<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>Journalism.co.uk Editors&#039; Blog &#187; search engine success</title>
	<atom:link href="http://blogs.journalism.co.uk/editors/tag/search-engine-success/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://blogs.journalism.co.uk/editors</link>
	<description>Online journalism news</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 20 Nov 2009 18:16:48 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.6</generator>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
			<item>
		<title>Getting links with made-up content: clever marketing or unethical publishing?</title>
		<link>http://blogs.journalism.co.uk/editors/2008/05/29/getting-links-with-made-up-content-clever-marketing-or-unethical-publishing/</link>
		<comments>http://blogs.journalism.co.uk/editors/2008/05/29/getting-links-with-made-up-content-clever-marketing-or-unethical-publishing/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 29 May 2008 15:59:16 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Laura Oliver</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Search]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Money.co.uk]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[search engine]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[search engine success]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[search engines]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.journalism.co.uk/editors/2008/05/29/getting-links-with-made-up-content-clever-marketing-or-unethical-publishing/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[
A story on financial website Money.co.uk of a teenager stealing his dad&#8217;s credit card to pay for prostitutes ticked all the right boxes to be a search engine success.
And for those of you who haven&#8217;t come across it yet, it is too good to be true.
It&#8217;s made up, fictitious and fabricated to generate what the [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<div class="tweetmeme_button" style="float: right; margin-left: 10px;"><a href="http://api.tweetmeme.com/share?url=http%3A%2F%2Fblogs.journalism.co.uk%2Feditors%2F2008%2F05%2F29%2Fgetting-links-with-made-up-content-clever-marketing-or-unethical-publishing%2F"><img src="http://api.tweetmeme.com/imagebutton.gif?url=http%3A%2F%2Fblogs.journalism.co.uk%2Feditors%2F2008%2F05%2F29%2Fgetting-links-with-made-up-content-clever-marketing-or-unethical-publishing%2F" height="61" width="51" /></a></div>
<p>A story on financial website <a href="http://www.money.co.uk">Money.co.uk</a> of <a href="http://www.money.co.uk/article/1000390-13-year-old-steals-dads-credit-card-to-buy-hookers.htm">a teenager stealing his dad&#8217;s credit card to pay for prostitutes</a> ticked all the right boxes to be a search engine success.</p>
<p>And for those of you who haven&#8217;t come across it yet, it is too good to be true.</p>
<p>It&#8217;s made up, fictitious and fabricated to generate what the man behind it &#8211; Lyndon Antcliff &#8211; calls linkbait.</p>
<p>According to <a href="http://www.cornwallseo.com/search/index.php/2008/05/25/linkbuilding-using-fiction/">a blog post by Antcliff</a>, the piece, which carried no byline and wasn&#8217;t on the news wires, attracted 14,000 links, in addition to being picked up by various other news publishers.</p>
<p>As he says in the post he&#8217;s not himself debating the ethics of such practice, but will &#8216;leave that to others who have a lot more time on their hands&#8217;, which is where this post steps in.</p>
<p>Yes &#8211; sites should optimise headlines for search engines and try to ensure the story keeps up with what the headline promises. But making content up is dangerous for a publisher&#8217;s reputation and unethical.</p>
<p>As Antcliff points out, it&#8217;s alarming that other media did not check the facts of the article before republishing it and the spread of the story proves he knows what he&#8217;s doing when it comes to optimising content.</p>
<p>It&#8217;s just a shame the same trial couldn&#8217;t have been carried out on a real piece of content.</p>
<p>Despite Antcliff saying he &#8216;pushed the boundaries of the ridiculous to make it obvious that the story wasn’t true&#8217; it is still available on the website and until recently carried no label of it being hoax.</p>
<p>It now includes the note: &#8220;This story is a parody and is not intended to be taken seriously&#8221;, which doesn&#8217;t help explain things much, just makes the reader wonder why they&#8217;re publishing it.</p>
<p>Other media aside, doesn&#8217;t running content purely for linkbaiting purposes undermine Money.co.uk&#8217;s credibility to a worryingly low level?</p>
<p><strong>Similar Posts:</strong>
<ul class="similar-posts">
<li><a href="http://blogs.journalism.co.uk/editors/2009/07/03/made-up-news-bylines-does-it-matter/" rel="bookmark" title="July 3, 2009">Made-up news bylines: does it matter?</a></li>
<li><a href="http://blogs.journalism.co.uk/editors/2009/01/15/jakarta-post-redesign-slimmed-down-print-redesign-to-aid-integratation-with-online/" rel="bookmark" title="January 15, 2009">Jakarta Post redesign: slimmed-down print redesign to aid integratation with online</a></li>
<li><a href="http://blogs.journalism.co.uk/editors/2009/07/02/afghanistan-in-the-media-the-good-war-public-meeting-july-13/" rel="bookmark" title="July 2, 2009">Afghanistan in the media: &#8216;The Good War?&#8217; Public meeting &#8211; July 13</a></li>
<li><a href="http://blogs.journalism.co.uk/editors/2009/06/09/mediapost-online-newspapers-the-trusted-brands-will-survive/" rel="bookmark" title="June 9, 2009">MediaPost: Online newspapers &#8211; &#8216;The trusted brands will survive&#8217;</a></li>
<li><a href="http://blogs.journalism.co.uk/editors/2009/04/08/bbc-refused-guardian-g20-protest-vid-too-much-of-a-london-story/" rel="bookmark" title="April 8, 2009">&#8216;BBC refused Guardian G20 protest vid&#8217; &#8211; too much of a London story?</a></li>
</ul>
<p><!-- Similar Posts took 5.932 ms --></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://blogs.journalism.co.uk/editors/2008/05/29/getting-links-with-made-up-content-clever-marketing-or-unethical-publishing/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>3</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
