Category Archives: Google

Yahoo Answers Helps Your Google Rankings

yahoo answers helps google rankingWhen I first discovered Yahoo! Answers, I rolled my eyes. Another futile attempt to facilitate the “knowledge sharing,” which historically provides lots of value for the recipient but little motivation for the subject-matter expert. It’s been the age-old problem of knowledge management within corporations, and part of the reason that Epinions and other companies have floundered. The stop gap was supposed to be some software that read your e-mails and documents and used keywords to identify you as an expert on a topic for peers (yeah- you’d love your co-workers to find you ranked number one for porn wisdom).

Yahoo! Answers has a whole point system, but they’re not exactly exchangeable for food stamps or beer. It struck me at first like an ego tool with little benefit to those of us that are packed full of wisdom and answers. Heh.

Then I discovered a secret to Yahoo! Answers. It’s an honest Google search-engine cheat. In other words, it can get you ranked highly on search results for a particular area. I can’t tell you how many times in the past months that my Google search has led me to information on Yahoo! Answers. And my WillVideoForFood referral sources show that people are coming to this blog via Yahoo Answers more and more… because people are using me as a source to answer online-video questions.

So now, as a Google ranking whore, I’m having fun answering random questions about online video. Here’s a YouTube section. Go ahead and post a question, folks.

The Viral Video Genius shall answer you. He wants not points or praise. He simply wants to be noticed by Mother Google, the Orb of All Knowledge. To feel the warmth of Her approving gaze. For if you find Nalts via Her gentle direction, then he does indeed exist.

Note: It’s nearly impossible to find other good sources to verify this technique because searches for Yahoo! Answers and Google Ranking are swarmed with other information. But watch your Google results when you ask a question, and you’ll start noticing Yahoo! Answers ranking well.

P.S. I spell checked this, you neurotic freaks.

Long-Tail Celebrities Won’t Get Famous and May Not Care

Here’s an excerpt of a wonderful post on Cracked.com titled “YouTubers That Will Never Be Famous.” It’s an opportunity for me to “clear the air” about being a self-proclaimed “weblebrity” (which is, you see, rather distinct from being a celebrity). LONG post, here, folks but this one is jam-packed with delicious goodness.

The internet is a big place, but there can only be so many Tay Zondays and LonelyGirl15s. Not everyone can become a crossover internet celebrity, and behind every one of these superstars there are a thousand others just like them, posting video after video and hoping one of them sticks. The following users represent only a fraction of a percentage of the YouTube users currently clogging up the internet tubes with absolute garbage – if you can think of others that deserve to be shamed, feel free to add them in the comments below. Or don’t, actually – additional exposure will only encourage them.

Let’s start by explaining that securing weblebrity status facilitates all the dysfunction of being a real celebrity, but none of the perks. You see, you receive hundreds of messages a day from viewers critiquing your work (probably more than many movie stars). The positive comments give you false self esteem, and the negative ones crush you like a lemon wedge. Eventually you develop thick skin, stop posting, or decide to find your self worth in a more healthy place (like at the bottom of a nice glass of vodka stired by a Xanax).

But, friends, there are at least 5 perks:

  1. We get constructive feedback about what people like and don’t like about our mindless short-form entertainment (so in theory we learn). People look forward to our stuff, and that’s encouraging. Remember that three years ago we bored dinner guests with our videos.
  2. We have a lot of fun. Shooting videos, editing them, collaborating, meeting fellow creators.
  3. Some of us actually get paid by YouTube based on a percent of the revenue it makes from selling ads around our garbage.
  4. We don’t really clog up the Internet. You see, there’s plenty of bandwidth around. It’s kinda like saying someone is wasting your sunshine (there’s an unlimited supply last I checked). Your tan doesn’t come at my expense… unless I have to look at your digusting, peeling skin.
  5. We don’t answer to anyone except our audiences. No producers to tell us to “dial it down,” or sponsors forcing awkward insertions. No “review team” or fear of cancellation.

Now let’s look at VisibleMode. Do I watch him daily? Nope. Does he watch me? Probably not, except when I happened to pick him for the YouTube Secret Santa (I sent him a mug so he could sell out like me).

VisibleMode is one of the top YouTubers in Canada, and Cracked.com’s pick for someone who won’t get famous. Obviously it would be even more interesting to see a Cracked.com list of the few YouTubers that actually might get famous (a harder list to write, and a shorter one).

So now I’ll get to my point, which Cracked might have overlooked. VisibleMode may not soon be in a b-grade film or even an extra in a television commercial. Heck even Michael Buckley (one of the fastest growing, and television-ready weblebrities) may fade like many stars. But VM tells me today he’s had 6,760,748 cummaltive views of his videos. If Google sold those InVideo ads surrounding his videos at $20 per thousand ($20 CPM is the list price), VisibleMode would have hypothetically taken a portion of more than $135,000 that advertisers would pay YouTube/Google. Let me say it again. Even if most of the ads weren’t sold, the CPM wasn’t $20, and VisibleMode only got a small portion, he’d be making decent take-home per month. Will it last? I’m the wrong guy to ask, because I would have bought Revver stock. But I’ll bet he’s enjoying the ride and not too worried about missing a red-carpet event in LA.

The sustainability of YouTube and weblebrities, of course, hinges on advertisers garnering an ROI on the ads that surround this content. They’re fairly targeted and hard to ignore. And they’re in the context of content you’ve chosen to view. So the branding benefit should be worthwhile (a cent or two an impression) even if the direct-response may underwhelm more transactional brands. 

So assuming marketers sell products (or believe they are) via YouTube promotion, the advertising revenue will flow. A shake-down of creators will naturally occur, but the audience of YouTube is growing in depth and frequency, and media consumption continues to fragment. There’s a volume of valuable ad inventory lurking in the long tail, folks…. so...

  • Weblebrities might enjoy a decent side income without ever becoming “famous.”
  • Viewers will have a greater selection of garbage to fit their unique tastes- some cheesy stuff blended with unique, unscripted and short entertainment.
  • YouTube/Google will make some money as well-backed middleman. Heck maybe they’ll buy Cracked.com.
  • Advertisers should enjoy a decent ROI in an emerging medium that’s bound to resemble future television buys more than current television ads will.

Nalts may or may not appear on SNL, but he’s having fun while this lasts. I just wish Cracked would have picked me for someone who’d never get famous. Hey- I know. I’ll do a sunburn video. Worked for ShayCarl.  

One Small Step for Video Ad Standards. One Giant Leap for Creators and Brands.

One of the factors that has limited the growth of online-video advertising is the production and traffic work. Mike Shields of Mediaweek reports that the Interactive Advertising Bureau this week introduced a set of guidelines to standartize online-video advertising and make the medium “easier for advertisers to buy.”

The new guidelines cover three basic forms of online video ad formats: linear ads — interruptive video spots which are typically of the pre-roll variety, non-linear ads — which include the increasingly popular ‘overlay’ ad units, and companion ads — bannerlike ads that appear alongside video as it plays on the Web.

The guidelines, writes Shields, are the product of work conducted by the IAB’s Digital Video Committee, which is composed of 145 leading media companies, including Google, Yahoo and Microsoft. “This is a historic day,” IAB president and CEO Randall Rothenberg said, likening the announcement to a similar set of landmark guidelines put in place for banner advertising in the late 1990s. IAB senior vp David Doty said he thinks leadership and marketing, predicted “seismic shifts” would occur in the online ad business as a result of their adoption.

So while the viewer in me isn’t too excited to see the new “interruptive video spots,” the creator and marketer in me looks forward to the possibility that this may unlock some of the potential of this medium.

In related news, tech writer Leah Messinger writes about other sites beyond YouTube that offer advertising models brands can consider.

Google Engineer Fired for Failure of “Google + Virgin= Virgle” April Fool’s Gag

picture-20.pngGoogle fired the engineer who convinced Virgin Founder Richard Branson and Google Co-Founders Larry Page and Sergey Brin to participate in an elaborate hoax (see press release) inviting individuals to apply to live on a Mars colony sponsored by “Virgle.”

Wired Writer Loretta Hidalgo Whitesides called it the “funniest April Fool’s Day spoof I have seen.” Whitesides is the founder of a local chapter of the Family Circus Fan Club, and has California’s largest reported collection of Alf memorabilia.

david scheydDavid Scheyd, the 28-year-old Google engineer who conceived the gag last February was, yesterday, inexplicably dismissed from his position at Google — a job he held for 4 years. “Scheyd presented the Virgle idea with such passion that we really thought it would be funny,” said Melanie LaForge, a Google spokesperson.

“It was with great regret that we had to let Scheyd go. It became clear yesterday to both Google and Scheyd that the attempted gag was too obvious and failed to amuse even the most affable and simplest minds employed by our company — the NYC media sales teams.”

Scheyd declined to comment except through a written release, in which he attributed the prank’s failure not to its concept but its poor execution. “The poor video deliveries by Branson, as well as Page and Brin, brought a sad and creepy fakeness to what might have been a very funny and believable bit.”

Neither Google nor Scheyd’s spokesperson could confirm if Scheyd had any credentials prior to leading the blunder.

Georgetown Business Historian Professor William Lawler called it “corporate America’s least-funny practical joke by a landslide.”

The only thing less funny than the prank, said Lawler, was the discussion group thread that had such actual unfunny quotes as:

  1. Maybe the cure for cancer and aids is on Mars.
  2. Curing cancer and AIDS would no doubt be a wonderful thing, increasing the quality of life for many.
  3. Consider, however, that once eradicated, there will be other things that crop up, things we didn’t foresee.
  4. There are several Mars analog projects that have been underway for some time, testing and trying to make colonization of the red planet a possibility for humanity’s future.

Scheyd would not confirm rumors that he has been offered a writing job for YouTube comedian Sxephil.

P.S. I’ve just informed that April Fool’s is over, and I’m not supposed to tease people with fake stories. But the ImprovEverywhere guy told me April Fool’s is amateur day. So by writing a fake story on April 2, I’m communicating to you that I’m a pro.

“Sorry, Partner” says YouTube

picture-6.pngSorry, Partners. Seems a few YouTubers have been getting the following response when trying out for YouTube’s Partner Program.

“The current level of viewership of your account has not met our threshold for acceptance.”

  • Should they announce what that threshold is on the “who qualifies” page?
  • Or provide a message that is a little more human?
  • Maybe let people know that the ad revenue would be laughable if views are at x level?
  • Give applicants a banner and credits to the Google store, which would be enough for many?

sorry partner

Nah, I think they should just send this clip without any text.

What Does Google’s Acquisition of DoubleClick Mean to Online Video?

Google closed on the acquisition of DoubleClick today, and issued this statement to address concerns (continued Dart service, as well as privacy provisions).

As a buyer of interactive media (primarily paid search but also targeted display), I like this deal. Google’s muscle, innovation and discipline from the paid search origins means this could enhance the metrics around otherwise cute but unaccountable display ads. I’m tired of the “let’s do another bloated consumer survey to find out what display does to awareness, recall and intent.” There’s got to be a way to get conversion rates tied better to display, and if anyone can now prove the “one-two-punch” theory of paid ‘n display (think chocolate and peanut butter yummy), Google now can. And should.

marketing text booksOh, I almost forgot. Here’s my “Enlightened Stupid Marketers” video I posted this morning to spoof my profession, and it touches on the impact of friggin’ newspaper ads versus paid search.  Did you know that stupid marketers have two choices: to remain stupid, or pretend not to be? The core YouTube audience really doesn’t care much for these niche videos, but readers of WVFF might.

Where was I? Oh. Now here’s the challenge. This deal kinda makes some online media buyers a little twitchy, as some get threatened by consolidation downstream. Some of those flickering-bulb types (you know- the pretty ones that talk too much if they talk at all) will feel they’re one step closer to being as obsolete as their moms or older sisters who were, naturally, travel agents. Maybe they should be doing PR afterall?

candy cornIn reality, the online media mix is dynamic and will always require smart, strategic buyers. It’s just that they’re only about 10 of them in the world, and 7 of them lose their charm exactly 6.5 days after they win the new account. Like Candycorn, the first few handfuls are delicious, and then suddenly you feel like you’re eating sweetened candles and can’t stand the site of them. You loved the little puppies in the litter, and now they’re just pissing on the furniture, biting the couch and barking all night.

So get to the damned point, Nalts. What does this acquisition mean to video? Well, probably nothing initially. But long term it’s good news for two reasons:

  1. Text ads are currently more relevant than display ads around videos. Since Revver hasn’t been selling many single-frame display ads these days, we’re seeing the Google-run text ads (Adsense) served “InVid” style. Guess what? They’re actually relevant and capture my attention more than current display ads. I watch a lot of videos, and have developed ad anethesia for the limited number of CPG companies doing “run of site” ads across YouTube. Don’t stop, guys. I owe my YouTube partner income to you.
  2. Since it’s Google buying Doubleclick (and not the other way around), we’ll see display develop some of the maturity of paid search. Harnass the visceral medium of InVid (quarter frame ads) with their sister display ads, then add the relevance of text relevancy. And if the databases can be merged in ways that don’t freak out the privacy people, then ads become even more relevant albiet sometimes creepy.

Now Google has two more challenges to make video advertising really interesting.

  1. The Google account teams have to grow beyond paid search. This is not an easy transition. SEM (search engine marketing) buyers have a very hard time with CPM (cost per million- a term for buying for an ad based on impressions not performance). Meanwhile SEM sellers need to be trained to talk to CPM junkies. It’s kinda like being bilingual. You need a translator around for a period. Currently, it’s a buyer’s market for video advertising. I am convinced that the “marketers are afraid of buying ads around CGM (consumer generated media)” hype is a big, fat, stinkin’ red herring. It’s just that nobody is showing marketers how online video ads and more creative sponsorships can move their business. Google plus YouTube plus DART should be able to pull that off, but it’s going to require behavior and organizational shift.
  2. Now the big challenge. If I get a CPC (cost per click) based on text ads around my videos, then I’ll tag them all with free Viagra, mortgage, loans, lawers and digital camera.  So we need that ever-evasive “text recognition” technology that turns my droaning voice into targetable text. Blinkx was supposed to be doing this years ago. Then, of course, I’ll just start saying all those tag words as part of my scripts. 🙂

“How to Become Popular on YouTube (Without Any Talent)” – A Free eBook

YouTube Popularity bookThank you, dear readers, for your help finalizing this version 1.5 of “How to Become Popular on YouTube Without Any Talent.” Honestly, if I look at this document another moment I’m going to boot. If you’re looking for my real book, “Beyond Viral,” published by Wiley & Sons in 2010, please click here.

(Warning- clicking the image to the right will cause you to download the book, which is annoying but probably what most people expect).

This post marks the official release of the book. You can download it (for free) by clicking this link, which will open the 30-page PDF: “How to Become Popular on YouTube (Without Any Talent), version 1.5” by Kevin Nalts, WillVideoForFood.com. If you post the PDF on your own blog or website, please keep that title, and my name and URL. You might want to list this post’s permalink, since it will point to future downloadable versions.

While you’re waiting for Adobe to open (insert “car rusting” joke here), I hope you’ll RSS this blog so we can keep each other current. If you’re a YouTuber and haven’t subscribed to my videos, visit YouTube.com/Nalts, then select the orange button labled “subscribe.” Okay- enough self promotion for one day. I’m going to take a nap.

Here’s the book on Skribd for easy access.

Here’s a free 2-page synopsis of my book, “The Prophet of Online Video.” If you want to use this outline and write your own book, go ahead. I’m so not writing for a while.

Sneak Preview: “How to Become Popular on YouTube Without Any Talent” (Free eBook)

[NOTE- THIS POST IS OLD. FOR THE MOST RECENT VERSION OF THE BOOK, SEE THIS POST]

On Friday I’m releasing a free eBook titled “How to Become Popular on YouTube Without Any Talent.” I won’t make any money for each copy downloaded, but I’ll make it up in volume.

Below is a draft that still needs some fine tuning, but I’d appreciate some feedback from some of you core WVFF readers. Here it is as a PDF (version 1.3, which includes some of  your edits on 01/03/08): How to Become Popular on YouTube Without Any Talent

If you’re a blogger, I know I can’t stop you from posting this, but it would be great if you could wait until the Friday (January 4). Unless you’re some big-ass blog like TechCrunch. Then you can do whatever the heck you want. The several days I spent on this would be time well spent if it resulted in an inbound link from a big ass blog (BAB). Up until now, TechCrunch has only given the black-hatted viral marketers a spotlight. 😉

That said, I’m kinda hoping to “soft launch” it to the WillVideoForFood regulars before it’s officially released. I’m somewhat anxious about releasing something via pdf, and knowing I don’t have the ability to fix some horrible mistake that’s bound to be lurking within.

Thanks!

PS Here’s a synopsis of my forthcoming “The Prophet (Profit) of Online Video: Book synopsis,” which is being written to help marketers, agencies and creators capitalize on the growing field of online video.

Even My Boss Knew About This Video

It’s not often my boss mentions YouTube, and I usually try to avoid eye contact when he does. But at today’s staff meeting he mentioned that a friend from a former employer had a YouTube video called “Here Comes Another Bubble” by The Richter Scales. It’s a wonderful satire on the absurdity of web 2.0 which, indeed, begs for another bubble burst. It’s done to the music of Billy Joel’s “We Didn’t Start the Fire.”

No sooner had I forgotten about his Bubble video did I discover that it trumped me on the “highest rated video of the day on YouTube. And I had actually done a storyboard for my “iPod Angel & Devil” video, which involved makeup, script, and a wicked amount of editing time (parenthetically this iPod video was born out of my frustration about overlooking the free AT&T phone by signing up directly with AT&T instead of Mac, and a quote that popped out of my mouth in a meeting this week: “I just paid $400 to eliminate jealousy.”).

Kudos to the Bubble video, which will be one of the seminal viral creations. If I’m going to be beat I’m delighted to see something this entertaining (versus musical montages of funny cat photos). This was cleverly written, jampacked imagery, and self depricating (it depicts a blog post with “another lame web 2.0 music video”)

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fi4fzvQ6I-o[/youtube]

The Making of “Google Dream Phone Demo”

dig me google iphone dreamGuest Blogger: Brett Slater (SlatersGarage)

So… This is what the inner sanctum looks like? Kinda blah… He needs something on the walls in here.

Anyway, hi.

Nalts and I have been getting a ton of feedback on the collab video we did poking fun at Google’s brainchild, the “Dream Phone.” This is the one that’s getting all the tech world atwitter… the one that’s gonna be free, and SO easy to use, but it will also be used to help Google generate ad revenue — onscreen ads on your phone, etc.

So, as Allen Funt used to say on the old Candid Camera, “we thought it would be funny…” to tease Google a little about what it would sound like if cell phone service was paid for by advertising dollars, rather than customers.

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=naUnXplUtrQ[/youtube]

It was Nalts’ idea to do the video, and quite frankly, I’m flattered that he asked me to participate. Made me feel like Jonathan Papelbon getting the call to close game 4 for the Red Sox. I worked up a script based on a few ideas we bandied about, and then we shot, edited, and posted. (Well, I did, anyway. He’s in New York at the time of this writing, and couldn’t do it himself. Apparently there’s no internet in the Big Apple.)

I gotta say, as a relative newbie to online video (less than a year), I’m positively enthralled by how well it works as a buzz-generator. Broadcast media development is my career, and until recently, it’s been mostly radio advertising that’s been my bread-n-butter: radio ads, voiceover, song parodies, jingles, etc. However, I’ve recently found my focus shifting more toward video, and the marketing potential for brands online. I’ve been an active participant on sites like XLNTADS, and lately, I’ve seen my radio ad workload start to drop, and my video orders starting to pick up.

So, what WILL the Dream Phone look/sound like? Probably not as bad as having your phone calls interrupted by a sultry woman’s voice reading ads. But for free phone service that’s as good or better than the iPhone is purported to be, I might be willing to listen for a couple seconds before my call goes through…

What do you think?

Thanks to Nalts for inviting me in on this little project… And thanks to my wife Kelly for supplying the aforementioned sultry voice.

P.S. Nalts here with a post-script. Is it just me or did Kelly’s laughing make this video?