<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<rss xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" version="2.0"><channel><title>Disqus - Latest Comments for mcbuzz</title><link>http://disqus.com/by/mcbuzz/</link><description></description><atom:link href="http://disqus.com/mcbuzz/comments.rss" rel="self"></atom:link><language>en</language><lastBuildDate>Wed, 03 Jan 2018 16:25:00 -0000</lastBuildDate><item><title>Re: New Year&amp;#8217;s Reading Resolutions from LunaMetrics</title><link>https://www.bounteous.com/insights/2018/01/03/new-years-reading-resolutions-lunametrics/#comment-3690341393</link><description>&lt;p&gt;Donovan - Awesome set of resources. Thank you!&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Mark McLaren</dc:creator><pubDate>Wed, 03 Jan 2018 16:25:00 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: User-ID: Measuring Real Users Instead of Devices</title><link>https://www.bounteous.com/insights/2015/08/13/user-id-measuring-real-users/#comment-2597650328</link><description>&lt;p&gt;Outstanding article. Thank you!&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Mark McLaren</dc:creator><pubDate>Wed, 30 Mar 2016 17:45:42 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: SMBs Don&amp;#8217;t Prioritize SEO</title><link>http://rumo.dev.contentive.com/publishing/sew/sew/news/2426099/smbs-dont-prioritize-seo#comment-2256726776</link><description>&lt;p&gt;R.Rogerson gets it right. SMBs have so many irons in the fire they rarely have time for well-planned, well-executed, consistent effort in digital marketing, whether it's SEO, SEM, social, email or analytics. The "I'm going to do it myself - eventually" attitude is classic. Of course, nine times out of ten, "eventually" means "not gonna happen."&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Mark McLaren</dc:creator><pubDate>Wed, 16 Sep 2015 11:02:03 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: What is &amp;#8220;to use this feature visit: event-tracking.com&amp;#8221; in Google Analytics</title><link>https://www.topdraw.com/blog/spammers-now-targeting-google-analytics-events/#comment-2238048053</link><description>&lt;p&gt;Hi Justin - Thanks for checking in on this issue. Do you have any updates?&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Mark McLaren</dc:creator><pubDate>Sat, 05 Sep 2015 16:10:45 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: Why You Can’t Ignore Links</title><link>http://searchengineland.com/?p=226259#comment-2184933467</link><description>&lt;p&gt;Thanks, Scott. I have heard the buzz about links becoming less of a ranking factor, but I strongly disagree that building them is not worth the effort. Here's Matt Cutts saying the same thing last year &lt;a href="http://searchengineland.com/matt-cutts-link-building-sweat-plus-creativity-197017" rel="nofollow noopener" target="_blank" title="http://searchengineland.com/matt-cutts-link-building-sweat-plus-creativity-197017"&gt;http://searchengineland.com...&lt;/a&gt; and here's the most recent MOZ Search Ranking Factors survey - dominated by various link-based signals as the top ranking factors. Although the MOZ survey is from 2013, I think we'll see that links remain the #1 ranking factors when the 2015 survey comes out. &lt;a href="https://moz.com/search-ranking-factors" rel="nofollow noopener" target="_blank" title="https://moz.com/search-ranking-factors"&gt;https://moz.com/search-rank...&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Mark McLaren</dc:creator><pubDate>Mon, 10 Aug 2015 15:06:23 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: Why You Can’t Ignore Links</title><link>http://searchengineland.com/?p=226259#comment-2181823807</link><description>&lt;p&gt;Scott - I'm sure you know this, but ranking #1 for various keywords, as in the Netflix case, is not an end in itself. And it's hardly the only benefit that comes from great inbound links. As more inbound links point to that page, its authority will continue to increase. That does much more than help the page rank in SERPs. The authority can be passed to other pages on the site by internal links or to pages on other domains, and it increases the authority of the Netflix domain overall.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;There is plenty of evidence to support the claim that authoritative sites pass authority to pages and domains they link to. And, conversely, there is plenty of evidence that spammy links do the opposite. Spammy links are penalized by Google because inbound links pass authority, not just because they make a single page rank for various keywords.&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Mark McLaren</dc:creator><pubDate>Sat, 08 Aug 2015 16:22:02 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: Why You Can’t Ignore Links</title><link>http://searchengineland.com/?p=226259#comment-2177945273</link><description>&lt;p&gt;Andrew - Your post is great for lots of reasons: You address the question of whether links will magically appear as long as a site produces great content. The idea that this passive approach to linkbuilding is all companies need today is a widespread misconception.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;You show why this is not the case even when major brands spend the time and money to create great content. And, what really sets your post apart from most of the "all you need is great content" posts is the real-world examples.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Why wouldn't these brands want to investigate and follow up when content that's clearly engaging can get more links? Relevant links to awesome content improve user experience. They show how one site relates to another - in a good way. Links are still one of the most important features of the web, something search engines have always tried to discover and use to rank results.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Let's ask the "all you need is great content" writers another question: Should you offer great content without optimizing HTML markup on the page? No way.&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Mark McLaren</dc:creator><pubDate>Thu, 06 Aug 2015 13:13:45 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: Top 8 Google Analytics Reports for Managing Organic SEO Campaigns</title><link>http://rumo.dev.contentive.com/publishing/sew/sew/how-to/2333093/top-8-google-analytics-reports-for-managing-organic-seo-campaigns#comment-1902314874</link><description>&lt;p&gt;Chuck,&lt;br&gt;Thanks for this post. I'm late to the party, but the post ranks so well it seems like a good one to comment on. Note that report #3, the Acquisition Efficiency Analysis Report, might show a discrepancy between organic and paid Goal Conversion Rate and Per Visit Goal Value. But we need to keep in mind that conversions don't always happen on the first visit. The Multi-Channel Funnels reports in Google Analytics (under Conversions) show the relationships between different channels leading up to a conversion.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Out of 132,000 visits in the example shown, over 40,000 are returning visitors. Returning organic visitors may be the ones converting. And they may have originally found the site via paid search.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;It's also important to determine whether the data in the report shown is reliable. A conversion rate of 17% (and per visit goal value of $0.96) from Twitter - when compared to direct and organic - seems unlikely.&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Mark McLaren</dc:creator><pubDate>Wed, 11 Mar 2015 19:41:05 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: How to create a content strategy – and measure its value</title><link>https://raventools.com/blog/how-to-create-a-content-strategy-and-measure-its-value/#comment-698124150</link><description>&lt;p&gt;Sound advice. Which social monitoring tools do you use / recommend?&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Mark McLaren</dc:creator><pubDate>Thu, 01 Nov 2012 16:12:00 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: My &amp;#8220;The Future of Mobile&amp;#8221; Talk (Video/Slides)</title><link>http://ceklog.kindel.com/2012/08/28/my-the-future-of-mobile-talk-videoslides/#comment-632760709</link><description>&lt;p&gt;Great talk tonight, Charlie! It's always nice to get a meta perspective from someone who has been there and knows how to put that big picture into intelligible language. You've got a new follower.&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Mark McLaren</dc:creator><pubDate>Wed, 29 Aug 2012 01:18:42 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: You Know You&amp;#8217;re An Enterprise SEO If&amp;#8230;</title><link>http://searchengineland.com/you-know-youre-an-enterprise-seo-if-126028#comment-574719745</link><description>&lt;p&gt;On the money, Ian.&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Mark McLaren</dc:creator><pubDate>Mon, 02 Jul 2012 17:53:00 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: Emerging Giveaway</title><link>http://howsyourpony.com/blog/emerging-give-away/#comment-558819620</link><description>&lt;p&gt;Initially I was going to say that my favorite thing about Seattle is that it attracts awesome conferences like EmMeCon. If you look at the fact that they are holding this conference in only two cities, Seattle and San Francisco, that tells you something! If the organizers were having it in Seattle and Cleveland, that would tell you something else. I was also going to say that my favorite thing about Seattle is it attracts people like Laura Lippay and Heather Quintal, but that would have been for schmooze effect only and they would have seen right through that. And that would have been two favorite things, which is cool for four-year-olds, but not for this mature adult. My favorite thing about Seattle is that I can live here with my family of five without having to sell my whole soul to the Man like I would if I lived in SF or NYC or San Diego. Here I only need to sell a small part of my soul to the Man and there's plenty left over for things that really matter, like tickets to Sounders games.&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Mark McLaren</dc:creator><pubDate>Fri, 15 Jun 2012 16:56:58 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: Another bad day: Facebook shares tumble nearly 10%</title><link>https://www.geekwire.com/2012/bad-day-facebook-shares-tumble-10-percent/#comment-542206235</link><description>&lt;p&gt;Amen, Luis. You make several great points. I especially appreciate the one about monetizing "that tiny screen". It's something investors need to think long and hard about. Technological advances and adoption by consumers are happening rapidly. Advances in advertising are not keeping up!&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Mark McLaren</dc:creator><pubDate>Wed, 30 May 2012 16:08:37 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: BigDoor rival Badgeville scores $25M for &amp;#8216;gamification&amp;#8217; platform</title><link>https://www.geekwire.com/2012/bigdoor-rival-badgeville-scores-25m-gamification-platform/#comment-542196860</link><description>&lt;p&gt;Gabe Zichermann is an authority on gamification who has written a book on the topic called Gamification by Design: Implementing Game Mechanics in Web and Mobile Apps. Here's an interview I did with Gabe that talks about the importance of gamification for online marketing. &lt;a href="http://mcbz.bz/KU6mK0" rel="nofollow noopener" target="_blank" title="http://mcbz.bz/KU6mK0"&gt;http://mcbz.bz/KU6mK0&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Mark McLaren</dc:creator><pubDate>Wed, 30 May 2012 15:58:55 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: INRIX names top 10 worst traffic cities (and tells drivers how to avoid gridlock)</title><link>https://www.geekwire.com/2012/inrix-names-top-10-worst-traffic-cities-tells-drivers-avoid-gridlock/#comment-535904040</link><description>&lt;p&gt;Agreed these traffic numbers are skewed. There's no way Seattle is worse than Boston or Chicago, or, I gather, Atlanta.&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Mark McLaren</dc:creator><pubDate>Tue, 22 May 2012 14:25:03 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: From Facebook to Zynga: A guide to the tech giants establishing Seattle outposts</title><link>https://www.geekwire.com/2012/facebook-zynga-tech-giants-established-outposts-seattle/#comment-531375670</link><description>&lt;p&gt;Nice list! The trend is clear - and clearly beneficial to the region. I'd love to hear the argument as to why big companies hiring local tech talent is a negative. We only need to look at the Bay Area to see it's not true. Haven't more Seattle startups been created by folks who got their start at Microsoft than any other source?&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Mark McLaren</dc:creator><pubDate>Thu, 17 May 2012 14:47:14 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: It&amp;#8217;s getting even better to be a geek, new survey finds</title><link>https://www.geekwire.com/2012/cooler-geek-survey-finds/#comment-530638254</link><description>&lt;p&gt;"People who identified themselves as geeks listed pen and paper as the items that would be most difficult for them to live without." What? Combined with the response suggesting that TV is a technological device comparable to a computer or smartphone (which it is not - mainly because you do not interact with data or humans in the same way via TV as you do via computers and smartphones), this calls the whole survey into question. Exactly what is a geek?&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Mark McLaren</dc:creator><pubDate>Wed, 16 May 2012 17:06:38 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: Why this Seattle startup &amp;#8216;Punk&amp;#8217;d&amp;#8217; unsuspecting Craigslist sellers</title><link>https://www.geekwire.com/2012/seattle-startup-punkd-unsuspecting-craigslist-sellers/#comment-477664004</link><description>&lt;p&gt;Skipsnes: "You have no idea who you’re dealing with." Um. Yes. Very true. "For example, you could be dealing with a pesky entrepreneur and his buddy as they look to promote their new service." :) Getting in the shower? This is nuts.&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Mark McLaren</dc:creator><pubDate>Tue, 27 Mar 2012 15:02:40 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: Steve Jobs: 1955-2011</title><link>https://www.geekwire.com/2011/steve-jobs-19552011/#comment-327618530</link><description>&lt;p&gt;I remember my first Mac so well! And my second and my third! How painful it was to have to start using a PC to build websites because users were on PCs - until PC designers finally started making PCs to be more like Macs. Now every tablet wants to be an iPad and every smartphone wants to be an iPhone. The Apple design standard is the reason I got started in this business. Steve Jobs, you crushed it for so many years! Like Red says, your legacy will go on forever. Thank you for sharing and inspiring!&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Mark McLaren</dc:creator><pubDate>Wed, 05 Oct 2011 21:05:46 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: Quick Guide to Smartphone &amp;#038; Mobile SEO</title><link>http://www.toprankblog.com/2011/06/quick-guide-to-smartphone-mobile-seo/#comment-258838832</link><description>&lt;p&gt;Lee - Mobile SEO is a hot topic and for good reason. My question is, does Google rank mobile pages differently than standard web pages? In other words, do people who search &lt;a href="http://www.google.com/m/" rel="nofollow noopener" target="_blank" title="http://www.google.com/m/"&gt;http://www.google.com/m/&lt;/a&gt; see different results than they would see if they searched on  &lt;a href="http://www.google.com/" rel="nofollow noopener" target="_blank" title="http://www.google.com/"&gt;http://www.google.com/&lt;/a&gt; and, if so, what are the factors that determine the different rankings? &lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Mark McLaren</dc:creator><pubDate>Wed, 20 Jul 2011 13:09:47 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: Blogging, Dead Puppies and Small Business</title><link>http://carolschiller.com/2010/blogging-dead-puppies-and-small-business/#comment-95781827</link><description>&lt;p&gt;Great post, Carol, and a good litmus test for anyone considering starting a blog. Care and feeding is hugely important. Then again, some bloggers I know started blogging so that they could find their own stuff when they needed it. That was more about coding and web development, though.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Now that Google is looking more closely at internal pages on websites for their top search results &lt;a href="http://searchenginewatch.com/3641531" rel="nofollow noopener" target="_blank" title="http://searchenginewatch.com/3641531"&gt;http://searchenginewatch.co...&lt;/a&gt; I think blogging is going to see a bit of a resurgence. It's still one of the least expensive ways to optimize a website for search engines.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Do you think that businesses that want to have an online presence should have a Facebook page and a Twitter account? Does the same puppy test apply?&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Mark McLaren</dc:creator><pubDate>Wed, 10 Nov 2010 01:38:56 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: Nathan Kaiser lands at Blue Box</title><link>http://www.techflash.com/seattle/2010/01/nathan_kaiser_lands_at_blue_box.html#comment-28986728</link><description>&lt;p&gt;Congratulations to Nathan and Blue Box Group! Looking forward to hearing about more successes in 2010.&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Mark McLaren</dc:creator><pubDate>Fri, 08 Jan 2010 17:38:37 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: Intelius, Classmates face scrutiny over online marketing tactics</title><link>http://www.techflash.com/seattle/2009/11/intelius_classmates_under_scrutiny_as_marketing_tactics_investigated.html#comment-23495101</link><description>&lt;p&gt;John,&lt;br&gt;I would like to know what the tactics are. Links above to Breaking News, World News, and News about the Economy don't offer any information, and your post never spells it out.&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Mark McLaren</dc:creator><pubDate>Wed, 18 Nov 2009 19:35:18 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: Microsoft: 'You get a free laptop! And you get a laptop! And you!'</title><link>http://www.techflash.com/seattle/2009/11/microsoft_you_get_a_free_laptop_and_you_and_you.html#comment-23470756</link><description>&lt;p&gt;Hi Todd. Seems like the first sentence of this post is incomplete.&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Mark McLaren</dc:creator><pubDate>Wed, 18 Nov 2009 13:25:25 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: Amazon Turns to Twitter to Boost Affiliate Marketing. Is it Spam?</title><link>http://pamorama.net/2009/11/09/amazon-turns-to-twitter-to-boost-affiliate-marketing-is-it-spam/#comment-23261860</link><description>&lt;p&gt;Hi Pam!&lt;br&gt;Nice catch. This is very interesting stuff. The key seems to be that the affiliate nature of the link is - more or less - hidden. But maybe you could argue that whenever you click a link that takes you to Amazon, it's either 1. an affiliate link or 2. the person who created the link is just not tech-savvy/self-serving enough to make it so.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;This has got to be the future. As long as people are going to link to things, they might as well get a cut. The sooner someone figures out how to monetize links across the board, the better, right?&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;The question of compensation doesn't necessarily have to happen in the tweet itself; it could be part of a statement on the landing page.&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Mark McLaren</dc:creator><pubDate>Mon, 09 Nov 2009 20:33:56 -0000</pubDate></item></channel></rss>