I was talking SEO this morning with the new Director of Marketing at Catalyst Studios, the infamous Christina Jackson. I was conveying to her what feels like to me a frustrating or at least confusing point about SEO for companies like Catalyst Studios. I would really like to know what others out there think, what your observations are.
If search engines (like Google, yes there are others, sort of..) are going to continue to prioritize the creation of original content in our sites and quality external links to our sites I see a couple pitfalls for service industries. I start to feel like it's not going to be enough to just do great work for my clients and have a thoughtful website that reflects my work and philosophies to the general public.
Reason #1:
I will be beat out by anyone who is blogging about the industry I work in. Which sort of makes me think that's a real bummer... Google will serve up a competitor who spends their time writing about what they do regardless of what they do, or how well they do it.
Reason #2:
Other than pro-bono work or awards shows, I can't think of a heck of a lot of good reasons anyone would like to my agency. This creates (IMHO) another time wasting ritual of me spending my time trying to figure out how to get links, or even taking on pro-bono work JUST to get them. How sad is that?
So, the agency I work for does some damn fine work. All our pages do their best to have the right keywords and whatnot, but to gain in the world of SEM I have to spend time and money writing stupid blogs like this exact one, hoping it's relevant to someone else, and having it point back to my agency subtly, and praying for a link that counts.
How do other medium sized agencies (or any service based company) feel about this SEM posturing practice? Waste of time, or cost of doing business simply because search engines can't find a better way to view us? Or maybe it's completely valid to say that if people aren't linking to me and talking about me I am not as important.
I really want to know how you feel about this!
Thursday, June 19, 2008
Wednesday, June 18, 2008
Before you run out and buy that new digital antenne
It has begun to dawn on us all how much of our attention is shifting towards video content. The climb of online social media video as a way to share and communicate ideas is proof that we just don't want to spend our time reading. Especially on computer screens.
I had lunch with an multi-Emmy winning producer today who poses the questions to me about what this all means. Will terrestrial video broadcast go the way of radio and record label? (it's dying, FYI)
One thing has become clear to me. Digital communication of any kind can all eventually pass through the same conduit, correct? The fact that we use radio waves, satellites, phone lines, cable lines, WI-FI, cell towers, and Bluetooth is simply a matter of awkward evolution, and corporate attempts to control communication channels.
In the end it seems to make sense to me that the highest bandwidth, most scalable and flexible channel will win out. Eventually it will be too much of a burden to force delivery through multiple channels. On computers cross platform sharing, and information syndication has shown us that already. People aren't willing to buy a format if the content they want isn't on it.
Will traditional broadcast channels start catering to an older audience? Will new generations shun anything that doesn't have an on-demand delivery system? What about format and compatibility?
Maybe there is a potential positive upswing to all this. When our networks, and media conglomerates stop bickering about formats and delivery channels they might actually get back to content. Maybe someday the media channels and content creators will be two separate entities who both have quality accountability.
Wouldn't that be nice?
I had lunch with an multi-Emmy winning producer today who poses the questions to me about what this all means. Will terrestrial video broadcast go the way of radio and record label? (it's dying, FYI)
One thing has become clear to me. Digital communication of any kind can all eventually pass through the same conduit, correct? The fact that we use radio waves, satellites, phone lines, cable lines, WI-FI, cell towers, and Bluetooth is simply a matter of awkward evolution, and corporate attempts to control communication channels.
In the end it seems to make sense to me that the highest bandwidth, most scalable and flexible channel will win out. Eventually it will be too much of a burden to force delivery through multiple channels. On computers cross platform sharing, and information syndication has shown us that already. People aren't willing to buy a format if the content they want isn't on it.
Will traditional broadcast channels start catering to an older audience? Will new generations shun anything that doesn't have an on-demand delivery system? What about format and compatibility?Maybe there is a potential positive upswing to all this. When our networks, and media conglomerates stop bickering about formats and delivery channels they might actually get back to content. Maybe someday the media channels and content creators will be two separate entities who both have quality accountability.
Wouldn't that be nice?
Monday, June 16, 2008
iPhone Game Development
We just got our SDK, and we're diving in. We've got two awesome projects loaded for our crack iPhone team, one for a client, and one for our kick ass selves. For those who know little about iPhone games let's just put it this way. With the iPhone you have a hand held device that rivals units like the Nintendo DS and even Sony PSP. The catch is that it's also a Phone, GPS, iPod, Movies, etc..Adding games to the iPhone presents more than just mobile gaming opportunity, with iPhone the primary interface is the touch screen. By some foreseen as a limitation, for others (like myself) seen as breeding ground for a fleet of games that take full advantage. The resulting library of games is sure to be more unique than ports of existing titles. I can't wait!
I'll be posting more soon, perhaps after our first beta is available!
Project Management 2.0
Friday afternoon last week, our crack interactive p.m. (Megan Potter) and I took a working lunch to discuss some of our floating ideas about interactive project management. We'd recently kicked the tires on a few well known platforms such as Basecamp by 37 Signals. In the end it seems that although most products out there have the essential elements we require such as:
In the end we decided to create a medium-elaborate system of our own using Google Apps, Blogger, Twitter, and some duct tape. Who knows, maybe after this we'll end up making our own flavor of an online interactive p.m. system and resell it as a service. I doubt it thought.
- to-do lists
- schedules
- client and project classification
- prioritizing
- collaboration
In the end we decided to create a medium-elaborate system of our own using Google Apps, Blogger, Twitter, and some duct tape. Who knows, maybe after this we'll end up making our own flavor of an online interactive p.m. system and resell it as a service. I doubt it thought.
Friday, June 13, 2008
Andrew Norell returns from Flashbelt
Nice to have Andrew back. After all, he's only our lead developer...
According to Andrew, Flashbelt was "off the hook" this year. He said that Mario was amazing and inspiring as usual. Ham in the Fridge's dev lead Brad B dish out some game making "rock and rock and roll". As much fun as hearing Mono talk about themselves sounded, he opted for something else during that time slot. Perhaps it was Marc Jenson of Space150 talking about how to develop Flash sites and retain web standards and usability. Andrew, you're a kid after my own heart ;-)
If you want to know more about what Andrew took away from Flashbelt you can always ask him yourself.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
