RSS feedSeptember, 2007
SEO PR: Buzz-Worthy Or Just Hype? Internet Reputation Management
By Reputation Management
Author: Brian Easter
SEO PR is a buzzword that is both over-hyped and under-hyped at the same time. What do I mean by this? SEO PR is currently in buzz overkill mode in the Search Engine Marketing industry, but is drastically underutilized in the traditional PR world. Many traditional PR agencies are misinformed about Search Engine Marketing in general and are completely taken aback by SEO PR specifically.
So what is it? Search Engine Optimization Public Relations (SEO PR) is a blend of search engine visibility and traditional public relations that disperses a company’s message across the Internet by way of online media outlets and search engines. SEO PR not only helps disseminate an organization’s messages, but it also incorporates search engine-friendly communicationĂ‚Â through techniques such as optimizing copy in online content such as press releases, articles, whitepapers, blogs, RSS feeds and websites.
A successful search engine public relations engagement harnesses the power of the search engines by focusing on relevant keywords within the content being created and distributed. Careful attention must be paid to the content to ensure a careful balance between search engine-friendliness and good copywriting. Ultimately readers need to be able to understand the message without being bombarded by keyword spam, or copy overloaded with keywords affecting readability and comprehension.
As with any marketing campaign, integration of other marketing initiatives is crucial. A good SEO PR campaign heavily complements any Public Relations, Search Engine Optimization (SEO) or Pay Per Click (PPC) campaigns in place while strengthening a firm’s brand. Some traditional PR firms are beginning to partner with SEO firms to add this service to their portfolio and vice-versa. This is good news for many firms as the incremental costs of adding SEO PR to existing marketing activities should be relatively low assuming that both SEO and PR services are already in place. Much of the additional work is simply connecting the SEO efforts with the PR efforts.
The logical first step is to integrate press release activity with search engine marketing. By optimizing and distributing press releases online (assuming the right online wire service is used), not only will the release have the opportunity to get picked up by thousands of sites, but it will often be picked up and archived by Google News, Yahoo! News and by a multitude of other sites that pull relevant news feeds.
This means that the press release’s message gets instant online visibility and SEO efforts are also strengthened by having strategic keywords included in the release’s copy, with the most important ones linked to your website with relevant anchor text. Besides the link-building benefit, the relevant anchor text makes this “off the page” SEO activity very powerful. Moreover, the sites that are likely to pick up your online release are usually relevant to the content being distributed.
However, there is a point of diminishing returns. You cannot keyword spam or add dozens of links to a release. The press release needs to be first and foremost a press release that makes sense to readers. Secondly, if you litter the release with too many links it’s likely that the major search engines will actually punish you in terms of rankings. In addition, delivering press releases too frequently just for SEO purposes will not be likely to achieve your desired results either. Press releases should be newsworthy. Otherwise they won’t get picked up, even online.
The next steps can be easy depending on whether content generation and distribution are part of your current marketing activities. By taking the same approach as described for online press releases (minus the online wires), content such as whitepapers, articles, “micro-sites” and/or advertising sites, etc. can be optimized, distributed online and used to both enhance brand and bolster SEO results. The same principles apply with online press releases. Keep the content focused on its purpose whether it’s educational, technical, marketing-oriented or a combination thereof. Again, avoid keyword and link spam.
A word of caution when looking for ways to distribute your content online for SEO purposes: Avoid companies that offer services where you pay them to host your whitepapers or optimized content. These firms can deliver leads in many cases through various mechanisms which they usually control, but the content usually disappears as soon as you stop using their service. Such firms may be a fit for a demand generation program, but I don’t advise using them if your goals include a solid, long-term SEO uplift as you could easily end up in a situation where a significant amount of your content disappears the moment you end the relationship.
Many sites, directories, online media firms and related industry sites are usually open to distributing content via their electronic outlets if it’s of a certain quality, adds value to their readers and meets their editorial guidelines. Just like a traditional PR firm identifies a target media list, the same needs to be done for your online media efforts. Like traditional PR, SEO PR can be hard to measure in some ways, but tends to be easier to measure in other ways especially when it comes to search engine rankings, online press release pickup and traffic generated from the release.
Online Reputation Management Risk
By Reputation Management
Risk Management, Sep 2007 by Neufeld, George A
How to Avoid Being Dragged Through the Mud
Today, intangible assets can account for 70% of the value of a business. These intangible assets include, among others, brands, employee loyalty, credibility, trust and reputation. In a world that has been rocked by corporate governance and audit scandals, reputation is now more important than ever before.
In late 2005, the Economist Intelligence Unit (EUI) produced a report entitled “Reputation: Risk of Risks” based on survey input from 269 risk managers in companies of varied size. EUI’s conclusions were that * Corporate reputation is a hugely valuable asset that needs to be protected * Serious reputational damage can occur simply as a result of perceived failures, even if those perceptions are not grounded in fact * Understanding how different aspects of an organization’s activities impinge on stakeholder perceptions is a vital aspect of protecting a company’s reputation * Many companies feel that their capabilities in managing reputational risk leave much room for improvement, but the high rewards of success should provide strong motivation for progress in this area * Incurring reputational damage can be fatal, but establishing a robust reputation can provide a strong competitive advantage
Reputation has always mattered. Managing reputation, however, has become a bigger challenge with e-mail and blogs that empower customers, suppliers, interest groups, investors and the media. The scope of external stakeholders’ concerns has also broadened to include employment practices, environmental impacts, human rights and community relations-which comprise what is now increasingly referred to as corporate social responsibility. Modern enterprises face reputational challenges stemming from operations around the world.
Reputational risk management addresses conventional risks as well as an organization’s relationship with its stakeholders, consistency in outward communication, corporate trustworthiness and management-employee ethics.
Reputation needs to be protected as well as built. Hence, there are two types of reputational risks: negative and positive. This is important for reputation risk management as the mindsets for addressing risks from a negative and a positive perspective are quite different. Negative risk involves thinking about what could go wrong. Positive risk is about creatively enhancing the company.
Negative risks lead to loss of reputation, loss of market share, financial losses and, sometimes, as in the case of Arthur Andersen, for instance, the demise of the company. Several private and public enterprises have been in the media limelight in recent years as a result of problems with their products (e.g., Menu Foods), their internal strategies and operations (e.g., British Petroleum) and the actions of their management (e.g., Enron).
For private sector enterprises, loss of reputation is not good for their business. For public sector entities, loss of reputation reduces influence and impact. Private and public enterprises suffer from negative risks due to having an attitude that “it won’t happen to us,” taking actions without wanting to acknowledge the consequences or thinking that “we can get away with it.”
Positive risks are those that enhance a company’s reputation, market share, share value and profitability. More and more private and public sector enterprises are managing (or taking) risks that integrate economic, social and environmental imperatives into their mission, strategies, business and culture.
For example, Toyota started producing smaller and greener automobiles before there was a significant market for such vehicles. Taking such risks requires assessing public opinion and market demands. In the case of automobiles, it appears to be paying off for Toyota. Competing dealers are currently concerned that they do not have the environmentally-friendly products that buyers are looking for. Enterprises sometimes fail to take positive risks because they are too inwardly focused and fail to see external trends and changes.
Generally, positive and negative reputation risks are of equal importance. Like so much in life, maintaining balance is essential. Enron seemingly focused on positive risks (opportunities), with little regard for negative risks. U.S. car manufacturers seemingly focused on negative risks (e.g., no scandals to date) with little regard for positive risks-otherwise they would not be experiencing a decline in market share.
The key steps to managing reputational risk are to identify and assess the risks, make decisions and then follow through on the decisions.
Managing Negative Risks
What is your organization’s approach to managing negative risks? Are you reactive or proactive? Being proactive puts you in a position to mitigate or even avoid disasters, be ready when a disaster hits and seize opportunities to enhance your organization’s reputation. Where to start?
The first step is to identify the kinds of events that could befall your enterprise.
RSS