Always & forever SMO will still apart of SEO because it will never lead to high positions in specific keywords maybe SMO will get higher traffic but never get different users per month like SEO
I always thought SMO was a joke but recently thought about giving a good try. It does seem to boost traffic, but not SERPs directly. Also it seems be a good strategy for a new site - to get things moving along at first. I have studied and observed many different angles specially on Twitter which I am now ready to exploit. However I am still new to Facebook and so will tread with more care.
I believe that with SEO can get more targeted traffic than SMO, sometimes with SMO get only crap traffic
A very good point and very true! NoFollow web sites are not inherently bad, though. A lot of folks think that finding DoFollow web sites is a quick-fix SEO solution. It'll help but temper expectations, as always. Really, sites like Facebook still have great value due to the huge marketd they represent. Just think about all the potential human clickthroughs you can have with proper placement on such sites. Remember: NoFollow was initially started by blogs and social networking web sites that didn't want to give their juice to spammers. Before people really thought about that application of the tag, comment sections were heavy spam targets. Certainly, if a web site charges for ad space, it'd make sense that they would control outgoing links as much as possible. That said, there are still blogs that allow DoFollow links but nothing beats warm marketing methods. Ask around and approach SEO with a permission marketing instead of interrupt/intrusive marketing methods. Anyone that finds your approach personal and/or thinks you have something interesting to share will likely give you free or dirt-cheap advertising options on their web pages. This is why affiliate marketing will always be a powerful tool (always has been, especially back in the days of web rings, when it arguably all started). I'd warn against site-wide links and overloading search terms because it *IS* possible to "over-optimize".
Good thread and good suggestion here by all experts of SEO and SMO. I think both are important and complete each other.
Indeed! I like how you think, Cossio. You're absolutely right: from a business perspective, SMO/SMM is much more operational/activity-focused whereas SEO is far more strategic and scalable. As Professor Schwartz has indicated, there is more value in (careful) SEO, which represents a better end-to-end approach to online marketing. Certainly, there are plenty of tools that claim to take the grunt work out of SEO and "SMO" alike, but nothing replaces discipline, persistence, and consistency. I don't think social media will ever be completely dismissed but, with everyone jumping on that bandwagon and some lazy web designers out there, search engines will certainly be going back to the basics. Content is king (especially true when the context is readable, relational, and reliable.. not too mention accessible and easy-to-categorize/tag).
How to do SMO? How to do it properly not spam-my? Is there anyone can tell how to do it and sharing the blueprint.
SMO is a part of SEO, they're not different things so you really need to concentrate on doing SEO right, then you once you've acomplished the main points of SEO (mostly written in the previous posts) you can then go do SMO.
Link Building: SEO – Inbound links are a large determining factor in rankings. SMO – Links are a result of success, which means that SEO benefits from good SMO. On Page Elements: SEO – Title tags, headers, image title, bold text and use of keywords are all influential on search engine rankings. SMO – Coding and tags are not so important, while visual attention grabbers make a bigger impact. Titles: SEO – The title tag of a page tells the search engines what a page is about and carries a lot of weight in the rankings. SMO – Titles and headlines are extremely important for grabbing attention and getting users to click-through. Content Must be Easily Readable… SEO – By search engine spiders. SMO – By human readers. Content: SEO – Quality content is important in order to rank well. SMO – Quality content is important in order to hold the readers’ attention and win their approval. Content Plus: SEO – Content alone will not produce high rankings. The structure of the site must also be sound. SMO – While quality content is essential, visual presentation can also make a big difference. Analysis: SEO – Analysis is necessary in order to know which changes have made an impact (positive or negative) on the site’s rankings. SMO – Analysis is necessary to know what types of content draws interest. Predictability / the Benefit of Experience: SEO – Experts are able to reproduce success with new sites (although it’s not as easy as it sounds), as the same elements can be applied. SMO – Those who know the social media audience can recreate success by publishing posts and headlines specifically for this purpose. Success Breeds More Success: SEO – Trusted domains will have a positive effect on all pages, including new pages. SMO – Power profiles on sites like Digg can keep traffic flowing with new submissions.
Unique content is even more important with SMO since your audience is the main driving force, as opposed to standard SEO practices, where you want the search engines to find your web pages and articles attractive. Like many have mentioned, you really can't separate the two, especially if you want to experience real gains The comparative analysis posted by Aisha is awesome but, in simple terms, great content will produce great results. If you take shortcuts or get lazy, don't expect an amazing turn-around.
Point me to whoever said this. SEO is very measurable. I work in the lead-generating business and I can tell that SEO is the number 1 source of quality traffic. because even when our clients get the leads we generate, They track it all the way down the channel and that's how we can tell that it is the best quality (at least in my industry). On the next level percentage wise is PPC. And I think social media marketing should be separated from SEO. Facebook has over 500 million users. It has it's own ecosystem and rules and the traditional SEO rules do not apply. Yes you might have to bring your visitors to your site for conversions but this might not even matter in the future because I'm sure facebook is going to release some kind of payment system. Many social media conversations start with do you get a dofollow link and IMO this is an entirely wrong approach.
I was waiting for someone to notice that statement! Let me begin by saying I am not saying SEO is not measurable but, with SMO, performance indicators are a lot easier to see, especially for the non-technically-savvy end-user. Real SMO takes place when social media, not just social networking web sites, is employed in a manner that allows users to share, vote on, and add to content in some manner. Say, for instance, you have a blog that uses videos to support text articles. If your users give your videos a high vote, which may be passed on to other sites it is syndicated on, other people will come to check it out. Share buttons/bars (those things are the REAL money) will also allow people to use your content and add to your virtual network. In that manner, SMO can be very organic and serve to both accomplish push and pull advertising for any project. Of course, it's only as successful as the complete Internet marketing strategy surrounding it, SEO inclusive. SMO is still mainly going to focus on push, bringing content to people, whereas SEO is more about pull, bringing people to the content. Mind you, this is not always the case, especially if you integrate your online marketing efforts properly, without any of the shady triangle link exchanges and other funny business that penalizes you with the search engines (and makes you lose some credibility). Certainly, if SEO was not measurable, there would not be a very business in this because clients would not be able to see the value-for-the-dollar/ROI. Obviously, SEO work represents a HUGE market, which is why we have so many dime-a-dozen SEO "experts" out there. In the long run, a real SEO campaign can produce tons of statistics but, immediately, these performance indicators may not as accessible or useful without some sort of trending data to accompany it. It's also important to note that SEO and SMO alike are not exact sciences, especially since consumer interests, search engine algorithms, and other marketplace changes happen rapidly (what's hot now, may not be hot next month or even tomorrow). I understand your perspective and agree. Don't jump the gun here, folks. I provide SEO work to clients as part of our overall service offerings and, believe me, it's one of my favorite parts of our business. You just have to be realistic and understand that there are still plenty of businesses that will see SEO as one of those "techie terms" and jargon service providers and freelancers throw out there just to be more billable. You and I know the value in the work but, for some, the time it takes to see a real turn-around may be too much for the investment of time and money required. No matter how good a so-called SEO specialist may be, some projects simply require a longer commitment than other. It takes time to see Internet marketing campaigns bare fruit. Now, if you compare it to much slower marketing efforts like just about any of the archaic, interrupt-based methods many "old money" companies employ, SEO hands-down provides more "bang for your buck"; after all, not everyone has millions of dollars to run print and TV ads, in hopes of a attaining a 1% conversion. Ultimately, good SEO projects require effective reporting whereas tasks are tracked to show clients the activity going on. With time, if you're engaging in GOOD marketing practices, that activity will equate productivity and not merely be "busy work"; hence, when I say SEO is not "quite measurable", I mean that the results may not be immediate and, thus, you must focus more on reporting the tasks being completed and actively communicating with your clients.
SEO is about search engines including Google, Yahoo and Microsoft. SMO is the new social media source including blogs, bookmarking websites and media sharing websites. SMO seems to build community while SEO seems to sell something
I think the issue here is the assumed value and connotations of SEO and SMO. We are ALL selling something, regardless of whether monetary gains are to be made. Good SEO should incorporate blogs, sharing tools, and all that good stuff. While the focus of SEO may be on doing the things that are attractive to search engines, if you are not making web pages look natural and creating value for your human visitors, you miss the point. As Cossio indicates, SEO results are easier to sustain long-term whereas SMO requires more maintenance. Regardless, social media has value in all Internet marketing, whether you label it SEO or SMO. The only thing that really changes is the degree to which you employ certain social mediums and whether you focus more on text or multimedia content. Web designers and Internet marketers alike should consider their target audience/market and not just consider what the search engines like (since we know they are fickle anyway).