network
In a recent survey CNET asked AOL, Ask.com, Google, Microsoft, and Yahoo about their privacy policies and behavioral targeting. In some cases…
That's the title of my upcoming... er,,,... this... post. Mike, you may be right, but I'm guessing you'll never stop it. By "it," I mean the tendency of SEO snake-oil salesmen (sorry, "snake-oil 2.0") from selling their seemingly plausible SEO formula long past its "gone stinky" date.
Yahoo China just lost a lawsuit to Qihoo, a rival portal, but the company’s not going to go broke over this one; the court only required that Yahoo China pay out $9,210 and use its homepage (for one week) to display an apology.
It's widely known in SEO that gaming links is dangerous, and too many questionable references can cause Google to give you the boot. Still, the power of the link is there, and this leads many SEOs into a reciprocal link network (link to me and I'll link to you). The question remains though: how many is too many?
Advertising folks are always banging on about the perfect idea and the genius insight that creates a powerful campaign. One that will change people's behaviour and drive sales and vast shareholder value. But the world has changed. The tectonic plates that the marketing industry sits upon have shifted. What adfolk don't get is however great their ideas - no one cares anymore. Let me explain…
In a post called 'Talk like a Googler: parts of a url', Matt Cutts discusses how Google deals with fragments/named anchors. Here are some of the components of the url:
