Error Forum Blog

That is a (deliberately) rubbish headline!

“Link bait� is a catchier term.

Nick Wilson wrote a good, if partly defensive, post about link baiting in 2007, a term he coined (?) in 2005. In the post, Nick makes the point that “you need to put thoughts of manipulating the system to one side and focus entirely on providing value to your clients users and making that value easy to link to�.

A good point. However, the aim is to manipulate the system, and I doubt the manipulation will ever be too far from the link baiters mind. Manipulating the system to ones advantage is what marketers and seos do. Not that there’s anything wrong with that. The most powerful marketing provides value for both the seller and the buyer, which is Nicks main point.

Link baiting also encapsulates a fundamental truth – in any crowded market, popularity counts. There is a nonsense often perpetrated by some SEOs – “producing quality content will attract links�. It doesn’t. Not by itself, anyway. Quality content needs to be placed somewhere where people will see it, and shaped in such a way as to encourage viral take-up. Quality content published on an unknown site is likely to be read by no one. Garbage content will often be read and parroted by thousands, so long as it is published on a popular site. SEO gurus who believe otherwise can conduct a simple test – publish articles on a new site, under a different pen name, and see if the quality content is enough to attract readers, links and attention.

The web is a popularity contest, thus the demand for marketers and marketing strategy.

However, I think there are more risks to link bait strategy than Nick makes out in that article. I’ll give you a an example. In a recent hacking event, many people didn’t believe that some top SEO blogs had been hacked because they suspected an elaborate link bait stunt. In other words, the past history of advocating and publishing link bait had come back to bite some of the bloggers involved. Readers did not trust what they were seeing, so wary were they of being misled, and who could blame them. Ironically, a reputation for link baiting can result in less links over time as readers become increasingly suspicious.

I find the term link bait to be pejorative. It screams manipulation of the reader, and as my example above illustrates, it can backfire. That is where the bad reputation is coming from, because no one likes to feel like they are being manipulated, and it will no doubt get worse as more people start using the strategy in inappropriate contexts. What’s the first rule of Fight Club?

In some ways, the growing bad reputation is a shame. Link bait is really an old, proven marketing idea concerning popularity and appeals to self-interest. It is the art and craft of getting attention in a crowded space. Compared to some of the alternatives - begging for links – link baiting is a far more useful and productive strategy. In the hands of master marketers, it can be pure gold. But used blatantly, it can have unwanted side effects.

And like SEO, the strategy won’t fit all customers. Do Ferrari need to do SEO or link bait in order to sell more cars? No (although they could use a usability consultant). Their brand is more than enough to carry them. Attention getting stunts will most likely devalue premier brands. Too overt, and it can be perceived as being base and desperate, the very things Ferrari are not. Careful application of any marketing strategy is critical.

I want to expand on one point which deserves more attention: Have Descriptive Titles. While describing the content is certainly a great start, you can achieve a lot more clicks simply by applying direct marketing theory to your headlines. Direct marketers found that headlines were important - often the most important part of their campaigns. How do you write a headline that makes people feel compelled to click? Here’s a test. Which headline do you think was more successful? * Are you afraid of making mistakes in English? * Do you make these mistakes in English? The second headline produced far more inquiries and orders. Why? The second headline arouses a readers curiosity and self-interest. Now let’s take a look at Digg. Often, the most successful stories appeal to self interest, arose curiosity, and provide news. Digg may be new, but these old theories hold true, as the top stories are often using traditional attention getting methods, whether the writers realize it or not. Here are a few examples from the top Digg stories today: * Why Steve Jobs didn’t mention Leopard & the Mac (Reader reaction: “Why! I want to know why!�) * Who is planning the next war (Reader reaction: “Who! I want to know who!�) * Paypal Doesn’t Want Slain Soldiers’ Families To Receive Aid (That headline is both news, and arouses curiosity as to “why�?) * Public can purchase $100 laptop (Reader reaction “tell me how I get a cheap laptop?�) ….and so on. Pretty simple, eh. When crafting a headline, try and fit it into one of the following categories: 1. Self-interest. Offer something the reader wants. 2. News 3. Curiosity If you can combine those three elements, your headlines will be even more compelling, and readers are more likely to click. When evaluating your headline, ask yourself - do I give news? Do I arouse curiosity? Do I offer something people want? If you don’t do at least one of those things, the posts are less likely to be clicked. If you want to read more on direct marketing theory, I suggest you grab a copy of “Tested Advertising Methods� by John Caples. My good friend Sophie recommended this to me a few years back. While it is getting a bit dated in places, a lot of the theory still holds true, and I find it works very well on PPC landing pages.

Hilarious. Tired of all that annoying content? Want to cut right through all those useless opinions and articles and get straight to the good stuff - the ads?

Well, now you can:

“Google’s mission is to organize the world’s advertising for maximum exposure to Web users. Unfortunately, annoying Web content often overwhelms the page, causing many users to become distracted and overlook the ads.“

Probably blocks Yahoo! Publisher, too.

Ad content is king.

Are we in serious bubble territory here? Facebook are rumoured to be on the verge of deal with Yahoo - for $1 Billion dollars. “Facebook, the social-networking start-up popular with high school and college students, is on the verge of being purchased by Yahoo, according to two sources with knowledge of the deal“. Ok, I can see how a social network could be leveraged to produce that sort of revenue, but there’s a big leap of faith involved. These types of businesses don’t yet make much, if any, money. Some analysts think the price is way up there. No bargains, certainly. Reminds me of a time….1999, in fact. Alternatively, social media is the new Google. It will be interesting to see what happens…