Am I an “SEO?”
It’s certainly how people introduce me.
“This is Mike – he does SEO.”
“Mike’s an SEO guy.”
I cringe a little when I hear this. Today, having just returned from Seth Godin’s talk on his new book Linchpin, which tries to get at an identity/work problem we all face in our post-industrial age, I’m feeling a little introspective and asking myself why.
And I think I’m starting to realize. It isn’t that I don’t work on SEO – it’s been my focus for years. The problem is that, outside of the SEO industry, the label (and work) is sorely misunderstood.
There is no commonly understood definition to what SEOs do.
SEOs “promote websites in search engines.” Sure. But that’s vague.
We help our clients make more money online (if we serve clients) – but that doesn’t sound too inspiring.
There’s a whole spectrum of roles within that initialism – a slew of means of getting the “promotion” done. And, sometimes, what people think of as SEO is actually a bunch of lame-ass wheel spinning designed to do little more than take people’s money on a recurring basis. “Residual income,” as a less-than-honest businessman once described SEO contracts to me.
Take two people we might call SEOs today:
Lyndon is known for creating viral linkbait. He crafts content and stories that get people to link. And since links are essentially the great advantage you can build for your website (from an SEO standpoint), the net effect is a huge boost in rankings and, more importantly, traffic.
There’s a lot of psychology involved here – and probably a lot of gut instinct that isn’t easily taught. To call Lyndon an “SEO” misses, doesn’t it?
Adam works with companies like Zappos.com, educates their in-house teams and helps identify, and rectify, technical issues that are holding them back from ranking as well as they could be. I don’t think there are many (maybe any) people who know more than Adam about technical SEO issues for large websites. I know first-hand that fixing technical SEO issues can yield enormous, and often almost overnight, increases in traffic and sales.
Adam knows a great deal about web technology overall – the nuanced interaction of web servers, browsers, users and, yes, search engines. As a result he’s uniquely suited to troubleshoot ranking and crawling problems and devise sound on-page SEO strategies.
Both of these guys, you might say, have a focus on building organic search traffic. Both are successful and have reputations to back it up.
But do they do the same work?
And is there even a remote cause to put them in with the same lot who offer “guaranteed 1st page placement in 24 hours” or to “submit your site to 500 directories for $29?”
My point: calling it “SEO” doesn’t even paint with a broad brush. We’re eschewing the brush entirely and kicking over the can.
And sure, we’re going to do it anyway – we’re going to go back to the shorthand. What else do we call them that won’t be terribly cumbersome? “Those who promote websites through search engines via varied strategies and methodologies?”
I’m all for concision. But let’s at least try to understand the nuance behind it.
It isn’t about not hurting the SEOs’ feelings – it’s about sidestepping the pitfall of thinking SEO is a commodity to be bought as cheaply as possible. It isn’t “all the same” – not by a long shot.
And if you’re not willing to put the time into learning why you’ll get the ROI you deserve.
{ 8 comments… read them below or add one }
Thanks for including me, Mike, and for the kind words.
I couldn’t agree more with your thoughts, and not just because you mentioned me. I’ve spent many hours thinking on the same thing. SEO touches so many areas – content, development, interface, domains, branding, marketing, PR. Partly it’s due to the dominance of search engines as a navigation/entry/waypoint on the web. But SEO goes far beyond search engines, ironically, as you well point out. The moniker is aged and worn, and no longer useful. But it’s sticky.
John recently blogged on our site that, “AudetteMedia is not an internet marketing company because we do SEO – we do SEO because we are an internet marketing company.” (http://www.audettemedia.com/blog/are-you-in-the-right-business/)
Mike you and I get it – most of our industry gets it – but outside this small world, many, many people DON’T get it. We need to work on re-shaping that, if it’s even possible.
Thanks again for the great post.
Thanks for your response, Adam.
I recall that quote from John’s post – and now that I think of it that post probably had some influence on my line of thinking here.
I understand the use of shorthand, and I agree that “SEO” is sticky – but I have a real problem with being bundled in with a lot of “SEOs” out there who provide disservices to their unfortunate clients.
I guess blog posts like this are the best I’ve come up with to combat the problem. Anyway, I appreciate your support.
From your own About page:
“I started Unstuck Digital out of a passion for helping clients leverage the web to grow their businesses. Our most important role is to provide sound and honest council. That means we tell it like it is and arm our clients with the best tools and information available. Our campaigns are driven by a simple principle: results are all that matters.”
The next time you take a side tour while on your vacation, and the Bermuda shorts bearing neurosurgeon next to you asks you what you do for a living, will you say you’re an SEO?
If Adam offered some of his Las Vegas local restaurant advice to a stranded tourist at McCarran, and the thankful visitor asked him what he did for a living, would Adam say he was an SEO?
At a Pubcon coffee break, when Hans Kaspersetz (a web designer from New Jersey) introduces himself and asks what you do, would you say you are an SEO?
SEO is a marketing label. It fits specific situations, according to market audience. You are correct is misses a lot. But if you are in this business and only getting labeled for SEO, you have probably artificially filtered out the better (and larger) portion of your leads.
People who already know what SEO is will have different expectations from an SEO than people who don’t already know what SEO is, even if they are perfect clients for SEO services. Very experienced people will ask more specific questions, to learn if you are a content creator, technical SEO, strategist, etc.
I like to call it Competitive Webmastering see http://www.johnon.com/1/competitive-webmaster-blog.html
John you’re spot on – situations determine the mutual understanding of such terminology. Always will.
I always liked your Competitive Webmastering term. But I consider it your trademark in a sense. Still, it’s arguably more accurate, in its broad scope, than any of the other labels we toss around.
My hope in writing a post like this is to get at least one person who otherwise didn’t know better to appreciate the nuance and depth of the SEO world and those who engage in it. Failing that, just getting something nagging off my chest.
I appreciate the reference to my own “About” page – if I have a problem with how I’m generally labeled I might do a better job of labeling myself.
I liked your post, but couldn’t help notice how meaningful it was only within the industry.. which led me to your about page. I don’t see how anyone in this industry today can publish one site to both participate in the industry & market.. for the exact reasons you noted. For one client I “get pages to rank #1 in Search Engines” and for another I “help their website get in Google” and for yet another I “show the dev team how to make sure the site achieves the business goals” yet for another I “tell them the right keywords to use in their web page copy” etc etc etc.
Perspective is everything.
I can admit that’s probably the central difficulty I’ve had with this blog since I started writing here – a lack of perspective on who, exactly, I’m writing for, because it can’t be everyone. Something to think over.
This is precisely why I’ve been pushing (subtly, mostly by comment-spamming the audettemedia blog) for a shift in terminology — by recasting the technical aspects of “SEO” as SAC — Search Agent Compatibility.
Search Agent rather than Engine because I act as a people-robot liaison — I provide for and enhance the compatibility of an inter-web site with the various user agents sent to evaluate its content and context.
But I digress and ramble about moot points that have already been discussed, and really I just wanted to join in on a discussion/thread with the likes of John Andrews and Adam Audette — and to further promote the use of the term SAC. Long story short, I’ve decided that, to cut confusion with those outside the industry, I’m going to start referring to myself as:
The Robot Whisperer™
The Robot Whisperer™ – I like it.
Search Agent Compatibility (SAC) does make literal sense, and it’s probably better than the “technical SEO issues” label this stuff normally gets. Whether it’ll gain traction, though, is another question entirely. Maybe if you keep pushing it’ll start to catch on.