Droid: iDon't Understand Search Engine Optimization(newmediacampaigns.com)
newmediacampaigns.com
Droid: iDon't Understand Search Engine Optimization
http://www.newmediacampaigns.com/page/microsite-search-engine-optimization
6 comments
Funniest part is, you can't view the site on an iPhone. First thing I tried when I saw it was a flash site, seems like a terribly obvious oversight.
Perhaps that's the point. iDont display flash websites either.
[deleted]
I'm pretty sure the verizonwireless.com domain has some serious trust within Google already, not to mention inbound links that have "droid" in the name. They don't need to do the on-page SEO Joe Blogger does.
That said, I really have to agree with this statement from the article: "As far as microsites and marketing landing pages go, DroidDoes.com is out of this world bad." I was really confused when I hit the page. It's like the opposite of Apple's pages and not in a good way.
That said, I really have to agree with this statement from the article: "As far as microsites and marketing landing pages go, DroidDoes.com is out of this world bad." I was really confused when I hit the page. It's like the opposite of Apple's pages and not in a good way.
Right, the site sucks (I hate Flash ad-sites especially) but that doesn't really have much to do with "SEO" which Verizon clearly does not need any of. What they need is a site that doesn't suck.
But Apple does? I think his point is valid: from a simple search of "iphone," I can go directly to, say, the official features page. I don't do that from a search for "droid." I first have to go through the obnoxious, contentless flash site.
I visited the site because I saw their commercial on TV. I imagine most folks will hear about it through their marketing campaigns.
They have plenty of smart folks over there - is it possible they did this intentionally? If their goal is to promote a phone launching later this week, perhaps SEO is not their top concern here?
They have plenty of smart folks over there - is it possible they did this intentionally? If their goal is to promote a phone launching later this week, perhaps SEO is not their top concern here?
Sure, why would they ever want extra hits from search engines (not just google remember, no other search engine can see this properly either). Why would they want extra traffic, surely they want to keep this a big a secret as possible??
The fact is that the people who did this have no idea, sure they can create fancy flash, but they are ignorant of almost everything else about the web.
The fact is that the people who did this have no idea, sure they can create fancy flash, but they are ignorant of almost everything else about the web.
http://www.google.com/search?q=droid
"Droid". First match. Has summary.
SEO is snake oil.
"Droid". First match. Has summary.
SEO is snake oil.
Not what he means by SEO. Did you read the article?
The description of Droid from Google:
"Get to know Droid a little better. Droid Does the Network. Droid is exclusive to Verizon Wireless, the most reliable network available."
This tells me Droid is Verizon, but nothing else. Two of three sentences are useless. When I search for iPhone:
"iPhone 3GS is a GSM cell phone that's also an iPod, a video camera, and a mobile Internet device with email and GPS maps."
iPod, video camera, mobile Internet, email, GPS. If I don't know what an iPhone is, I do now. Meanwhile, a personal test I've run suggests the average college student doesn't know what Droid is, and this search doesn't help.
Subdomains for the Droid link:
I think parts of SEO are bullshit same as you, but this article made some great points and it bugs me that you're getting upvoted for saying something that had nothing to do with the article's point.
The description of Droid from Google:
"Get to know Droid a little better. Droid Does the Network. Droid is exclusive to Verizon Wireless, the most reliable network available."
This tells me Droid is Verizon, but nothing else. Two of three sentences are useless. When I search for iPhone:
"iPhone 3GS is a GSM cell phone that's also an iPod, a video camera, and a mobile Internet device with email and GPS maps."
iPod, video camera, mobile Internet, email, GPS. If I don't know what an iPhone is, I do now. Meanwhile, a personal test I've run suggests the average college student doesn't know what Droid is, and this search doesn't help.
Subdomains for the Droid link:
{nil}
Buy iPhone
Features
Downloads
Support
Apps for iPhone
A Guided Tour
How Tos
Software Update
I think parts of SEO are bullshit same as you, but this article made some great points and it bugs me that you're getting upvoted for saying something that had nothing to do with the article's point.
Search Engine Optimization is for maximizing your chances of appearing higher in search results than other websites. The OP's point is that SEO doesn't matter in this case. Before seeing this post I did a Google search for Droid as well and found that site. The site is awful and it could use some sprucing up- I did not even explore the site. But SEO is the least of its concerns.
Search Engine Optimization means optimizing for search engines means if your metadescription on Google sucks and your sublinks are nonexistent, you have bad SEO.
No, the point of SEO is to drive you up higher in search results. Droid is already at #1. There's nowhere for it to go.
A crappy site and meta tag are unrelated.
A crappy site and meta tag are unrelated.
That's part of SEO. But if you're optimizing for search engines, that includes controlling how your result shows up and what extra things show up too.
If you want to stick to your pedantic definition, then I'll put it like this: Apple isn't just at #1, they have an additional eight links present before anything else shows up. Droid has one link to their nine.
If you want to stick to your pedantic definition, then I'll put it like this: Apple isn't just at #1, they have an additional eight links present before anything else shows up. Droid has one link to their nine.
That is one goal of SEO. Another related goal is to have the search result's blurb compel the user to actually click on the link.
You're missing the point: try searching for something you want to know about the Droid...
"droid preorder"
"droid screen"
"droid apps"
"droid keyboard"
All of these subjects are covered in their Flash and they have content for but Google can't index or link you to any of it. So instead of Verizon owning these terms, which they easily could be, you're taken to 3rd party sites on the internet.
Even in their first result of "Droid" their misuse of a meta description (it's way too long) means you get 0 relevant information in the result Google displays.
All of these subjects are covered in their Flash and they have content for but Google can't index or link you to any of it. So instead of Verizon owning these terms, which they easily could be, you're taken to 3rd party sites on the internet.
Even in their first result of "Droid" their misuse of a meta description (it's way too long) means you get 0 relevant information in the result Google displays.
The summary:
"Get to know Droid a little better. Droid Does the Network. Droid is exclusive to Verizon Wireless, the most reliable network available."
If you didn't know what the Droid was, what would you think it was, and why would you care?
If you're not a VP of Marketing at Verizon, you're not going to like that copy.
It's getting harder and harder to claim that SEO is snake oil. Companies like Yelp and Mint have been built on SEO -- it's how they can out-market Citysearch and Intuit. Simple and standards-aware design and factual copy get you 90% of the way there; that last 10% is the difference between a solid site and a $170M buyout.
"Get to know Droid a little better. Droid Does the Network. Droid is exclusive to Verizon Wireless, the most reliable network available."
If you didn't know what the Droid was, what would you think it was, and why would you care?
If you're not a VP of Marketing at Verizon, you're not going to like that copy.
It's getting harder and harder to claim that SEO is snake oil. Companies like Yelp and Mint have been built on SEO -- it's how they can out-market Citysearch and Intuit. Simple and standards-aware design and factual copy get you 90% of the way there; that last 10% is the difference between a solid site and a $170M buyout.
<annoyed>
It has first match because of massive in-linking and parent domain trust.
Search Engine Optmization is closer to standards compliance than it is to snake oil. Most developers are just too lazy to do it. Or they grant it the same amount of thought that was spent on the comment above. As an SEO Account Manager most of my job is cleaning up these messes and client education so they don't get ripped off by SEO shysters or lazy developers.
As for the craptastic Droid Flash site, it doesn't validate and is a nightmare in terms of usability and accessibility. As stated in the article, it won't even work on a Droid phone. It still ranks because just like anything else, you can concentrate resources in certain areas and make up for shortcomings in others. AT&T has abysmal customer service, but they spend enough money in other places, like iPhone exclusivity deals and FCC lobbying, that it doesn't matter. You're seeing something similar, here.
Verizon can give the big finger to standards compliant, accessible web design because they've spent enough money on a traditional marketing and PR campaign that the URL has hundreds of thousands of incoming links with the keyword "droid" in anchor text. That page could be blank and it would still rank for on a "droid" SERP, that doesn't mean there's no such thing as SEO or that it's a "good" website.
Search Engine Optmization is closer to standards compliance than it is to snake oil. Most developers are just too lazy to do it. Or they grant it the same amount of thought that was spent on the comment above. As an SEO Account Manager most of my job is cleaning up these messes and client education so they don't get ripped off by SEO shysters or lazy developers.
As for the craptastic Droid Flash site, it doesn't validate and is a nightmare in terms of usability and accessibility. As stated in the article, it won't even work on a Droid phone. It still ranks because just like anything else, you can concentrate resources in certain areas and make up for shortcomings in others. AT&T has abysmal customer service, but they spend enough money in other places, like iPhone exclusivity deals and FCC lobbying, that it doesn't matter. You're seeing something similar, here.
Verizon can give the big finger to standards compliant, accessible web design because they've spent enough money on a traditional marketing and PR campaign that the URL has hundreds of thousands of incoming links with the keyword "droid" in anchor text. That page could be blank and it would still rank for on a "droid" SERP, that doesn't mean there's no such thing as SEO or that it's a "good" website.
Maybe for some SEOs that's what it means. I've seen too many where it's all about astroturfing links for pagerank and inserting junk into pages to fool web spiders.
I get that, but that's still not what it means. I can say that A means B all day and it doesn't change reality. Google, Yahoo and MSoft have defined SEO and support that definition.
If someone tells you that keyword stuffing is SEO, they're wrong. I could tell you that stuffing chickens in a bag is plumbing, that doesn't make plumbing snake oil.
If someone tells you that keyword stuffing is SEO, they're wrong. I could tell you that stuffing chickens in a bag is plumbing, that doesn't make plumbing snake oil.
I find that this article applies: http://lithosphere.lithium.com/t5/Inside-Enterprise-Communit... (spoiler: it's "Show me five things you've done.")
If he was worth anything, he should have figured out five searches that Verizon would want to rank high on, but don't because they're doing it all wrong. For an expert in the field, that would be simple, right?
If he was worth anything, he should have figured out five searches that Verizon would want to rank high on, but don't because they're doing it all wrong. For an expert in the field, that would be simple, right?
How about every term that they use to position themselves against the iPhone in their ads?
"droid keyboard"
"droid apps"
"droid camera"
"droid development"
"droid customization"
"droid widgets"
"droid batteries"
"droid keyboard"
"droid apps"
"droid camera"
"droid development"
"droid customization"
"droid widgets"
"droid batteries"
For the record, the top hit for each term:
"droid Keyboard" - http://pocketnow.com/hardware-1/verizon-wireless-motorola-dr...
"droid apps" - http://www.droidapps.org/
"droid camera" - http://www.engadget.com/2009/10/30/motorola-droid-review/
"droid development" - http://www.droidforums.net/forum/droid-development/
"droid customization" - http://swg.wikia.com/wiki/Droid_Customization_Kit
"droid widgets" - http://phandroid.com/2009/04/20/android-widgets-to-the-rescu...
"droid batteries" - http://www.accessorygeeks.com/motorola-droid-batteries.html
The "Droid" site isn't on the front page for ANY of these terms. In fact, they're all third party or Star Wars related.
Just wait til they launch multiple phones with "Droid" as the imprint (Droid Eros, for example). Then it will be a real mess.
"droid Keyboard" - http://pocketnow.com/hardware-1/verizon-wireless-motorola-dr...
"droid apps" - http://www.droidapps.org/
"droid camera" - http://www.engadget.com/2009/10/30/motorola-droid-review/
"droid development" - http://www.droidforums.net/forum/droid-development/
"droid customization" - http://swg.wikia.com/wiki/Droid_Customization_Kit
"droid widgets" - http://phandroid.com/2009/04/20/android-widgets-to-the-rescu...
"droid batteries" - http://www.accessorygeeks.com/motorola-droid-batteries.html
The "Droid" site isn't on the front page for ANY of these terms. In fact, they're all third party or Star Wars related.
Just wait til they launch multiple phones with "Droid" as the imprint (Droid Eros, for example). Then it will be a real mess.
And ironically, the phrase "droid you're looking for" only has one Star Wars page in the top 10, with the rest being articles about Verizon's phone.
More like iPhone and those terms, I'd say ..
[deleted]