Anyway, here’s what just happened…we’ll let the comic explain:

Here’s the full story on ReadWriteWeb. Maybe someone should clue the writer in on what an SEO actually does? Future Buzz readers already see why this is absurd.

Good luck with your “content expert” btw.

Let’s help the writer out with a quick visualization of how modern SEOs actually function, (and smart SEOs have for years) courtesy of SEOmoz:

Media, marketers and even Hollywood continue to be clueless and misinterpret what search engine optimization is. Marketers incorrectly put it in silos and media think it is witchcraft, spam or manipulation. Of course, none of this is accurate and even Google says SEO is not spam.

I expect this from most, but not ReadWriteWeb. They have to be able to do better for the web industry.

Dear ReadWriteWeb: WTF? Signed, SEOs Globally is from The Future Buzz, a Blog Covering Digital Marketing

The following is a guest post by Justin Champion. If you’d like to contribute thinking here, please read the guidelines.

Previously, Adam shared a post outlining 7 signs you shouldn’t hire that SEO agency. But what happens when you find a quality agency? Should you hire them at all, or should you have someone in-house instead?

As a search marketing sales consultant, this is a common question I am asked. While there are advantages of having personnel in-house to manage your SEO efforts, there are also advantages to partnering with a tier-1, trusted digital agency.

The ideal situation of course is to have a knowledgeable SEO on your team who manages an external SEO agency. This provides the best of both worlds and will greatly scale an in-house marketer’s ability to achieve results.

However, we understand this isn’t always possible. Working at agencies we may be slightly biased, but if you had to choose between one or the other, following are 4 reasons a dedicated digital  firm might be the better bet. At least until you’re ready to dedicate an internal resource as well.

1. Ongoing training and expertise

Search engines are dynamic: updates to search algorithms can alter rankings and visibility as well as create new opportunities to help your brand stay ahead of the competition. Understanding the changing landscape is critical to the success and failure of an account and can be mean making updates that are technical in nature.

Something to keep in mind: Because search engines are always changing, it is vital to have ongoing search engine marketing (SEM) training. It is the job of a digital agency to monitor and stay ahead of industry trends. Not only will this help you achieve and maintain visibility within search engines, but also help you better prepare for updates that can alter your visibility within search engine result pages (SERPs).

Being prepared is half the battle!

2. Resources at hand

There are many aspects of a successful SEO program, many ongoing, such as:

• Keyword research
• Content edits
• Inbound links
• Social / search integration
• Online reputation management
• In-depth reporting

Something to keep in mind: Generally speaking, no single area of a successful SEO program is weighted more than the other. For example, focusing your efforts solely on inbound links will not help you achieve your goals for visibility. It is best to keep a balanced, holistic program.

Think of an SEO program as a table and the elements that comprise the solution as the legs. If one of the legs is missing, then the table will become unbalanced and fall over.

There are various tools that help make this process easier and more efficient. Agencies not only pay for the latest and greatest tools to manage these efforts, but also have a process and a system for implementing these strategies for optimum results.

3. Team vs. individual

This is pretty self-explanatory: Would you rather have one specialist managing your account or a team of specialists?

Agencies offer a team of experts that will constantly monitor your account. And while some agencies have different models set in place for team structure, most offer a team that is dedicated to specific elements of the SEO process, such as:

• Strategy
• Implementation
• Monitoring
• Reporting

Something to keep in mind: Having dedicated specialists working on various aspects of an account with a checks and balances system in place, equals more work performed in a timely, efficient manner (this ties back in with my second point, resources at hand).

4. Cost effectiveness

One of the biggest constraints that many decision makers face–“How much is this going to cost me!?”

Consider this: Hiring on an SEO specialist in-house means a salary plus benefits. First of all, the starting rate for an SEO professional is around $45,000 a year. Secondly, what’s included within you benefits package?

• 401k
• Health insurance
• Vacation time
• Sick leave

And this is not including:

• Future pay raises
• Bonuses
• Ongoing training

Now you are looking at $65,000+ a year. Starting to add up?

When looking for pricing from an SEO agency, the most important thing to keep in mind is, “you get what you pay for.” If it seems too good to be true, then it probably is.

Most reputable, ethical SEO agencies start small programs around $4,500 a month (however can increase significantly based on program scope and desired outcomes).

Compare the prices:

• In-house SEO Specialist: $65,000+ a year
• Outsource to a team of SEO Specialists: $54,000 a year

Something to keep in mind: Make sure to research and do your homework to help find the agency that best fits your company.

One final note: Companies mature in their marketing tend to have digitally savvy team members who use agencies to scale execution, evolve strategies and push their team forward. Ideally, you’ll get there too, at which point it becomes crystal clear when to hire, when to partner and who to choose for both.

Justin Champion is a Search Marketing Sales Consultant with Search Mojo, a dedicated search engine optimization and pay per click advertising agency. He works with new prospects to determine the best fitting search marketing solution to achieve their goals. He also is a regular blogging contributor to Search Mojo’s blog, Search Marketing Sage.

image credit: Shutterstock

4 Reasons To Partner With An Agency For SEO is from The Future Buzz, a Blog Covering Digital Marketing

Having worked at a variety of different digital marketing consultancies (including an SEO firm) I’ve been privy to the pitches, proposals and processes of many competing agencies.

Usually they’re forwarded by client for a second opinion, I’m brought into meetings with other agencies or even friends ask me for an opinion about a consultancy they are thinking of hiring.

I’ve also been pitched myself by SEO firms, who don’t realize that, in fact, our team at LEWIS executes SEO services for clients (at the intersection of search, social and PR). When reviewing their plans I’m frequently amused by just how ignorant many are to a truly effective online marketing program.

While a select few SEO shops such as TopRank Marketing, (my previous employer) Outspoken Media, Portent Interactive and AimClear offer top-notch SEO services, an overwhelming majority of agencies in this space should be avoided at all costs.

So what are the worst things I’ve seen from an insider perspective? Here are 7 signs you definitely shouldn’t hire that SEO agency:

1. They guarantee first page / place rankings

This is just silly, no SEO firm can or should guarantee this. First of all, rankings are a KPI of traffic, by themselves they don’t really mean anything. But secondly, firms saying this are saying it because they have no real reputation, results or reputable clients to stand on. No legitimate SEO firms promise this. None. Zero exceptions. If you ever see this, run.

2. They only provide ranking reports but not actual search traffic / conversion reports

Again with rankings, here I am referring to SEO shops that don’t actually report any search traffic or conversion data. They likely don’t even have a process to get access to any client’s web analytics, because that would make them actually be accountable to results-oriented metrics. Instead they simply provide ranking reports. Which are completely meaningless on their own. As said, rankings are a KPI, not an outcome – and becoming less and less important everyday in a search landscape prioritizing personalization and social.

Judging an SEO firm on search rankings is like judging a social media firm on their ability to increase your Klout score. It might make everyone feel warm and fuzzy. It won’t actually produce outcomes.

3. Their plans purely involve building links and bookmarking a limited set of web pages

This is a dinosaur method of SEO. And by dinosaur, we mean one companies were implementing years ago when anchor text links reigned supreme, before searchers started getting smarter, (remember, 1-2 word queries are now decreasing, while 3-5+ word queries are increasing) before personalization (when everyone saw the same page 1) and before search engines started favoring robust, content rich sites based on a diverse tapestry of signals difficult to game (brand, social, etc.).

I’ve seen SEO firms who tell brands “oh, your 20 page site is fine, that’s all you need – we’ll just build a bunch of (worthless) links.” And, with this, my blood pressure immediately rises. This is not SEO. This is a waste of time and resources. Funny enough many brands love this and hire chop shop SEOs because they don’t actually have to change anything on their website or do any real work. Sad.

4. No team members represented on their website / no one in the industry has heard of them

This is an easy one to spot for any service provider. If the people behind a service don’t publicly represent themselves, you should never hire such an agency. Even if they tell you who they are in private, it is a huge red flag they don’t publicly share the leaders of the organization and at least a few team members. Further, beyond this, the SEO industry is relatively tight knit. Connect with a few well known people in the industry, they will be happy to tell you if they’ve heard of the agency. If you consult a few people and no one knows them that’s a red flag.

5. They’re not able to provide references to other clients

Any agency worth their salt is able to provide references of clients at reputable companies. If they are unable or unwilling to provide this it is a negative signal of their credibility. Again, this goes beyond SEO to any type of service provider: the legitimate ones always have references who are able to clearly articulate their experience / results.

6. The SEO / digital marketing trades have never talked about them

Conduct a quick Google search of the SEO agency’s brand name. If you find nothing on a legitimate digital marketing trade, run. Fast. The only SEOs worth hiring are the ones pushing the envelope and leading the industry. They truly care about what they are doing and are off experimenting, building connections and creating content on their own worth reacting to. You have to in a space that is so dynamic. And our trade publications, especially the top sites like Search Engine Land, AdAge, etc. do their homework to report on quality agencies.

7. They don’t blog / have an active presence on social outposts

I am sure there are good SEO agencies out there who don’t blog. But not great. Argue with me if you want, but the people who really care about SEO blog. This shows they are not only passionate about the space, but that they are savvy enough to use the web as an organic marketing tool for themselves. And those that go through the process, live it every day and constantly refine their own marketing have a distinct advantage vs. those who do not. This is the ultimate sandbox to learn in and any agency savvy in the web is embracing it.

Of course, this is just a short list. There are other items to consider such as technical chops, analysis capabilities, creative content ideas, etc. but I thought I’d throw it over to the readers: what are some other signs you’d add to the mix?

image via 50 viral images part 8

7 Signs You Shouldn’t Hire *That* SEO Agency is from The Future Buzz, a Blog Covering Digital Marketing

Or maybe you have no clue what I’m talking about and have been enjoying a high quality search experience, ignoring the early adopter pontification.

Either way, the truth is most people think search engines do a good job.

A survey reported by Search Engine Land shows this nicely – 89% of users are satisfied with their search results (and a big 0% say poor):

So early adopters aside, the general population thinks search engines do pretty well. I would tend to agree even if there are some edge cases of spam leaking through. I find the results of Google to be very high quality – and in cases I can’t find what I want with a regular search, I’ve got the important operators memorized anyway. That’s why it’s funny to me when tech savvy people complain about lack of quality in Google. If you know how to search you can definitely find what you need.

With that in mind, I wanted to weigh in my opinion about some of the conversations about search going on around the web lately:

Search is not a simple problem to solve

An ever-expanding mix of content, sites and services sprout up daily. All trying to compete with the existing ones. Concurrently, all of them are working to develop content and create signal to their sites that will help show quality ahead of others. All of this while existing sites continue to market themselves to improve both search and social performance. Search engines have been working hard to keep up and maintain relevancy and quality despite the changing landscape of the web. It’s not an easy problem to solve and if you consider how good most of the results are even without using advanced queries I’d say the major engines all do well.

If you go looking for imperfection of course you’re going to find it

Web search is not a problem that is 100% perfectly solved. It may never be. That’s because the one constant of the web is change. In content, in relevant quality signals and how we use it. And that’s OK – dealing with indexing near-infinite amounts of content you will always be able to find a search which isn’t perfect if you look hard enough. Thus is the nature of searching for information. I think a lot of the complaining lately is from users who expect everything to be perfect. We’re trending to a web that’s getting even better at predicating what we want however that’s just not a reality yet. But it’s so good considering how nascent the technology is in the bigger picture that we should all be amazed. Literally frozen in amazement. I think aside from those complaining because they feel slighted by Google, it is a case of everything is amazing and nobody’s happy.

Complaints about monopoly are absurd

Our government does some pretty obnoxious things such as allowing businesses to influence them with monetary contributions, rallying against the wrong things to “protect the children” simply to generate public approval (but not actually accomplish anything) and other items which are pretty frustrating, but sadly not out of the norm. So the fact that Google now has to go to Washington to lobby against search engine regulation isn’t a surprise, but is equally as ridiculous. Google is not a monopoly. It’s popular because it’s good. Don’t like it? Use Bing. Or Blekko. Or Duck Duck Go. Or Yahoo. The point is Google is most certainly not the only web search option and it is consumer preference to use them.

Search is still a disruptive business

Web search is hardly new, but it is still a very disruptive business. And so naturally a lot of people don’t like Google. Some media entities see search as a double edge sword – it sends them traffic, but they think Google “takes” advertising revenue from them. I use “take” in quotes because while some media see it as taking, I take a different perspective: that media does not need to be saved from search. They need to evolve how they monetize and build community. The opportunity is there and pivoting their approach could actually make Google their largest ally instead of something to be feared. And yet it’s easier to cling to the past and fight progress. Hard to feel sympathy for anyone who is being disrupted by technology though because that’s sort of how innovation works. Evolve or don’t, but to rally against it makes you look like you can’t compete.

Social does not kill search – they work together

While some people like to think social is “killing SEO” they are being shortsighted: search is a core function of the web and is not going away. My main focus at LEWIS PR is social, not search. But I view the web holistically and for clients we ensure that anything happening in social is helping their search visibility. Social media pros who don’t also understand search need to learn SEO as they are falling short of their craft. Besides, putting social before search is like putting the cart before the horse. The order here matters. Think about it – even if you succeed wildly in social if your main site isn’t optimized you just built a whole lot of signal that didn’t even help you rank or gain traffic. Your competitors will still be found ahead of you by those with an immediate need for their product or service. Social builds community and branding, but organic search produces the cleanest, most relevant traffic.

I think at the end of the day all the ranting about Google falls under one of the following buckets:

• Someone has a product that competes, and thus wants to try to position Google as evil or less relevant.
• An SEO is upset that Google is going a direction they don’t like or want.
• A blogger or reporter writes something negative or anti-Google because it’s good for pageviews and links (and ultimately more traffic from Google – talk about biting the hand that feeds them!).
• Media are upset Google is making ad revenue by indexing their content (yet sending them free traffic – instead of complaining they should take advantage of this to build community and ultimately more revenue).
• A tech geek found a SERP they didn’t like and wants to use it as an example the sky is falling (while a majority of people are finding their searches valuable).

Meanwhile, I remain a fan and supporter of Google – their products are strong, and much of the complaining is either undue or has ulterior motives behind it.

In Defense Of Google is from The Future Buzz, a Blog Covering Digital Marketing

And a contributing factor of most vertical-specific site success is the long tail of search. I share very specific ideas that a small subset of the population are interested in. I’m sure your company or blog is similar: some of the most valuable traffic is via very specific queries in the tail.

That’s Quora’s game except to be horizontal, and if you’re answering or asking questions there you’re helping them win it. That’s basically how sites like Mahalo, Yahoo Answers and eHow function – they become (maybe) useful hubs of information on the cheap and dominate the tail (and sometimes the head) of search.

Quora is a nicer packaged version of this and has an smart community using them thanks to a good user experience. I’m not saying it’s not an interesting service and of course has alot of good content. It is, and it does – but let’s not turn a blind eye to their play to acquire content and links and win SERPs. Let’s look at some of their initial equity racked up:

link data: unfiltered links via Majestic SEO, page data via Yahoo Site Explorer

Not bad at all for a relatively new site. Quora does have a long way to go to catch their competitors but they’re already starting to win SERPs, i.e.:

How does all this translate into traffic?  They’re beginning to get some good traction:

Data via Compete

However this is just a fraction of their less buzz-worthy competitors. Despite some people yelling “the sky is falling” on search – the answer factories continue to trend up by providing content to feed the tail. So long as they prove useful to consumers the engines aren’t going to stop ranking them. This is a (sample) of the real market they are playing in and provides some context:

Data via Compete

But what’s the takeaway for the rest of us? I.E. – those of us with our own vertical-specific sites and blogs (pretty much all of you)?

With my consumer hat on, Quora is super interesting. With my marketing hat on – just like any other outpost – I would caution companies about building out authority pages on Quora ahead of their own sites to answer specific questions. Remember that Quora is specifically designed to win SERPs – likely at the expense of your own high value, vertical-specific pages which make more sense to get found in search ahead of behemoth Q&A sites.

As part of a spoke of efforts Quora has marketing potential. But most companies don’t even fund their own inbound marketing programs enough yet to justify a focus away from their own blogs and sites. Nearly every company already spends way too much time external of their own web properties vs. taking advantage of the opportunity staring them in the face. Thus sites like Quora (they’re certainly not alone in this space) will eat a free lunch on every topic, because no one bothers to answer consumer and market demand on their own properties.

While Quora in particular is a neat service and certainly does have interesting social potential think carefully about your efforts here (and the search/social juice your company throws this type of site). One of their core tactics is obviously search and it feels like, coupled with social signal generated as part of the design, a next generation play to win the tail.

Is Quora A Next Generation Long Tail Play? is from The Future Buzz, a Blog Covering Digital Marketing