most effective way to build a brand (Frost, February 9, 2004).

In order for social media marketing to ever success, brands cannot approach it as any traditional form of advertising. Brand message cannot be contrived and shaped by marketers. Creating a forum for a conversation should be the focus, not interjecting into the conversation and attempting to change thoughts. And, finally, marketers must measure their success, even if it’s just through brand awareness.

The online conversations of brands will continue, but it may be time for the brands adjust their approach or decide to step aside.

References

Frost, Randall (February 9, 2004) Gaining Influence by Word of Mouth. Retrieved on December 2, 2008 from http://www.brandchannel.com/features_effect.asp?pf_id=196.

Pfauth, Ernst-Jan (May 15, 2008) Social media marketing might have a limited future. Retrieved on December 2, 2008 from http://thenextweb.com/2008/05/15/social-media-marketing-might-have-a-limited-future/.

Reference.com (2008) Retrieved on December 2, 2008 from http://www.reference.com/search?q=Social+media

Minority marketing: target locally December 2, 2008

Minority groups in America represent billions, if not, trillions of dollars of business. And, many brands are scrambling to find the very best ways to speak, sell and interact with these minority groups. It seems overwhelming, though, to know how and where to turn.

Hispanics and African-Americans are considered the largest minority groups, and although their presence online is still limited, it’s growing exponentially with specific wants and needs. Then there are Asian-Americans who can be broken into hundreds of different sub-groups with specific interests of their own. There are dedicated print products focused on this minority, but focus is many times too broad for the subgroups’ specific interests.

So as a marketer, do you try to speak to the broader audience of these minority groups, or do you target your message for specific regions or groups that represent the greatest potential? Jones Lang LaSalle company of California looked at the makeup of its immediate local community and recognized the large population of Philippino residents. They responded by targeting Philippino retailer Bench to join their development at a local mall, thus attracting hundreds fo thousands of consumers which had virtually been untapped before that time (Misonzhnik, November 2008).

Wal-Mart has dedicated portions of its Western stores located in cities with large Hispanic populations to authentic Mexican food and ingredients. Wal-Mart marketing has been targeted to these populations with a strong Hispanic focus, as well (Misonzhnik, November 2008).

What is our lesson learned? Big or small, we must first know our local consumer base. Who are they? What are their specific interests? If you don’t know what their interest are, then simply ask. Once those minority groups have been identified and their interests recognized, marketers must learn from them how to best market and communicate with them. In other words, research, research and then just when you think you’re there; research some more.

These are ever evolving and growing groups with changing interests. Just as their tastes for brands may change, so does their way of finding those brands. The marketing mix must take on a whole new focus when advertising to minority groups and ultimately must be done on a very local and precise level in order to effectively connect the brand with the consumers.

References

Misonzhnik, Elaine (November 2008) American Melting Pot. Retrieved on December 2, 2008 from http://web.ebscohost.com.www.libproxy.wvu.edu/ehost/pdf?vid=4&hid=6&sid=e05c9136-d67e-4f1e-bfae-f7eef597bbca%40SRCSM1.