When Words Fuel the Internet
Words are the fuel of the Internet. We type the name or description of a product, service, or topic into a search engine, and the search engine takes us to it. With luck we get where we would like to be. Easy enough from our end — usually.
Of course, our search words have to match those that marketers use to describe their product. And therein lies the problem. Sometimes as marketers, we are too clever for our searchers, or as my husband would argue, “Peach is fruit, NOT a color.”
In his post Words That Work at Marketing Profs, Gerry McGovern, uses the book “Words that Work,” by Frank Luntz to show that the words we sell with are often not the words we punch into a search engine. Take a look at Prof. McGovern’s examples:
However, according to Overture, in December 2006, 730,958 people searched for “used car,” while only 949 searched for “pre-owned vehicle.”
Nearly 73,000 people searched for “housewife” (122,000 searched for “desperate housewife”), while only 43 searched for “stay-at-home-mom.”
Over 30,000 searched for “gay marriage” while 19,000 searched for ” same-sex marriage.”
While about 17,000 people search for “impotence,” over 100,000 search for “erectile dysfunction,” proving that some words are indeed falling into disuse, even from a search point of view.
The point is that the words that might bring us to products — cheap office supplies, budget hotel — aren’t the same words that sell us when we get there — office supplies at great prices, campy hotel. Prof McGoven wonders whether we need to use more than one set of terms to describe things. Hmmmm. I don’t know.
I keep thinking that transparency and deep knowledge of our customers as people would lead us to write copy that naturally avoids the problem.
I’d love to know what you think.
— ME “Lia” Strauss
Related
Enough About Me, Letââ¬â¢s Talk About What You Think
Do You Know the Difference Between Quality and Cost?
Blog Promotion: How to Write for People and Search Engine Spiders
Great find!
I think proper medical terms are used in searches because they are more likely to yield relevant results from an authoritative source.
As for housewife versus stay-at-home mom, the huge disparity in the numbers could be associated to many horny men looking for pictures of housewives 🙂
Now, I’m off to reading the blog post.
Hi Eddy!
Thanks for your fun comment. 🙂
I think the housewife thing has more to do with it being easier and faster to type, and with “thinking in shorthand.”
I have noticed that more people find my blog using the word ‘blogs’ rather than ‘blog.’ I guess people are in the mindset of finding more than one, so they unintentionally search for more than one. 🙂
I think the use of the search terms to determine trends of term usage is brilliant. I never would have guessed that last example would be the case, as the term is so…vivid, shall we say?
Hi Jesse,
Great observation and it makes total sense. When we’re searching, we’re “talking” to the search engine, so to say “I want to see gaming blogs” plural makes more sense than “I want to see a gaming blog.”
I also think you’re right about the last term. The folks who are searching for information on that subject probably feel better about themselves typing in “E.D.” than would typing in “impotence.” After all, the first is a “dysfunction” and the second means complete powelessness. Which would anyone rather have? 🙂
Wow! Very interesting stats. Sure does make me think about the words I use in marketing. I usually try to think about how I would search for my product/services and use those terms. After reading this, I think I need to go back and really look at the words we use in marketing and on the website.
It seems that the last example is evidence that powerful marketing (via drug companies) can change our common language. What can we learn from this?
Yeah, Kirsten,
It’s fascinating, isn’t it? You say “airplane.” I say “plane.” We end up in two different places, even though we’re looking for the same thing. 🙂
Hi all (3.10 pm here, sunny – but getting colder)
Words on search-engines and PPC campaigns on this issue is being discussed on another blog today (is it just me or are more and more people talking about the same items more and more at the same time?)
http://worldwidecreative.typepad.com/heavy_chef/2007/01/number_of_keywo.html
Be nice to them, they’re my blog friends from day one on.
Hi Karin!
No worries, we’re nice to everyone here, but especially friends of our friends.
I’ve always noticed blogger synchronicity. I think it’s the linkage and our sensitivity to whatever we’re talking about the moment.
Then of course, when Google is shifting algorithms SEO topics become noisy . . . until someone does or says something that distracts our attention. 🙂
Hey Liz,
Another possible reason for the disconnect between copy and search results may be that in many instances the marketers write copy and someone else puts it up, and little communication in between. Makes me wanna ask, where’s the manual? But, then, it keeps changing…
L
Hi Lisa!
Great to see you here!
Ah yes, the organic nature of marketing copy . . . it’s the manual does changing too. How true. 🙂
[SNIP] Prof McGovern wonders whether we need to use more than one set of terms to describe things. [END SNIP]
Ummm…who ever thought we COULD use only one set of terms to describe things? There are so many variables that affect a person’s word choices: education, country of origin, region of origin, primary language, expertise (or lack thereof) in subject areas, influence of significant teachers and mentors, and…well, I’ll spare everyone from a long list. And even when people grow up in the same area, there are intangible cognitive processing traits that still may cause them to use different words (e.g., I call it a “tape dispenser” but my colleague calls it a “tape holder” — neither of us is wrong).
When you learn to index written works…whether they’re books, online help systems, Web sites, or something else…you’re taught to think of the synonyms that might be used for your primary keywords, and then include those synonyms in your index (even if only as “See {insert primary keyword here}”).
You’ll never get EVERYONE to use the same vocabulary, though in certain audiences you might at least be able to get folks into the same ballpark. By using analysis of search terms to determine trends in usage, you’re still not going to find the magic words that you can get everyone to use, but (as you, Liz, suggested) you can at least find out what the majority seems to be using and write to that common denominator (and hope that the minority group still somehow manages to find you).
Whitney,
I love how you find the point in middle of the mix and pull it out for clarification. Cool!
A certain “type” of marketing folks I’ve worked with in the past has been “buzz-word dependent.” I’ve reviewed and fixed catalogues that used the same five buzz-words to describe every product. That would be the exact opposite end of the spectrum to what is reality, i.e. what you describe above.
I don’t think that’s what Mr. McGovern was proposing or ever thought to do. I think he was gently trying to shake folks out of doing that. But the illusion that buying one set of keywords to market online products is a pervasive one. And it’s one that overlooks what you say. It decides what customers think. As we used to say where I used to work, “Those customers just won’t behave as we would have them behave.” 🙂
We bring our vocabularly to our readers by understanding theirs and working with both. I’m with you on that. 🙂
Hi Liz,
I use adwords quite a lot and from my experience, when the ad copy contains the exact same wording as the search term, your click-through goes way up.
On the other hand, the search term the customer uses doesn’t always reflect your unique selling proposition. Which is important for converting the website visitor to a customer.
So, in my opinion, the marketing Holy Grail would be to combine the two (search term+unique selling proposition).
Hi Yoav!
Welcome! I started to answer you earlier and got interrupted . . . sorry.
You have both sides covered — key words that folks search for and wider vocabularly to express the value of your product in unique and compelling terms that customers recognize and understand.
That makes sense as you describe it, paticularly if you are in a field in which products are hard to differentiate. It sounds like you sell hard good of some sort. Thanks for stopping to leave your comment. It’s nice to have a “tangible” example.
I’m hoping SEO copywriting doesn’t mean the end of elegant variation.
Consistency of messaging for corporate communications purposes and nailed-down key messages are important. But I’d hate to see phrases like ‘impotent fury’ fall out of usage. Although I’m giggling at the thought of this sentence: “His face worked in [erectile dysfunction] fury.”
Hey Liz,
I sell a PDF converter, which is more in the category of Hard to Sell goods than Hard Goods.
P.S.
Your blog is my favorite saloon.
Hi Yaov!
Great line about “Hard to Sell versus Hard Goods.” Glad you like place. I’m remodeling this week.
Here you go have one your favorites on me!
You are not a stranger anymore! 🙂
Well, it has been my experience that horny men looking for housewives may be confused about a few things or never been married for any significant period of time…
As for multiple terms, I had a thought that I must go rediscover because it has completely fled my brain. Hmmpf.
Oh yeah, part of coming up with a term to describe something is actually knowing what you are looking for. For instance, I am in search of the perfect organizer. I have tried Franklin and Daytimer, looked at Day Runner but never put any green down for it. I was told by a friend that I have a fetish (this word no doubt inspired by the first post here) for office supply stores. I vehemently denied this until I looked at the fact that I go by Office Max or Office Depot just to look sometimes.
…and getting ‘organized’ is some kind of Holy Grail for me. I want someday to be able to say, “OK, I am ORGANIZED.”
…but it never happens. I grumble about it, but I never seem to be satisfactorily organized to my liking.
Hi Ruth!
I didn’t mean to jump over you! I so enjoyed the music of your comment and the phrase “elegant variation.” You are a writer after my own writer’s heart. 🙂
Hi Tim!
You’ve a point that in order to search, we have to know what we’re searching for. That sounds silly obvious, but I’ve stared at a search box wondering what to type in to get me to what I want.
As far as office supply stores go. It calms my stress to walk down a perfectly organized pen aisle. Most writers I know have an office supply fetish. I think most designers do too. 🙂