From Search Engine Optimisation (SEO) to Web Presence Optimisation (WPO): How Web 2.0 and communities are changing the way websites appear on search engines
Posted on 02. Sep, 2011 by Al Black in Digital Marketing
The various platforms that make up what is commonly referred to as Web 2.0 have greatly impacted the way we share information. The communities that have been generated by Web 2.0 have experienced exponential growth, at rates that were unheard of until recently. This paper will demonstrate how the flow of information from within these communities is now considered so powerful, search engines are increasingly utilising this data in their ongoing quest to improve the relevancy of search results. This paper will also demonstrate how sites can use these new Web 2.0 tools to increase the likelihood of appearing within the search engine results pages (SERPs).
Search Engine Optimisation (SEO) is a set of techniques aimed at improving the ranking of a website in search engine listings, thereby making it more likely that the end user will choose to visit the site (Search Engine Optimization, 2006). Although the concept first materialised during the mid 1990s, the first documented use of the term was not until August 1997, when John Audette from Multimedia Marketing Group used the phrase on the company’s website (John Audette). Since then, there has been somewhat of a battle between those proficient in the various SEO strategies and the engineers of the major search engines such as Google and Yahoo! The word “battle” may seem a little dramatic, and probably is when one is referring to the vast number of SEO practitioners who attempt to achieve good site rankings by following the guidelines set down by the search engines. Those that follow this approach are said to employ White Hat techniques. Examples of such techniques include ensuring that both the content a person sees and the content a search engine sees are the same, and making that content easily accessible to the search engines. There are however, SEO practitioners who follow a less scrupulous path and utilise what are termed Black Hat techniques, which are frowned upon by the search engines. Examples of these include inserting text onto a page that is the same colour as that page, whilst another involves displaying different pages according to whether a person or a search engine are requesting that page. Regardless of which techniques a website may employ, if the site wishes to rank well in the future, they would do well to begin placing more emphasis on their overall web presence. So, whilst the basic SEO techniques will still play an important role in site ranking, Web Presence Optimisation (WPO) strategies, utilising Web 2.0 tools, are becoming increasingly relevant.
If SEO is about achieving page one positioning on Google, WPO is about owning that page (What is Webbiquity? How to Be Everywhere Online). Another way of looking at WPO is comparing it to SEO. The primary difference between the two concepts is that while a website is one place where people can learn about an organisation, a web presence is the collection of all the places across the web where people can find and engage with an organisation. WPO utilises the array of Web 2.0 tools to generate multiple listings on the SERPs and it achieves this in two distinct ways. Firstly by achieving optimum ranking for the various pages of a website, and secondary by focusing on ranking associated pages that are external to an organisation’s website, such as Youtube and Facebook links, (Malaga, 2009).
Backlinks are an important element of SEO strategy and are used by Google in its PageRank algorithm. The most important factor here being the more backlinks achieved by a site, the more popular that site is deemed to be and the better that site will be ranked. The relevance of the linking site to the host site is another important element, as are the words that appear in the HyperText of the link (known as the anchor text). These factors are of great importance when considering the way in which Web 2.0 affects the manner in which websites are ranked. So important in fact, that the computer program that became known as Google was originally known as Backrub, with backlinks being the core element, (Anonymous, 2005).
Consider the various ways in which sites can engage with Web 2.0 communities. Search engines and communities are hungry for new and relevant content. By establishing a blog and providing such content, a site will reap the benefits in a number of ways. The regular updating of the site’s content with relevant information will increase the likelihood of that site being crawled by the search engines. Once the site has been crawled, the new information within the site can enhance the site’s ranking. A blog should also be designed and operated with backlinks in mind. Whilst the temptation exists to promote the blog across as many platforms as possible, one should consider the community contained within each platform. By promoting the blog across appropriate Web 2.0 platforms, the site is engaging with the correct community and increasing the likelihood of people visiting the blog, thus increasing the number of backlinks. These are known as the specific strategic issues of priority audience preferences, and selection of appropriate applications, (Thackeray, Neiger, Hanson, & McKenzie, 2008). Whilst many organisations will incorporate the blog into an existing site, many choose to utilise some of the powerful Web 2.0 blogging platforms such as WordPress and Blogger. Advantages of using WordPress, for example, include free use of the basic platform; the many templates from which to choose; basic spam protection and; the vast number of plugins for improved functionality, (Honan, 2007). One of the easiest methods of increasing the popularity of the blog is through the use of Really Simple Syndication (RSS). RSS enables the user to access information from a variety of sources from the one destination and has achieved its status partly due in part to its ability to separate form from content.
Microblogging is another Web 2.0 technology that is widely used to increase site traffic and to engage with other like-minded members of a community. Two of the best known platforms in this area are Twitter and Tumblr. To use Twitter as an example, a primary objectives is to create as many relevant followers as possible. Although automated tools are available to increase the number of followers, this approach contradicts a community approach. As with all of the strategies covered in this paper, the building of weak ties is abundantly important, however a shotgun approach takes the weak link strategy to a point where its value becomes limited. Successful strategies using the Web 2.0 platforms share a degree of commonality and by creating such an engaged community, the benefits in terms of member contribution and group affiliation become apparent, (Ramsay, 2010). As with any community, community members do not appreciate those that are self-centred and lack some sense of community value. Web 2.0 etiquette suggests that while occasional self-promotion such as the tweeting of a latest blog and asking for re-tweets is expected, it is crucial that one is not seen to do this relentlessly. Attempting to push products through Twitter’s Direct Message facility would also be viewed unfavourably, (Ramsay, 2010). As with non-virtual communities the idea of sharing is also important. If one reads a fascinating blog or notices an interesting tweet, by re-tweeting that tweet and by making this a matter of habit, others in the community will take notice and will reciprocate.
Social platforms such as Facebook and LinkedIn also constitute vital components of WPO strategy. A recent study of the Fortune 500s use of social media demonstrated that 46% of the aforementioned organisations were using Facebook as part of their marketing effort and that one of the fundamental benefits that such a strategy provided was the establishment of online communities. These communities may then proceed to create positive content about the organisation, whilst arresting the proliferation of any negative reviews, (Culnan, McHugh, & Zubillaga, 2010). Further, promotion of positive and the relegation of negative commentary now have a marked effect on not only the organisation’s site ranking, but also how the organisation appears in third party sites such as YouTube and ProductReview. Building a presence on Facebook and engaging with that community through initiating discussions, posting regular status updates and utilising the various optimisation and tracking tools such as tabs and Facebook Insights, are all key factors in the development of an effective Facebook strategy. As with the other Web 2.0 technologies mentioned herein, the links and content generated from an effective Facebook campaign further increase the prominence of that organisation on the SERPs, (Malaga, 2009).
Perhaps the most significant development in the growing importance of Web 2.0 tools was the launch of the Google indexing infrastructure Caffeine. Aside from the decrease in search time, the new system enabled the search giant to deal more effectively with rapidly updated information from services including Twitter and Facebook (Grimes, 2010). This was also seen as a defensive measure by Google against the meteoric rise of Twitter and Facebook. Just prior to this launch, Google introduced a new feature to the SERPs in the form of a toolbar on the left side of the screen. This enabled users to conduct searches that would only show results for specific types of data such as images, videos and real time, (Grimes, 2010). Later in the year Google made a further change by removing traditional organic searches and replacing them with these data-specific results. The effects of these three developments were seen by many industry pundits as a tipping point in the shift toward WPO strategies. Further updates to Google’s operations were the launch of the Mayday (Fox, Google Confirms “Mayday” Update Impacts Long Tail Traffic, 2010) (Shinghal, 2011) and Farmer (or Panda) algorithmic changes, (Fox, Google Rolls Out Its Panda Update Internationally And Begins Incorporating Searcher Blocking Data, 2011). The Mayday update placed more importance on long-tail search strings, whilst the Farmer update was more concerned with penalising sites that were duplicating content from other sites in order to achieve improved rankings. It can be argued that all of these changes, including the multitude of frequent subtle tweaks have been part of Google’s constant strive to ensure search results are as relevant as possible. Added to this is the potential financial motivation. The major search engines receive almost all of their income through the paid listings, and are therefore unlikely to allow savvy SEO / WPO operators to understand a static set of algorithmic and indexing protocols which allow their client’s sites to continually appear prominently on the SERPs for a wide range of keywords. By keeping the organic area of the SERPs relatively volatile, the attractiveness of the more stable paid search area is increased.
It is not just the changes that the search engines have made to their indexing techniques and algorithms that are seen as significant, but also what the search engines have launched in terms of product offerings which take advantage of the increasing relevance of the Web 2.0 prodigies. Another reason for this strategic move is that search engines are keen to reduce the perception of themselves as launching points from where users find what they’re looking for and then move on to a third party site. Although online directories are very much a child of the Web 1.0 generation, the launch of Google Places (formerly known as Local Business Centre), is a Web 2.0 facelift of a Web 1.0 product category. Launching their own more advanced directory service in the form of Google Places is seen as a tactic in this particular clash for superiority. Google’s launch of Hotpot is another tactic in this arena and is their venture into the reviews and recommendations space, popularised by sites such as TripAdvisor, Urbanspoon and Yelp. Search engines are placing increasing importance on the reviews obtained by sites, both positive and negative. Travellers can use sites such as TripAdvisor to pass comment on what they thought of a particular accommodation provider, whilst those more interested in culinary pursuits can critique restaurants through platforms such as Urbanspoon. Higher ratings for these businesses, obtained through the communities within those platforms, can contribute to the way those sites and sites like them appear on the SERPs. Google however has an advantage over other players in that it can concatenate the data from Hotpot with the data from Places, Maps and its search offering. When a user conducts a search, Google will recommend a restaurant based on previous interactions with Hotpot, either by the user or their friends.
Web 2.0 also gives the user the ability to link content across the various platforms, thus decreasing the amount of time required to conduct such activity. For example, many organisations link the status updates on their Facebook Page to their Twitter feed. Although such systems are relatively simple, there are other services such as TubeMogul which, once the initial setup has been completed, can post videos to multiple sites after only one upload. Such connectivity is a classic example of how Web 2.0 tools have increased the chances of sites appearing for relevant searches. By decreasing the amount of time a user has to spend distributing information across multiple sites, the likelihood of the user taking advantage of such systems and getting their information across multiple sites is increased. There are two main benefits of increasing the number of sites on which the user’s information will appear. Firstly, the user is increasing the potential audience and the number of listings that can be crawled and indexed, and secondly they are also increasing the number of backlinks, which works toward better SERP rankings for their main site.
Information on the Internet is usually obtained through search, directories or folksonomies such as Digg, Delicious and StumbleUpon. These social bookmarking platforms rely on users to provide classification information on documents and those sites gain positioning within those platforms based on this user-generated data (Morrison, 2008). By gaining popularity through the folksonomies, sites are increasing the number of backlinks from authoritative sites, therefore increasing their ranking on the SERPs.
The dramatic rise of mobile internet usage has seen an accompanied rise in location-based applications such as Yelp and Foursquare. Such applications are also having a profound effect on the relevancy of SERP results through reviews and other user-generated content that is being populated by these burgeoning mobile communities.
To conclude, there is no doubt that there has been a considerable shift in the way that websites are now ranked by, and appear on, the major search engines and, that shift is mainly due to exponential growth in the use of the various Web 2.0 platforms mentioned in this paper. Recent studies have shown that almost 50% of U.S. small businesses are already using Facebook and nearly 20% are using Twitter. In addition, the number of U.S. small businesses using Twitter in the past year has doubled (Small Businesses Doubled Use of Twitter in 2010, 2011). It is not only Facebook and Twitter that are building on their strengths. A recent study by McKinsey Quarterly has shown that 65% of businesses are planning to increase their spend across all Web 2.0 technologies over the next 3 years, with only 3% planning to decrease spending in this area (Business and Web 2.0: An interactive feature, 2010). It is no longer a question of if, but how organisations will embrace Web 2.0 in the future.
Reference List
Anonymous. (2005, December 16). Backrub. New Scientist , p. 60.
Business and Web 2.0: An interactive feature. (2010, December). Retrieved April 1, 2011, from McKinsey Quarterly: https://www.mckinseyquarterly.com/Business_and_Web_20_An_interactive_feature_2431
Culnan, M., McHugh, P., & Zubillaga, J. (2010). How Large U.S. Companies Can Use Twitter and Other Social Media to Gain Busniess Valu. MIS Quarterly Executive , 243-259.
Fox, V. (2010, May 27). Google Confirms “Mayday” Update Impacts Long Tail Traffic. Retrieved April 15, 2011, from Search Engine Land: http://searchengineland.com/google-confirms-mayday-update-impacts-long-tail-traffic-43054
Fox, V. (2011, April 11). Google Rolls Out Its Panda Update Internationally And Begins Incorporating Searcher Blocking Data. Retrieved April 15, 2011, from Search Engine Land: http://searchengineland.com/google-rolls-out-its-panda-update-internationally-and-begins-incorporating-searcher-blocking-data-72497
Grimes, C. (2010, August 8). Our new search index: Caffeine. Retrieved April 15, 2011, from The Official Google Blog: http://googleblog.blogspot.com/2010/06/our-new-search-index-caffeine.html
Honan, M. (2007, December). THE SMART Blogger’s GUIDE. Macworld , pp. 91-94.
John Audette. (n.d.). Retrieved April 1, 2011, from The History of SEO: http://www.thehistoryofseo.com/seo-interviews/john-audette/
Malaga, R. A. (2009). Web 2.0 Techniques for search engine optimization: two case studies. Review of Business Research , 132-139.
Morrison, J. P. (2008). Tagging and searching: Search retrieval effectiveness of folksonomies on the World Wide Web. Information Processing and Management , 1562-1579.
Ramsay, M. (2010). Social media etiquette: A guide and checklist to the benefits and perils of social marketing. Journal of Database Marketing & Customer Strategy Management , 257-261.
Search Engine Optimization. (2006). Journal of Visual Communication in Medicine , 39-40.
Shinghal, A. (2011, April 11). High quality site algororithm goes global, incorporates user feedback. Retrieved April 15, 2011, from Google Webmaster Central Blog: http://googlewebmastercentral.blogspot.com/2011/04/high-quality-sites-algorithm-goes.html
Small Businesses Doubled Use of Twitter in 2010. (2011, March 7). Retrieved April 15, 2011, from emarketer: http://www.emarketer.tv/Article.aspx?R=1008266&dsNav=Rpp:25,Ro:-1,N:1126&view=compact
Thackeray, R., Neiger, B. L., Hanson, C. L., & McKenzie, J. F. (2008). Enhancing promotional strategies within social marketing programs: use of Web 2.0 social media. Health promotion practice , 338-343.
What is Webbiquity? How to Be Everywhere Online. (n.d.). Retrieved April 1, 2011, from Webbiquity: http://webbiquity.com/web-presence-optimization/what-is-webbiquity-how-to-be-everywhere-online/
