The winter issue of Search Marketing Standard is out today – and along with the latest issue, I’m inviting you to take advantage of a limited-time offer from Search Marketing standard which will allow you to subscribe at 67% off the cover price. Now, Search Marketing Standard is already a pretty reasonably priced publication at $15/year — but this discount will give you a year’s subscription for $4.95. ($6.60 for international subscriptions.)

Now, I don’t normally go out of my way to advertise for companies on this blog. However, there’s an extra little piece of incentive in this case which makes me a bit more inclined to push this. Specifically, for every subscriber using coupon code HOLIDAY67, Search Marketing Standard will be donating $1 to the charity Toys for Tots.

The promotion is good for two weeks – it’ll end on Monday, December 10th. Just enter the coupon code HOLIDAY67 during registration to get your subscription.

And a note to those who keep track of these things: Search Marketing Standard is a good publication. They focus on analytics-based, meaningful issues in Search Marketing. This isn’t a publication where you’re going to see anybody recommending cloaking, keyword-stuffing, or any of those many highly questionable practices in the SEO world. It’s not about accessibility, but this publication discusses methods which somebody with a commitment to standards-based, accessible web development can faithfully use to make serious progress in the search marketing arena — without breaking their other commitments.

Subscribe to Search Marketing Standard

A while ago (actually, quite a while ago,) Raj Krishnan of the Google “snippets” team posted a very interesting article on meta descriptions at the Google Webmaster Central blog. One of the key points was about “tagging” your meta description.

The meta description doesn’t just have to be in sentence format; it’s also a great place to include structured data about the page. For example, news or blog postings can list the author, date of publication, or byline information. This can give potential visitors very relevant information that might not be displayed in the snippet otherwise. Similarly, product pages might have the key bits of information — price, age, manufacturer — scattered throughout a page, making it unlikely that a snippet will capture all of this information. Raj Krishnan

Read more: Tagging your meta descriptions

One common suggestion concerning the search optimization of images is to use the alt attribute to place keywords relevant to the image contents.

I really loathe this.

If it was an amazing, perfect, incredible search optimization technique which would bring absolutely fantastic traffic I still wouldn’t recommend the technique. Appropriate alt attributes are one of the most critical areas for the user experience of screen reader users — using them inappropriately is a great way to give this section of your market a horrible experience on your site.

Read more: Search Optimization, Accessibility, and Images: Best Practices

I just want to discuss one concept (mine) behind search engine optimization. There are still people out there who would opine that all efforts at search optimization are a form of trickery – although that number is certainly shrinking as the SEO community grows and matures.

A key element to SEO is the concept of the “perfect search result.” For my purposes, this is defined as the search result which:

1. Provides access to the most relevant information pertaining to the search.
2. Appears as the first or only result of its media type to a search.
3. Satisfies the searcher’s needs for the search they performed.

There is hardly such a thing as a perfect search result. As the explicitness or uniqueness of the search increases, the perfection of the results increases — but the challenge of constructing a search which will return perfect results is pretty significant. Once you accept that, the whole world of search optimization becomes much more clear. The goal of search optimization is to make your site the most perfect result for the broadest range of relevant searches. It’s a fuzzy definition, I know — but it works for me.

Read more: Helping search engines provide better results

Well, I’ve finally managed to read the entirety of the Summer issue of Search Marketing Standard — and I must say that I found it to be a pleasant read. The articles were well-written and interesting, which certainly makes for an overall high-quality experience.

If I had to say there was anything missing for me, it would be that I felt the material didn’t necessarily challenge me much. The articles didn’t make me confront new ideas about how search marketing could work, or challenge my notions of the world of search. Granted, I’m pretty well plugged-in to the industry: The fact that I’ve read moderately extensively in the search marketing field MIGHT just have an impact…. I’m not viewing the subject from the perspective of the intermediate marketing manager or business-owner who really needs the information, after all.
Read more: Search Marketing Standard: Print News for Online Marketing

Shari Thurow, a regular on the search marketing speaking circuit, just published an article in the ClickZ network addressing three SEO Myths and Misconceptions. Although the article is generally pretty decent, I do take some issue with how she addresses one area — the question of replacing images with text.

In fact, my complaint is with what I perceive to be the basic assumption she’s making in this SEO Myth: that web developers and marketers are recommending that web sites replace graphic images with CSS-styled text.

Read more: Replacing Images with Text

The links between accessibility and search marketing are frequently explored: creating a universally accessible website has a number of significant benefits for search marketing. After all, many of the features which make a website accessible (using text instead of images, ensuring the ability of non-visual tools to fully access content, etc.) are also characteristics of a website which has been optimized for search.

However, there’s a huge difference between search engine optimization and search engine friendly. What most accessible developers create are search engine friendly sites, not optimized sites.

Read more: Search Engine Friendly vs. Search Engine Optimized