The SEO Industry Regulator OfGoog by Ben Mckay (Guest Poster)
Thanks to all those that commented on the “How to become a famous SEO overnight” post. I’m contacting each and everyone of you who left a comment for your contributions to the DaveN blog.
Ben Mckay is first up, so thanks Ben.
About Ben McKay
Ben McKay, http://www.justmeandmy.com, has been in marketing since 2001, in various online and offline campaign management roles. In the last 2/3 years he has made a more permanent move into search marketing on a in-house and consultancy basis. He currently consults on online projects for clients of webdesignfromscratch, bourn design and greensplash.
OfGoog – the SEO Industry Regulator
You’ve all heard of OfWat, OfCom…well now there’s OfGoog! Give them a round of applause, please!
Google has been increasingly playing at teacher, covering ‘good practice’ SEO in more and more detail, but is it right for them to go any further regarding regulatory or accredited industry standards?
Game of Monopoly: Google Wins
If a search engine has a monopoly of search results, which Google does (currently at 90% in the UK [the Competition Commission deems a company with 25% market share to hold a monopoly]), then we could say that the industry power is a little skewed. This is like HSBC buying-up Lloyds TSB, Barclay’s and RBS and then becoming the FSA too. Can Google be all things?
Now, you’re probably thinking, “woo there, you’re developing quite a militant, anti-Google stance here, ranting and raving because you’ve got a slot on DaveN’s [awesome] blog”…well not really, but it sets me up for something else. If it doesn’t make sense for OfGoog to be the industry regulator, then who should do the dirty work? Or should anyone be ‘regulating’ it at all?
SEO Industry Standards
There has been discussion about industry standards for quite some time, with Dan Thies taking lead on the topic with his SEOpros website many moons ago, but it’s not really taken off. Why is this? Well, why would a SEO consultant not want to be accredited in their industry? Here’s why:
- The buying public is unaware of such an accrediting organisation, unlike bodies such as the Chartered Institute of Marketing (CIM) – therefore there’s minimal commercial pressure to do so
- There is not the peer pressure to sign-up either – offers little competitive edge
- Cost implications, although minimal, are worth noting
- Restrictions on techniques / procedures – some of these items are still debated and procedures are changing…
- Brand management. Too formal? Is it uncouth to be part of such a rule abiding club?
Maybe though, there will be enough instances of SEO cowboys for the reputation of the search marketing industry to decline in a way that will encourage some level of formal accreditation other than personal recommendations / reputation being the single indicator. The kind of formal accreditation I’m talking about is certificates, badges, handshakes with the PM, a uniform…the full works!
Cowboy’s Grabbing Headlines
Search marketing needn’t be another cowboy industry, but there will always be those headline grabbing stories of ‘another blackhat/cowboy SEO firm’ being brought down, but these headlines exist in any industry: surgeons, accountants, lawyers, lawyers, lawyers…so maybe it’s nothing too much to worry about?
Future of Accreditation in SEO
The FSA’s regulations didn’t exactly do an excellent job of regulating the financial industry and I don’t think this would work in the SEO industry, both are complicated and constantly changing.
Instead though, I do like the idea of industry standards, but in a way that promotes professional best practice, not specifically the technicalities of search engine optimisation. Being pragmatic, I think there is some time to come before we see change on any sort of industry-wide basis. If it comes sooner rather than later, it will be from OfGoog in my opinion. Google et al have had PPC accreditation for some time now (well done Adam), so maybe formal SEO accreditation will be next on their agenda – it sounds odd but considering the amount of advice they put out, this could happen…
However, do I want Google accrediting my professionalism, playing OfGoog AND raising my concerns over the monopolisation of online information? Well no, not really, so in that case I hope us search marketers chip in a few ideas, maybe a few quid and set-up something that represents us at an industry level. At least this way we can be seen to be taking the role and responsibilities that we have very seriously indeed (importantly in the eyes of Google et al, and the buying public).
Representative Body not Regulatory
I know some people are against SEO regulation and others that are for it, but I like the idea of some sort of representation at an industry level, a club if you like, just like the forums, social media sites and blogs that we so enthusiastically engage in, but on a national and collective basis. It’s not to everyone’s liking but for me, right now, as an aspiring SEO consultant, clubs are good. People needn’t sign-up if they don’t want to.
I would see the ‘regulating body’ as more of a representative body that considers education and best practice, but doesn’t enforce certain protocols as Jill Whalen suggests a regulatory body, by definition, must. It could take on a role similar to the CIM, of which I’ve been a member and it does have some benefits: education, national representation, networking and career development. Who can complain at that?
In the mean (and friendly) time
Now that I’ve made all this cafuffle, I’m going to crack on with getting accreditation with where it really matters – the SERPs! Do I need a certificate? No. Do I need a uniform? No. A badge? Well, it would be nice actually!
Feel free to leave comments on what you think to Ben’s post and his perspective





Dudibob 1643 days ago
You certainly need a hat to get accredited in the SERPs
I’m a bit skeptical of an SEO body as it would stop or at least hinder some of the younger people in the industry and the body itself would have to be leading authorities in the industry with open minds to change (a biased board never works)
It could however lead to helping ‘purify’ the SEO image on the plus side though
http://twitter.com/DaveNaylor/statuses/1012682111 1643 days ago
1st Guest Poster on My blog : http://tinyurl.com/6agyxa
Ben McKay 1643 days ago
http://www.jusmtmeandmy.comThanks Dave and Dan for the fame! I had the press outside my house this morning
Hi Dudibob, I’d be interested to hear how you think it might hinder younger folks…in my mind it would do the opposite wouldn’t it…networking opportunities, accreditation, education? I like the idea of purification, but I guess so do banks, lawyers and estate agents…the headlines overwhelm the public perspective unfortunately.
I do agree that we should be skeptical, or at the very least realistic, regarding organising body expectations. It’s kind of healthy to know what to expect of such a body – and it certainly doesn’t fix all problems and do much ‘regulating’ at all.
BUT, I think one of the most interesting points is that it shows that we are taking our role (in an increasingly important sector) very seriously.
It should be less about rules and regs and more about professional development in my (humble) opinion…
Cheers guys!
Ben
Robert 1643 days ago
http://www.propdata.co.zaI’m always wary of organizations that offer accreditation (lawyers come to mind
). I’m not a fan of rules, never have been and hope never to be.
Would Shady SEO techniques be given the thumbs up by this body? After all at times it’s well worth it.
And if not, then why not? And would accreditation not offer some an advantage over the newer or those that don’t qualify for what ever reason. If anything I just see this as a way for some to create an exclusive club.
All of that said, the theory is sound with the idea to keeping the clients safer from the Cowboys… it’s the practice that I have no faith in.
Ben McKay 1643 days ago
http://www.jusmtmeandmy.comI agree with this:
“Would Shady SEO techniques be given the thumbs up by this body? After all at times it’s well worth it. And if not, then why not?”
…I’m not about to say that grey / black hat is bad for rankings (when we know it’s not necessarily), but as long as the risk / rewards are communicated then I don’t see a problem.
Although this I’m not convinced by:
“And would accreditation not offer some an advantage over the newer or those that don’t qualify for what ever reason. If anything I just see this as a way for some to create an exclusive club.”
…a tier system in professionalism/competency is exactly what we should be working towards…whether or not it’s white or black hat
And this:
“All of that said, the theory is sound”
…I’m removing from context and taking as a compliment! Cheers!
http://twitter.com/yetanotherben/statuses/1013741309 1643 days ago
@mattcutts did you see this: http://tinyurl.com/6agyxa
http://twitter.com/yetanotherben/statuses/1013742983 1643 days ago
OfGoog: http://tinyurl.com/6agyxa
http://twitter.com/yetanotherben/statuses/1014496650 1642 days ago
@aaronwall Fame has landed: http://tinyurl.com/6agyxa …Well chuffed
http://twitter.com/yetanotherben/statuses/1027793765 1634 days ago
@benscratch did I mention that I’m famous? http://tinyurl.com/6agyxa
http://twitter.com/yetanotherben/statuses/1045758745 1624 days ago
@danschawbel OfGoog: http://tinyurl.com/6agyxa
Dan Thies 1602 days ago
http://www.seofaststart.com/Ben,
This is a very insightful breakdown of why professional standards organizations like OSEOP/SEOPros never got any traction.
To do a professional certification right – even just certifying knowledge – requires a lot of resources. There’s just no significant demand from SEO practitioners for that.
SEMPO’s certification is really targeted at corporate marketing departments and job seekers. Bruce’s certification is a marketing tool for his subscription-based tools.
I personally still hate the white/black hat thing, because think it mis-states the issue. Black Hat to me means phishing, 302 & proxy hijacking, real deception. Beyond that you are either doing stuff the search engines want to be able to catch and filter out, or you’re not.
A practitioner who wants to go “grey hat” on a real website that’s intended to be around for a long time is making a very questionable choice. I won’t question their ethics, just their competence for the task. If you can’t get a real web site positioned in SERPs where it needs to be without putting it at risk, you’ve got more to learn.
The goal of SEOPros was to reward those who don’t take risks with their clients’ web sites, live up to reasonable business practices, etc. It’s kind of a chicken-and-egg deal though. Even SEMPO, with all their resources, doesn’t exactly cause new client leads to rain down on their members.
I am not in favor of a regulatory body for SEO practices. It’s not necessary. For unethical business practices, there are plenty of regulations already. For policing how people do SEO, you’ll never get consensus.
I am most definitely in favor of some kind of knowledge/skill/practice certification by a professional body, but I think the core problem faced by the clients isn’t ethics, it’s competence.
A well known SEO consultant took on a client who was competing with one of my students. In a short time, he managed to drive this client’s link rental bills through the roof while driving their rankings down. Was he “unethical” for buying links and doing all the other goofy stuff he did? No, he was just incompetent – he wasted the clients’ money and possibly caused long term damage. They would have been better off doing nothing.
That’s the problem we should be trying to fix. It takes more than education, but education is a good place to start.
Ben Mckay 1593 days ago
http://www.justmeandmy.comHi Dan,
I think in many respects we share the same conclusions – importantly on membership of certifying bodies not promoting the likelihood of commercial progress (ultimately what most companies are seeking).
SEMPO, I think, is more important internally for the SEO industry, for professional progression maybe, but beyond that (as you’ve agreed) it doesn’t help gain clients.
Maybe though, as companies learn more about search industry (and blunders that can occur from poor SEO work) there will be more companies making accreditation/certification a prerequisite to getting the contract?
The other points you made, were similar to what I was trying to get at regarding white hat / black hat techniques. Competency is what we want, more than anything in the industry in my eyes. If we have competency then nothing else will be questioned. But that goes beyond techniques and into the realms of client management, i.e. communicating the risks/rewards of blackhat behaviour to clients…not chancing buying a ton of links and dropping in the SERPs to the surprise of the client. Certificates still wouldn’t prove competency as they are a very static measure too.
I have done a variety of generalist courses in marketing and business, and only one of them touched on SEO (and that was a eMarketing course with CIM). I hear on the grapevine that UK Universities are starting to tap into this field for resources to teach, but it’s still not going to be adequate as it’s the testing of these skills that’s necessary, of which is hard to do in an academic environment.
It’s a ‘learn as you go industry’ for the near future I feel, with mostly in-house accreditation for now. However, I still think there is space for (not-for-profit) industry representation – it might help trickle information into major education / corporate institutions more effectively too…
Maybe SEOPros will play a bigger role in the future, Dan?
Thanks for commenting.
Dan Thies 1580 days ago
http://www.seofaststart.com/I don’t know what will happen with SEOPros/OSEOP – Terry van Horne has really kept that organization going as a labor of love. We’ve never had anything that even feels like traction with the larger SEO/SEM profession.
SEMPO came in, took money from the search engines, said ethics didn’t matter, and even with lots of money and no standards they didn’t exactly light up the world.
There’s a market for certifications that can help win clients, get someone a job, or help someone prove that they’re doing a good job.
http://twitter.com/divinewrite/statuses/1153559416 1574 days ago
Reading: “The SEO Industry Regulator OfGoog” ( http://tinyurl.com/6agyxa )
Glenn Murray 1574 days ago
http://www.divinewrite.comAs usual, Ben, nice post.
Dan, I’m with you. I think competence is the issue. I reckon the search engines will filter out all the true black-hat/unethical stuff.
And I think it’s important from more than a results perspective. Yes, it’s important that clients get results, but it’s also important for the reputation of our industry. Too many people view SEOs as snake-oil salesmen.
Cheers.
Glenn (twitter: @divinewrite)
Maurice 1572 days ago
Um you do know that ofComs real job is keeping the tabloid media barons happy which is what one MP told me
seo snake oil as oposed to the advertising snake oil
or spending the clients cash to win design awards and who gives a frack it it works just what did the Cadburys gorilla do for the client
What does my perfect SEO training scheme look like? [General] | SEO Scoop 1273 days ago
[...] previously covered-off, what I think about SEO accreditation, but SEO training is another kettle of dogs. So, what does my ideal SEO training scheme look [...]
What does my perfect SEO training scheme look like? — neocortex.ro 1273 days ago
[...] previously covered-off, what I think about SEO accreditation, but SEO training is another kettle of dogs. So, what does my ideal SEO training scheme look [...]