There is an interesting discussion that has been going on a long time in the search marketing/search engine optimization industry about creating standards.
While I don’t want to get involved in the debate (standard disclaimer: I work for a search engine and what I am about to write is my opinion and not the official opinion of Microsoft ), the debate has kept me interested, not only because people are so passionate about it, but because when I talk to people about what I am doing at Microsoft I often have to try and define the industry for them. It seems to me that in this or any industry that is fledgling, the biggest obstacle to growth and acceptance can be how you define the work that is being done. Whether you agree with standards or not, the question remains how can you bring meaning (common ground) so that customers and potential customers can understand what it is that you do.
I personally look to one of my favorite theorists; I.A. Richards for answers: Richards is most recognized for his work The Meaning of Meaning: A Study of the Influence of Language upon Thought and of the Science of Symbolism. Richards, along with fellow theorist C. K. Ogden, established a theory of semiotics that splits meaning into three parts:
The conceptual domain - thoughts that are in our minds
The symbolic domain - words and symbols that we use to communicate with others
The real world - things in the real world that we refer to in our thoughts and with symbols
Source: Wikipedia
The most well known concept derived from these domains and the reason I was thinking about this was there was an idea expressed by Richards that “Words don’t mean; people mean”. Richards believed that misunderstanding happens when people give too much value or incorrect value to the connection between a word and its referent. Words alone mean nothing, it is the people who use the words that bring them value.
Reading the article When Talking SEO, Be On The Same Page, by my favorite schawg addict Tamar, you can see an instance of this type of confusion.
A High Rankings Forum thread is a perfect example of how people can misinterpret SEO terms. In this particular case, because a site has lost its rankings, an individual is looking to build a “link farm.”
Well, sort of. A “link farm,” he says, is how he builds reciprocal yet relevant links. (A real “link farm” is frowned upon by Google.)
If you ask me, that doesn’t sound like a link farm. But there’s a problem within this industry that can cause serious penalties (without any idea why) if you’re not understanding the proper SEO terms.
My guess is that in this particular member’s case, he lost rankings because his boss misinterpreted another SEO tactic yet again. It’s very important to understand these terms clearly. If in doubt, ask a forum member for help.
Outside of the search engine world there are other examples of this. Take for example, the Marketplace Money segment on the Fed’s financial literacy test. When producer Nancy Farghalli, was asked a question from the Fed’s test, she struggled to answer the question, not because she didn’t know the answer, but because the Fed left out what she considered to be important details to understand the question. These details were probably not relevant to the to the High School students that were the target of this literacy test, but in In her experience, there was more data necessary to answer the problem.
Another great example is mentioned in one of my favorite books, A first look at Communication by Em Griffin:
Lest you think the identification of a word with its referent is a trivial problem, consider references to acquired immune deficiency syndrome. Unfortunately, just the word AIDS has a chilling effect on many who hear it. Ponder the plight of the manufacturer of a dietetic candy called ‘‘Ayds.” Because the name of the candy sounds like the medical condition, sales fell 50 percent and the manufacturer was forced to change the name of the product.
(From the Third Edition of A First Look at Communication Theory by Em Griffin, Ó 1997, McGraw-Hill, Inc)
Standards or Definitions are like a GPS unit. A GPS Unit is helpful when the user knows how to determine where they are and what they need to do get where they are going. Without some point of reference or bearing as my dad used to say the map on my GPS is useless. (This explains at least in part why people follow the GPS off the road.)
Em Griffin in A First look at Communication describes these starting points it this way:
I’ll again use the word love in a romantic context to illustrate some of these definitional routes. I’ve heard each of the following statements voiced by different people:
- Symbolization
‘‘That’s what I mean by love.” (Spoken while pointing at a couple exchanging their wedding vows.)
- Similarity
‘‘As I interpret the word, love is like a lifetime commitment.”
- Spatial relations
‘‘I consider love to be sexual intercourse, nothing more, nothing less.”
- Temporal relations
‘‘As I see it, individuals can love others only after they like themselves.”
- Causation
‘‘I believe love inevitably leads to self-sacrifice.”
- Object of a mental state
‘‘Love to me is desiring the best for another person.”
- Legal relations
‘‘I judge a couple to be in a state of love when they have entered into a joint property agreement.”
(From the Third Edition of A First Look at Communication Theory by Em Griffin, Ó 1997, McGraw-Hill, Inc)
So here is the rub. All this was to say that maybe there should be standards, maybe there shouldn’t (I really don’t know the answer) but what could make the difference is if when we discuss the search industry or any industry we are in, we need to make sure we think about the people we communicate with. What is the message we are trying to get across. Are we explaining what we are doing with the heart of a teacher? Will the customer be able to explain at an 8th grade level what you did for them? Could they explain it to their spouse who is even less technical than they are and have that spouse understand?
I don’t know and am not sure I care how the debate will end, but to me a call for standards is often the call for us to be better stewards and servants of our customers.
Disclaimer: This is just Jeremiah’s opinion. Please don’t hate me for it. I love SEO’s both on the for standards and not for standards side and I will not take sides in the matter. This blog post came from notes I have collected at conferences in the last few months…
