Peter Kafka

Recent Posts by Peter Kafka

Anyone Want to Offer Free SEO Advice to a Former Businessweek Editor?

Former Businessweek editor John Byrne has a new site up, and he’s understandably proud: PoetsandQuants has an impressive-looking survey of the top MBA programs and a slew of related stories. (Not a coincidence: Business school rankings are a big asset for Businessweek too.)

The problem, as Byrne explains in a blog post, is that Google (GOOG) doesn’t seem to care. Or at least not in the way he’d like it to: Search for “poetsandquants” and you’ll find many references to the site, including the site’s Twitter and YouTube accounts, but no direct links to the site itself.

And, frustratingly, many of the links that Google does show searchers are simply scraping/Google gaming sites with no connection to Byrne’s site at all. Byrne:

As you go through the first five pages of Google results, there are all kinds of websites that have essentially highjacked Google, rendering its search product less useful and helpful to users. There’s a so-called weblog that is little more than a place to advertise Viagra and Cialis. There’s links to TweetMeme, Interceder, tweetcepts, twapperkeeper, rallyclips, and whotechpunditstweet, among many others. Most of them are search traps that have gamed Google. There’s even a link to one fool who has no idea who I am yet calls me a “douchebag” on page three of Google’s results for PoetsandQuants. (See the screenshot below to get a real glimpse of how bad Google’s results are.) Get through the first ten pages of results and there is still not a direct link to the site.

Two thoughts:

  • Join the club, John. You’re now one of many publishers who have a gripe with Google.
  • The fact that you’re one of many doesn’t make your gripe less worthy. And this sort of thing really should be worrisome for Google. It’s not that the search engine is ignoring your site–it’s that it is sending searchers to the wrong place. This happens much too often, and it’s a huge hole for a competitor to exploit.

I assume that Byrne, and Google, will sort this out fairly quickly–Bryne doesn’t tell us whether he’s been able to get ahold of a human in Mountain View to hash this out. And perhaps a link from this site will help!

But I also assume that Byrne, as a bootstrapping publisher, has less advanced SEO help than he had at his last gig, which means he’s always going to have some version of this problem.

So. Any generous SEO experts want to offer some advice about ways to solve his problem? You’ve got an open forum in the comments section below.


comments so far. Add yours.

  • http://www.the-digital-reader.com Nate Hoffelder

    I checked his PageRank. Wow. I’ve never seen a score of zero before.

    Part of the reason he’s not showing up in Google is because of the low pagerank score. All those other sites have higher scores so Google shows them first.

    So how does he get a higher score? Simple. Get sites with higher scores to link to his site.

    BTW, I’ve looked over the site, and I’d bet he’s running it on WordPress. There are several free SEO plugins.Hopefully he’s installed one.

  • http://www.facebook.com/dsmjllc Jeff Johnson

    Bleh All in 1 SEO on WP.
    Keep it simple. I got Barneysmag.com to a #1 with barneys of new your and its not linked from anywhere except facebook . Try it. yourself by simply typing “barneysmag” into google.

  • Anonymous

    Um. Welcome to the internets? I find myself annoyed by this. Duh, yes. Seo = hard. Building traffic = hard. Stop whining and get to work.

  • Anonymous

    Inbound links make up about 70% of ranking algorithms.
    Total Inbound Links : 32
    -Aggressive link building campaign, STAT

    Keywords, titles, descriptions etc., make up about 10-15% of ranking algorithms:
    -Current titles are not page content relevent or keyword rich
    -Current descriptions do not exist (ouch)
    -Current keywords (ugh): average 244 per page – consider two to four per page that are relevent to the page content

    Go git em & always remember, page 2 sucks.

  • Anonymous

    Inbound links make up about 70% of ranking algorithms.
    Current total – 32
    -Aggressive link building campaign, stat!

    Page titles, descriptions, keywords, etc., make up about 10 -15% of ranking algorithms.
    -Page titles – not keyword rich / lack “ad” power
    -Page descriptions : missing (ouch)
    -Keywords : avg. 224 per page (super ouch) : consider 2 – 4 unique per page / page content relevent.

    Go git em & remember, page 2 sucks!

  • http://www.harrr.org/rrr righini

    i’d focus on getting more quality inbound links, also publishing new interesting contents for their community would be cool (the okcupid blog for instance is doing an amazing job)

    One simple question to answer: Why people should link to their blog?

  • Anonymous

    This perfectly illustrates why fat, old tired media (where he came from) is screwed. It’s called being competitive in the marketplace. Online there are rules that need to be followed in order for search to properly index your site. Learn them, follow them, be entrepreneurial and competitive. Most important stop whining and blaming others. Just because you went to journalism school doesn’t mean you are entitled to a cushy successful journalism job – online or in print. For all we know he probably has a robots.txt file telling the engines not to crawl his site. Get with it.

  • http://www.socialtimes.com Nick O’Neill

    I ran into this problem the other day and commented on John’s blog. While all the technically minded people love to make suggestions, the reality is that it’s often not so simple. I am technical and went through all the standard processes (Google Webmaster tools, etc), and one of the sites I was helping didn’t show up for months. It’s a problem when buying domains through brokers.

  • http://www.thewayoftheweb.net Dan Thornton

    A pagerank of 0 isn’t uncommon for a new site, because it takes about 3 months before Google updates the Page Rank figure it shows publicly (Which isn’t what the actual page rank is internally, so take it as a very, very rough guide of trending).

    The other element is that new sites are quite often put into Google’s Sandbox for a while, so won’t rank immediately. Hence why Tweetmeme ranks for content, and poetsandquants doesn’t.

    The two key elements are the technical set-up of the site, as people mentioned below, and the inbound links from relevant sites.
    Build those up and you’ll rank, but it takes a few months…

  • http://www.thewayoftheweb.net Dan Thornton

    Two and a half months is a pain when it’s your site, but isn’t completely unreasonable in terms of expected timings for a relatively small site.
    I’ve yet to have a problem buying domains *touches wood*, but the only thing I can think of which could be a problem is if the previous owner of a site may have been doing something less than reputable?

  • http://twitter.com/Besmertnik Seth Besmertnik

    For John’s site – he suffers from the same malady as many new sites. He’s built it – but in order to get the searchers to come, he’s got to first get the engines to visit, index, and understand the topology and content of his site. Here are a few quick tips:

    - Most category pages have a lack of content/unique keyword rich content. Those category pages are what the engines are going to look to for ‘news’ and stories.
    - External links to the site are practically nonexistent. Right now, this is your biggest challenge.
    - It looks like Google is only indexing 88 pages of the site
    - Pages need better meta descriptions (won’t help the ranking, but may help with click throughs when they do show up.)
    - No site map live: http://poetsandquants.com/site-map/ (good job with the robots.txt sitemap, but it’s also good to have a crawlable one.)
    - Nav is images and needs alt text, could be done more SEO friendly using CSS and text without sacrificing the design.
    - Most images are missing alt text
    - Some URL’s could be better optimized for terms the key terms
    - Internal linking structure – (pointing your internal anchor text at your category pages) could use some work
    - H1 tags could be better optimized target term first
    - Meta keywords are being stuffed – all those are doing is telling your competition what you’re working on.

    - Seth Besmertnik, CEO @ Conductor

  • Anonymous

    Funny how there are so many folks chiming in both here and at the blog. Mr. Byrne should have really kept his mouth shut and gotten some advice on the side. Maybe from that old SEO contact at Businessweek.

  • http://www.harrr.org/rrr righini

    everything is good to get some links, even showing a weakness. For the moment those links still have a weight on search engine algorithms.

  • http://www.marketingtactics.com/ davebarnes

    No meta description found.
    Bad.
    Google loves this tag.

    48 HTML validation errors
    Bad.
    Google prefers pages that validate.

    He should sign up with SheerSEO for inexpensive measuring service.

  • http://twitter.com/killtheketchup Shanna

    Here is some free advice: hire a SEO and get a real strategy in place; don’t just rely on free tips that come tacked to the end of a commonplace story.

  • http://www.elevatemarketing.co.za/ Werner Wichmann

    subsribe to some rss feeders and post new content often. Also make shure you articles have the correct tags and categories.

  • http://twitter.com/netmarket1ng Elise Connors

    Let’s go back to the oldest and most basic principles of SEO. A lot of others may disagree with me here, but I’m going to break it down to the simplest terms.

    1. The list of keywords on that site is full of crap. There’s entirely too much in the keyword tag. Many may argue that the keyword tag is not important and may as well be ignored altogether. I’m a firm believer in utilizing the keyword tags if for nothing more than to help you remember what keywords you’re optimizing for on that particular page. A good rule of thumb is to aim for 2-3 keyword PHRASES per page.
    2. You’re not using your domain name very much in the content. If you want to come up for “poetsandquants”, you have to use it on your page. Multiple times. But, don’t get carried away – you still want your content to make sense.
    3. As others have commented, you have to try to get some inbound links coming in to your site preferably using the anchor text “poetsandquants”. Internal linking between your website pages will be helpful as well. Once again, don’t overdo it here, you want to be sure you don’t come off as spammy. Make it make sense to the human eye, and the search engines will follow suit.

    Those are just a few basic tips. But my bigger question would be – what is the hangup with the term “poetsandquants”? For the best ROI (of time usually) for SEO is to try to bring in visitors that would not have found your site if they were not browsing the search engines. That being said, people who type in “poetsandquants” most likely already know who you are and already know how to find you on the internet. Ultimately, you’re wasting valuable time that can be dedicated to optimizing for keywords that will really drive in traffic. Just some food for thought…

Dive Into Media

Latest Video

View all videos »

Search »

As long as the newspaper was a bundle, no one ever had to care that people were buying it for radically different reasons. But once you go online, and people can unbundle things, where you can traffic directly to a story without going through the home page or any of the rest of it, suddenly what it — the individual choices made by individual readers come to matter a lot.

— – Clay Shirky, on NPR’s Talk of the Nation with Neal Conan