Happy independence day.

Our nation is going through its worst humanitarian disaster. This 14th of August has come with millions of displaced people, not much different from 1947.

The horrors are many and playing out right now. Please join me in volunteering this independence day and giving back to the country that has given is so much. History and the world are watching our patriotism and spirit. Get up and show the world that Pakistanis are a nation of spirited and motivated people.

Our brothers and sisters need tents or tarps as a roof over their heads, ready to eat food, dry ration, water bottles or the pills that make water ready to drink and medicines for malaria and dysentry.

You can donate, collect, pack or deliver. Choose your calling right now and get out of the house.

Army’s special services group has created centers for collecting relief goods in all major cities. You can go there and volunteer.

Read more at Google Alerts - allintitle:"internet marketing" by iFreshNews (blog)

This post is the culmination of two of my lifelong dreams: (1) To spend an entire day on YouTube and call it "work", and (2) To Photoshop Matt Cutts' face on cartoon food. Early in 2009, Matt Cutts, Google's most visible anti-spam engineer, began releasing a series of short Webmaster Help videos. You've probably seen some of these videos, but what you may not know is that there are currently over 200 of them, with more than 70 posted in 2010 alone.

From time to time, I've been amazed at the details that slip out during these videos, many of which don't get much play in the blogosphere. So, I decided to watch all of the 2010 videos and report back on what I learned. This post contains my Top 10 picks along with a few interesting tidbits and one SHOCKING CONSPIRACY.

Obligatory Disclaimers

Let's get this out of the way, as Matt seems to be a lightning rod for controversy. I'm a nice guy, but if you don't read this section, don't expect me to reply to your comments.

I don't speak for Matt

Other than having played a couple of hands of Search Spam with Matt over the years (I think we're 1-and-1), I don't know him and I'm not trying to put words in his mouth. I've used the original video titles, for reference, but the rest is paraphrased. I strongly encourage you to watch the originals.

Don't believe everything you hear

Matt, like everyone, has vested interests, and Google doesn't have any motivation to tell us every detail about how the algorithm works.

Don't disbelieve everything, either

I don't think Matt stays up nights scheming about how to deceive SEOs. I think he's a smart, decent guy who cares about search quality.

My Top 10 Picks

One quick note, before I reveal my picks (counting down from 10 to 1). If you want to get Matt to answer your questions, it apparently helps to have a cool-sounding name, like "Magico" or "Youser". From now on, I will have my Muppet Intern Yoozer submit all of my help questions.

10. Should I spend time on meta keywords tags? (Apr 19)

Matt says: "I wouldn't spend even 0 minutes on it, personally".

I know most of you know this, but it's good to hear it from the source. Google does not use the keywords meta tag for ranking. Meta description still has value for other reasons (Watch the video - 1:21).

9. How does URL structure affect PageRank (Apr 6)

Matt says: "Google doesn't worry so much about how deep a set of directories is."

This post raises an important distinction – URL structure is not link structure. We get this confusion frequently in Q&A. Let's say you have a URL like this:

http://www.example.com/year/month/day/topic/blog-post-title

That page isn't 5 levels deep, just because it's 5 /s behind the root domain in the URL. The depth of the page is determined by your internal architecture and link structure. URL length may affect the power of keywords in the URL and the click-through of the URL, but the crawlers don't really care when it comes to finding your pages. What matters is if this page is one hop from the home-page or 10 hops away (Watch the video - 2:04).

Note: SEOmoz correlation data has shown that deeper folder structure may correlate with worse rankings. Deep folder structures can be an indication of other issues, including information architecture problems.

8. Can I make sure Google always uses my meta description tags? (Mar 24)

Matt says: "The short answer is 'no'."

I hear this complaint a lot. Google will sometimes rewrite its own snippets for relevance. You can block the ODP and you can write relevant, unique meta descriptions, but you can't completely control what Google does (Watch the video - 1:52).

7. Can having dofollow comments on my blog affect its reputation? (Feb 22)

This is an interesting two-parter. First off, outbound links to spammy sites can have a negative impact on your reputation. Manage your outbound links and nofollow if you have to. Individual, inbound spammy links will typically not harm you, on the other hand, because they're beyond your control (although, in my experience, a pattern of inbound spammy links can be a different story). Matt has some great comments at the end about the value of commenting on dofollow blogs (Watch the video - 2:35).

6. Is cross-linking websites bad? (Jan 25)

Matt says: "I would ask yourself: are these websites really related in any kind of sense?"

When Matt wants to read cartoons, links to auto insurance and coffee tables make him sad. Cross-linking 3 sites probably isn't a big deal, but 30 or 300 could likely get you into trouble. Relevance is the key, and footer cross-links are often low-value (Watch the video - 2:00).

5. How can I get Google to index more of my Sitemap URLS? (Mar 23)

Matt says: "I wouldn't get hung up on just how many pages have been indexed..."

We hear this one from frustrated webmasters every day. Google does not guarantee that pages in your XML sitemap will be indexed. Indexation has a lot to do with your authority and trust – an authoritative site will get more love from the crawlers, plain and simple (Watch the video - 1:31). Check out Rand's recent post diving deeper into Matt's comments on the indexation cap.

4. Will changing hosts cause any SEO concerns? (Feb 9)

Matt says: "Most people can switch their IP address and never have any issue whatsoever."

This is a common fear that is usually unfounded. As long as your domain name and hosting country stay the same, switching from one reliable host to another should have no SEO impact. Matt gives a nice briefing on how to change DNS servers and set your TTL that's worth watching (Watch the video - 1:53).

Note: Although I implied this in the recap, it deserves repeating. If you're changing your domain name and/or hosting country, that can definitely affect your ranking and is a much more complex issue. Consider the risks and plan accordingly, in those cases.

3. Is Google Analytics data a factor in a page's ranking? (Feb 2)

Matt says: "I promise you, my team will never ask the analytics team to use their data."

I don't think you'll hear a more direct answer from Matt than that. Conspiracy theories abound, but there are 3 separate videos in 2010 where Matt states that the quality team does not use Google Analytics data. Of course, that doesn't mean that user metrics (click-through rate, etc.) aren't a factor, but these are more likely coming from other sources, such as SERP tracking (Watch the video - 1:17).

2. Can you give us an update on rankings for long-tail searches? (May 30)

This is a discussion of the so-called "Mayday" update. Matt clearly states that Mayday is a deliberate, algorithmic change to improve the quality of long-tail searches, and it is not temporary. It is not related to Caffeine, although the roll-out timeline overlaps somewhat (Watch the video - 2:39).

1. Should I be obsessing about load times? (May 5)

Matt says: "We have considered in 2010 using page speed..."

There are a couple of important points here. First, Google hadn't even finalized the decision to use page speed as a ranking factor until this spring*. Second, page speed is just one of over 200 ranking factors. All else being equal, a fast site is good for users and good for search, but an occasional server glitch isn't going to kill your rankings. If you can speed up your site with a few simple changes, though, why not do it (Watch the video - 2:28)?

*Edit: As Lindsay points out below, Matt's April 9th blog post does suggest that page speed was incorporated as a ranking factor. One of the issues with the dates on the videos is that they're often recorded a bit before they're released. On the May 5th video, Matt suggests that Google hadn't made a final decision on using page speed, but the reality is that that decision was probably made in March or April.

Honorable Mentions

3. How many bots does Google have? (Feb 30)

This is a nice review of what bots/spiders actually are. They aren't real robots that come knocking on your door. It's a good, short primer for new SEOs (Watch the video - 1:30).

2. State of the Index 2009 (Jan 20)

This is a long one, and it's slightly out of date, but it's a good review of some of what happened in 2009. It has a solid explanation of rel=canonical, as well as the parameter blocking and fetch as Googlebot features in Webmaster Tools. It ends with a brief explanation of what Caffeine is all about (Watch the video - 25:59).

1. How many search algorithm changes were made in 2009? (Apr 22)

Google makes a change to the algorithm on the order of ONCE PER DAY. These changes may be batched and rolled out in chunks, but another video confirmed a number of roughly 400 algorithm changes in 2009. If you think May-Day and Caffeine are the only things that have happened in 2010, think again. Google is constantly evolving. This video also includes a statement you don't hear from Matt every day – Good content is necessary, but not sufficient (Watch the video - 1:53).

The Shocking Conspiracy

Of course, it wouldn't be a post about Matt Cutts without a conspiracy. If you watch the 2010 videos, you'll see a shocking transformation, where Matt goes from having hair to no hair back to hair again almost instantaneously. I've graphed this phenomenon below:

Matt claims this has something to do with the timing of the videos and filming them in batches, blah blah blah, but those of us who are savvy are forced to reach one of two conclusions:

1. Google has discovered the secret of re-growing hair and refuses to share it.
2. Matt is, as I've often suspected, a cybernetic extension of the Google algorithm.

So, there you have it. My Top 10 picks of 2010 (so far), a few highlight reels, and one shocking conspiracy, as promised. By the way, if you're a beginner or are interested in general SEO tips like these, make sure to check out our completely revised, free Beginner's Guide to SEO.

Do you like this post? Yes No

Syndicated Content: Read more at SEOmoz Daily SEO Blog by Google Alerts

I've been having a similar conversation with a number of folks from the world of search that's interesting enough as to deserve some transparency and discussion. It centers around the idea of the web's link graph and how it operates to power the rankings of relevant results in the major search engines. If we follow this brief timeline, you'll see what I'm getting at:

• 1993 - 2000: The beginning of the web is marked by an influx of researchers, academics, hobbyists and enthusiasts. Nearly every link created has an editorial, reference purpose behind it. A link is one page telling its viewers that another page has useful, interesting or worthwhile information about a specific topic.
• 2001 - 2005: As the web commercializes at an accelerated pace and PageRank becomes a familiar concept, links drift further away from editorial votes and more towards self-interested endorsements, often with financial motivations.
• 2006 - 2010: The web's link graph swings further away from editorial references towards ever-more commercial interests. Meanwhile, the social web rises with the popularity of sites like StumbleUpon, Digg, Reddit, Facebook, Twitter & LinkedIn. These communities often contain a much higher percentage of editorial citations, particularly those that contain smaller communities inside them (LinkedIn groups, pockets of Twitter users and Facebook friends)

During chats with some folks from Bing, Google & the SEO world, it became clear that nearly everyone is aware of this ecosystem and thinking more about how to leverage it to make search better. Bing & Google obviously made back-to-back deals to get the Twitter firehose late last year. Google's been trying hard to get Facebook data without success (and Bing may have it, thanks to their investment in Facebook in 2007). Both engines could certain extract citation data from other web communities that publicly publish (Delicious, Reddit, Digg, LinkedIn, StumbleUpon, StackOverflow and as of today, Quora) and extrapolate reference material.

The problem for the engines is that links on websites have a high probability (probably not 50%, but maybe as high as 20%) of existing specifically to influence their rankings. While some of those influence-targeted links certainly do point to great content that's relevant and high quality, the engines would prefer to return to a web of "pure" recommendations. The social web might offer more of that type of web environment. Sure, we all tweet/share/post links to our own websites, but those are easy for engines to detect and treat as "internal" references. The "external" endorsements, however, are often much more genuine than what exists on the open web's link graph.

If you're in the field of SEO, I think this means social media marketing is a no brainer. And if people aren't recommending and endorsing your site editorially in their Twitter feeds, Facebook updates, LinkedIn groups, answers on Q+A sites, and when socially bookmarking, tagging and voting, I'd be thinking hard about how to change that.

p.s. I still think the social graph overall is still a very small portion of the engines' ranking algorithms, but I think Bing & Google are both racing towards innovation on this front as fast as they can. SEOs should, IMO, follow suit.

Do you like this post? Yes No

Syndicated Content: Read more at SEOmoz Daily SEO Blog by Google Alerts

Hey there folks! Today's post is a hands-on walkthrough of some of the decision making used when choosing the keyphrases to target. Producing a list of the most important terms in an industry is nice, but actually choosing the right keyphrases is essential. The post was largely created in response to a question submitted by Kien in the comments of my last post.

What to Expect

This post should  provide you with real-life examples of the keyword decision making process and help you make sense of the output from the revamped Keyword Difficulty Tool. If you're already a hardcore keyword research (and keyword difficulty) guru, this is more of a refresher, but should provide valuable insights to journeymen and perhaps a bit more transparency into how to choose the right keyphrases for your site (plus a bit of a tour for those of you who haven't used the Keyword Difficulty Tool for a while).

While you may get more value from this on smaller sites, and those that are newly launched, large sites with specific keyword targets may benefit, too.

Two Different Camps

There are really two separate and distinct camps on keyphrase research implementation: those who always go for the highest volume search terms that are moderately relevant to a page and those that also give consideration to the competitive landscape for a certain term. Regardless of which camp you fall into, this tool can be immensely useful. If you find yourself in the "competitive" camp and always go after the highest volume term no matter what, the Keyword Difficulty Tool could and should still be used to track your linkbuilding efforts vs. the competition and to have some understanding of if/when you might be able to rank for the term in question. There's no point in setting goals (even if they are lofty) without having some idea of how to reach them.

Image: Ebaums World

However, if you are in the camp that likes quick results and has a bit more time to give to the keyphrase research process I strongly recommend going the extra mile to indentify realistic targets for the short-term and keep those lofty ambitions in the back of your mind to be addressed as a site grows, gains new links and hopefully acheives higher authority and trust metrics.

But what if my site is brand new?

As a general rule any newer sites should probably be aiming for the "less-moderately competitive" types of keyphrases for the most part. The one exception to this rule would be for exact match domain names.

If you can afford to look at these metrics in this light you can scale up the competitiveness for your terms as you improve the quality and competitiveness of your website.

Image from: Rand's Post on Multiple vs. Singular Keywords

Thinking about it logically (with the above graphic in mind): if you could rank first for a term with 30,000 global monthly searches or somewhere on the fourth or fifth page for a similar term with 300,000 global monthly searches which would you choose? The optimist might choose the second option, but the truly intelligent will pick the first for now and aim for the second option down the road. It doesn't take superior math skills to figure out that a small fraction of 1.2% of clicks from the 300,000 searches will not amount to anywhere near 42.1% of 30,000 searches.

I'm not saying it's always better to play it safe, I'm just saying that realistic goals will help you achieve more in the short term, and the opportunity to re-evaluate these goals will help you in the long term.

Does this keyword require a new page? How many terms can I target on a page?

This depends on a couple of factors. It depends, again, on the competitiveness of the terms but also largely depends on the strength of the overall site or page on which the keyword is being targeted.

As covered in Rand's post in March on this issue, a highly competitive term deserves "single page targeting". This is true in most instances and particularly good advice for smaller, newer sites. The way this works is somewhat backwards, but experience suggests stronger sites can target multiple terms on a page yet also can afford to rank for a larger number of long-tail keyphrases. This may seem a bit unfair, but it is what anecdotal evidence has shown me.

The long and short of it? If your site is big, unless the keyphrase is highly competitive it can probably be targeted on a page targeting other similar terms as well. However, if the phrase is extremely competitive it deserves it's own page.

In the case of smaller, newer sites there are forces working against the best approach. On the one hand, smaller sites will have fewer pages indexed and will not have a great deal of authority to rely on and spread throught the site. On the other hand, this also means they cannot drop the term "breast augmentation" on the same inner page as "breast enhancement" and expect to rank for both terms.

How do I know if my Site is Strong Enough to Rank for that Term?

The Difficulty Tool pulls in some nice metrics from the rankings that allow you to see a fair bit of information about the other sites ranking for a particular search term or phrase. It won't always be a simple case of "my page/domain is stronger than theirs, thus I will rank". There will always be other factors: is the keyphrase an exact match for the Top Level Domain [TLD]? Are the other sites targeting multiple terms on the page or just the one? How many inbound links does the other page have? How relevant is this specific keyphrase to your term?

I think you get the point here, it won't always be a simple fix but let's look at an example to try to get a clearer idea of how to work through this.

Let's look at an example from a recent client project I did for a plastic surgeon (honest). In doing research for terms around plastic surgery for a brand new website I tried to get my head around some of the inner nuances of some of the terminology and procedures to try to better understand search behaviour. As you can see from the above research the broad match search volume for breast augmentation is considerably larger than the others [insert corny joke here], however the local search volume is quite comparable for the top two terms and they are about equally competitive.

This particular area of research can be quite complicated because you also have to look at the intent of the searcher and weigh that with the product offered. The term "boob job" whilst funny, is probably not likely to lead to serious searchers who are considering having a selective surgery so that coupled with the lower search volume means we can probably get rid of that one for now (though it might be worth bearing in mind for future link bait).

As an aside: by doing a bit further research into the types of pages that rank for the two terms and looking into search behaviours a bit it actually seems that people searching for "breast implants" are also not likely to be the highest converting traffic and there are certain social stigmas associated with the various terminology. So, in this case we can actually probably rule out breast implants (in terms of the main target of the top level page) because it is not likely to lead to highly converting traffic. This does not, however mean that we won't want to target the term at all, just that it may move down the priority list a touch.

So, the very first step has helped us eliminate two of the terms for the time being- so we're making some progress! The next step is to compare the terms that seem as though they might both be realistic targets for the page but are also relatively similar in terms of competitiveness. Although the scores assigned by the Keyword Difficulty Tool can be very helpful when comparing a term that is ranked as a "10" versus one that is ranked as a "95" these "difficulty scores" do not provide enough information alone when comparing two simialrly competitive terms. Thankfully, the tool gives us a lot more data to work with.

As you can see above, although "breast augmentation" seems to be a slightly "less competitive" term based on the diffculty metric there is a clear outlier within this chart (which we can go ahead and guess is going to be Wikipedia without even having the rest of the data) that looks like it will be extremely difficult to outrank even if the top spot seems slightly weaker than for "breast enhancement."

Similarly, the overall landscape for "breast enhancement" actually seems a bit more realistic as a target for a new site. Thus, in this case (based solely on the likelihood of ranking) we would actually choose to target "enhancement" rather than "augmentation." And try to work our way up to the more difficut term by building links to the site as a whole and specifically trying to target this page before shifting our approach on the term targeting. But before we make this a final decision, let's have a slightly closer look at what the competition really looks like.

As you can we were right in assuming the 5th spot for the "augmentation" comparison has been taken by Wikipedia, though not on a page directly targeted towards "breast augmentation" (hence why it's probably riding as low as it is in the rankings).

Meanwhile, setting aside the Wikipedia page it looks like the top spot for "augmentation" is actually being held by a rather weak site that happens to have great anchor text in the domain. This is a perfect indicator of just how much benefit having a strong TLD with exact match anchor text can be, but unfortunately this sort of tactic won't help much when you're trying to land the client who wants a "tummy tuck" instead.

So, what do we do?

In an ideal world, the client would be a great big site with loads of authority and without much sense. They will have been targeting "boob job" and have 302'ed all of their old links so we can make some quick changes and win. In this case, we go after all of the terms, do a bit of linkbuilding and we'll probably turn out just fine.

Meanwhle, in the real world situation we would recommend going for "augmentation" as our targeted term for a couple of reasons.

Labeling/Usability Fail

First, it is probably the "best" of the keyphrases in question. It targets the right kind of customer/searcher (we know this based on existing data and background insights on behaviour) and it has the highest search volume at the broader level.

Second, this keyphrase actually makes the most sense for the page we set out to build. As a top-level page it gives us the opportunity to (over time) target some of these other terms on the page (with the exception, maybe, of "boob job") . Augmentation is the most generic term and will allow us to discuss "implants, reduction, enhancement, etc."

Third, after having looked more closely at the sites/pages currently ranking for these terms it actually seems like it will be easier to rank for this particular keyphrase (please note that Wikipedia is not even directly targeting this keyphrase in this case).

"But what about all the other keyphrases? I don't want to waste them!"

This is where the post comes full circle. If you're building the small/new site the most sensible option (in the short term) is to create a page that is optimised for as many of these pages can be justified and for which you have research. As we mentioned ealier on, you can't just go after every single keyphrase in the industry on individual pages from the get-go because they won't all be indexed.

Try just to use some common sense: create the augmentation page high-up within the information architecture, construct a page for "reduction", "implants" and "enhancements" and forget about "boob job" for now. This term may get some traffic but if it doesn't fit with the theme/tone of the site then save it for the linkbait and build strong links to these inner pages now.

This technique creates much more work. But with a brand new site this is to be expected. Try to structure things in a manner that you can get rid of some of the smaller pages targeting extremely similar terms without impacting usability. This is essential and will make your life much easier in the future.

"What if my client is a massive site with great links?"
 We should all be so lucky. This is obviously a different ball game we're talking about here. But, if you are fortunate enough to have a Domain Authority that is considerably higher than your competitors for the keyphrase(s) in question you aren't going to struggle too much and you only need one page to rank for a number of terms.

Image via: 3 Meeses

If this is your starting point, I would advise creating one hub/landing page for all "augmentation" related terms. If your site is strong enough the Wikipedia example quite clearly illustrates that some of these other pages may be superfluous.

There's no need to jam all these keyphrases in the title-tag either. If there are enough inbound links and the site is trusted enough you can probably just go for the highest search volume terms so long as the term is related to the service offered (never forget usability!), if you are in this position kick back, relax and just wait for the little guys to catch-up!

Sam is based in London as a lead SEO at Distilled. He hopes you've enjoyed this post and is looking forward to your comments, questions and concerns!

Do you like this post? Yes No

Syndicated Content: Read more at SEOmoz Daily SEO Blog by Adnan Ali

The avalanche-like flow of special guest Whiteboard Fridays continues this week with another installment featuring our beloved London SEO expert, Richard Baxter (anchor text, y'all). Last week Richard helped us all learn how to get our fresh content indexed licketty-split, and this week he's back to help us learn how to identify which areas of our sites are working hardest for us.

Whether you have multiple types of content on your site (maybe a blog, tools, articles, etc.), or you have limited content types across different topics (blog posts about cats, kittens, evil cats, ninja kittens, evil ninja kitten cats, etc.), wouldn't it be nice to know which content types or topics bring you the most and best traffic?  Never fear, Richard's here to explain his handy-dandy system to do just that!  By the end of this video you'll know exactly which stats to pull from your analytics to create a so-shiny-it's-practically-chromed spreadsheet that will let you peer deep into the inky black heart of your site and know the stars, the slackers, and the shiftless hobos among your content.

Wow! It's like the future is now! And, since thinking of the future always makes me think of 'Flash', and thinking of 'Flash' reminds me that those of you without Adobe Flash can't watch the video, I'll try to summarize Richard's bard-like musings on content segmentation and performance analysis.

In order to track and analyze the performance of your individual content, you'll want to segment out your analytics data by content type. This is really, really easy to do if you have good, clean site structure (which you have, right? RIGHT?!). You can just pull Richard's data points (below) for the different sections or subfolders of your site. If you were lazy and thought the best way to organize your site was to throw all of the pages into a virtual bucket, dump them out, name them by throwing your keyboard at a stump, and call it a day, you'll have to get a little more involved with how you filter your segments. No matter what though, you might consider segments like all blog posts (perhaps a 'CONTAINS /blog' filter), all tools, all content written by Belverd Needles, III (/authors/belverd), etc. 

Once you have your segment filters in place, you just need to pull the data that Richard suggests and you'll be able to see exactly how Belverd's content compares to that of his bloggitty arch-nemesis, Marmaduke Huffsworth, Esq. (/authors/marmaduke). What data you say? This data:

1. Number of Pages per Segment  Richard advocates crawling your site using something like Link Sleuth to get this number; you'll use it for all sorts of fun calculations. Yes, calculations can be fun. If you don't believe me, just ask these racially diverse, embroidered youths.

2. Number of Keywords Sending Traffic  You can pull this from your analytics. Don't worry so much about the words themselves here, you just want to know how many different keyword terms are delivering one or more visits to each segment.

3. Number of Pages Getting Entries from Search Engines  How many pages within the segment received one or more visits from a search engine (pick an engine, any engine, or all of them, whatever matters to you...so Google, basically).

4. Total Visits from Google Search Engines  Like it says on the tin, this is just the total number of visits to the segment from search traffic.

5. Percentage of Total Visits that Performed a Conversion Action  This will require that you have some conversion actions setup in your analytics, but it's a key data point if you want to figure out your strongest content.

So what can all of this stuff tell you? LOTS! By tracking these numbers, you'll be able to quickly identify which content is working hardest for you. You'll be able to know whether Marmaduke or Belverd is better at drawing high-converting traffic. You'll know which subjects and content types are most deserving of your precious time and the investment of your hard-bilked pennies. You'll know who put the bop in the bop shoo bop, who moved your cheese, and why birds suddenly appear every time I'm near (it's because my pockets are full of birdseed). You'll be 12.7-29.4% awesomier than you were before, and you'll smell delightful ALL THE TIME!

Now aren't you glad Richard stopped by and shared his magic secrets with you? Thanks, Richard!

p.s. Richard has posted more about getting things indexed quickly w/ PubSubHubBub and more on his blog - well worth a read.

Do you like this post? Yes No

Syndicated Content: Read more at SEOmoz Daily SEO Blog by Google Alerts

As you know someone has created a page on Facebook to collaborate the “Draw Muhammad Day”, NauzibAllah , Astaghfar, shame on the antagonist and participants.

Muslims on Facebook are outraged by this act of blasphemy and due to our immense respect and love for our Prophet Muhammad PBUH, have been reporting the page in the Racist / Hate Speech category. I have done so myself. Apparently Facebook has not acted upon what we Muslims think are its own rules and policies about user generated content on Facebook.

Since then, there has been a growing demand by the Muslims on Facebook to boycott the platform and it has been rumored that Pakistan Telecommunication Authority has been asked by the Pakistan government to block Facebook or the disputed Page’s URL. [Update: ProPakistani.pk is reporting that PTA has indeed blocked the Page URL.]

I will not be supporting any such boycott by Muslim users of Facebook, nor shall I support any block or ban by the PTA. Here is why:

1. Boycotts are the easy way out. Boycotts achieve little and they are just a self satisfaction tool.

2. If the 2,359,620 Pakistanis choose to delete their accounts on Facebook, it is going to make no economic or social difference on Facebook.

3. This is a media war. Muslims have always been prone to emotional discourse which provides immense pleasure to our enemies. Moreover, boycotts are going to leave the social media space open for those who hold wrong beliefs about our Prophet PBUH.

4. Why should PTA ban this page in Pakistan? It does not have jurisdiction over other countries. So, PTA is stopping Muslims in Pakistan from accessing this page? How does that make sense? Why are Muslims in Pakistanis visiting this page in the first place? I think that no Muslim worth his salt would visit such pages and therefore PTA can stay away from banning the internet.

5. Allowing government interruption and censure on the internet will lead to precedence. Which sites will be next? Local sites where the government is criticized for politics and policy? This is a wrong and dangerous step and we should not in any case accept government censure of the internet in Pakistan.

6. Boycotting something like this will only give it more life. Imagine all the status messages that have the link of the page. We are actually spreading this virus rather than burying it. Add to this, other pages and groups created by Muslims which highlight the content of the blasphemous page. This is ridiculous behavior.

7. Our emotional outbursts are only going to be picked up by mainstream media and then everyone can join and laugh at our activities.

8. For most of us so called aggrieved people, we disrespect, ridicule and deny the teachings of Prophet Muhammad PBUH when we do not offer prayers, do not fast, lie, steal, bribe or accept bribes, engage in immoral activities etc. So I do not consider that being a Muslim gives us any moral high ground in this situation. As Muslim youth, we are the least educated in Islam. A majority has not opened the Quran or read a Tafseer in ages. A little introspection never hurts.

Here is what I would do if I was so inclined to do so:

1. Instead of promoting the blasphemous content by adding the link to my status message and creating groups and pages that showcase this content, I would sit and contemplate why this is happening.

2. Have no confusion; this is another organized attack just like the original cartoons. They know how we will react to such outrageous behavior. They know that we will boil our blood in emotional outrage and then destroy our own properties, kill our own citizens and provide another body blow to our weak economy.

3. As a reply, I would create a Facebook Group or Page to praise the Prophet Muhammad PBUH, highlight his teachings, his achievements, and his famous sayings, how he taught us to treat the poor and the children and the women. How the Prophet Muhammad PBUH urged caution and care and taught rules even for war.

4. I would ask people to record 1 minute videos about why they love Prophet Muhammad PBUH and recite their favorite Hadeeth.

5. I would narrate how Islam teaches respect for all Prophets of Allah and our faith is incomplete without believing in the Prophets of Allah.

6. I would encourage western and non-muslim scholars to visit the page and add their comments about this issue.

7. I would hope and encourage all Muslims to join this page rather than having small silos of their own. In fact, unity is the only solution here.

I am confident that my solution is better than emotional outbursts and impotent activities like boycotts and governments bans of websites.

[Update: People on Facebook have already started building Pages. The more the better. Here is one: http://www.facebook.com/pages/Why-I-Love-Prophet-Muhammad-PBUH/123972860955845]

What: Webinar (Online Seminar)
When: Sunday May 16, 2010 11:00AM – 12:30PM
Seats: 100 (First come first service)
Cost: PKR 200/- (Telenor EasyPaisa)
Register: http://bit.ly/5-steps-of-successful-blogging

Event Description:

How to be a successful blogger?

There are more than 17 million blogs (blogger accounts) in Pakistan. But there are few very successful bloggers.

Join Adnan Ali as he goes through the “5 Steps of Successful Blogging“. A one hour webinar (online live seminar) that describes:

- Which topics should I write about?
- What are keywords and how do I find them?
- How do I find and create new content?
- How do I start getting visitors and how to increase traffic?
- What other monetization method can I use?

You can ask questions during the webinar and watch the video recording any time you want*.

Frequently Asked Questions:

How to register for the webinar?
Space is limited. Register at http://bit.ly/5-steps-of-successful-blogging

How much does the webinar cost?
This one hour webinar is jam packed with content and fresh new ideas. It costs only PKR 200/- to register.

How do I access the webinar?
First you will need to register yourself by following the registration link. Once you have made the payment, your registration will be approved and you will be given the password and link. At the time of the webinar, click on the provided link in your email and join the live session.

How do I pay for the webinar?
Payments are made via Telenor EasyPaisa. The simple process can be found at Telenor’s website: http://www.easypaisa.com.pk/moneytransfer_process.php
Required information to send payment will be provided when you register for the webinar.

*You will need to register and attend the live webinar in order to access the on demand recording.

Back to Part 4 Index

Back to Part 4 Index