Why SEOs are hated
“We are the outcast, the banished, the shunned
The cheated, the punished, the feared.
The loathsome downtrodden whom nobody loves,
But, with reviled comes revered.”
Back in the good old days, when men wore tights and bells, people were afraid of witches. One thing that was supposed to stop witches from entering your house was a bottle of piss and ironmongery buried under your front door. Thus you could sleep safely at night. We might have moved on from that belief, but the psychology of protecting yourself from nameless horrors continues.
Only today, instead of burying a bottle you’d use Disqus for your comments system, nofollows on your links and redirects on your outbounds. And instead of witches, you’re doing it because you’re afraid of SEOs.
SEOs have become the villains of the internet. Fear stalks the webmaster at every turn – that somehow your website might fall “victim” to SEOs. When my.telegraph got shut down, the finger was immediately pointed at SEOs. When Powazek bitched, he used the word ‘SEO’ as a catch-all for lazy developers, shoddy content writers and outright spammers.
Like lawyers, MPs and cockroaches, we’ve gotten a bad name.
Even SEOs are running from their own rep. Some like to use the phrase SEM. Or to call themselves Web Marketers. Or to loudly proclaim that SEO is just a branch of marketing or some such bullshit.
And yet we are the people who build the content as often as not. We build the links so that content can be found. We write for humans not for search engines. We make it accessible to the spiders. We advise our clients not to use Flash… to not hide their content… to invest in unique copy… not to cloak… to reach out and communicate with their audiences on blogs and forums and social media.
We make our clients leap through hoops they don’t even know exist just to fulfill Google’s vision of the web. We sit and explain that their £12000 Flash animation might be brilliant in every regard, but it has to go because Google won’t like it.
When a new social media site starts up, we flock to it to see what it offers. If we can, build up our clients’ profiles – protecting their brand equity from the unscrupulous and making sure that their official channels are covered properly. We engage with the audience. We publicise these sites to an audience of tech-savvy early adopters. And then when the site has enough content and backlinks and advertising revenue…? Links are nofollowed, comments are Ajaxed, outbounds are redirected, profiles are banned.
We do this with no professional infrastructure beyond conferences and blogs – and amid a blizzard of misinformation. There are no accredited university courses explaining how search algorithms function.
So why are we hated?
We’re hated because people can discern no difference between spam and good SEO. Because Calacanis is quotable and can say that black is white and be believed by a gang of credulous dupes and cackling stooges looking for a hobby horse to ride.
We’re hated because people need a bogeyman to blame for their failure to have a problem business plan or to hide their own corner-cutting. Much easier on the soul to blame your SEO then take a long, hard look at your business model right?
We’re hated because people set up shop promising to rank you for ‘iphone’ for $100 a month. They’re either just ignorant of reality or outright scammers. And yet they fly under the same SEO flag as the decent guys.
We’re hated because of the pointless grey hat vs. grey hat battles – when people try to pass themselves off as either “black hat” or “white hat” – or blue or green – when really only one dividing line matters: good SEOs vs. bad SEOs.
We’re hated because we stop content writers copying and making sure they speak the language used by searchers. We’re hated by developers because we make them rewrite their code and re-architect their sites. We are hated by designers because we obsess over every kilobyte of every image to make our sites faster.
We’re hated because morons fire off cookie-cutter link requests to the most inappropriate sites imaginable.
We’re hated because the sites we work on rank higher than others who think that they should be in the top spot because they’re inherently superior and don’t understand why Google thinks differently.
We’re hated because all of these things are seen by some as attempts to ‘game’ the search engines to deliver results that are somehow ‘fake’.
Where are the SEO heroes?
So who are our representatives – the people who will stand up and tell people that SEO is worth it? Do we have a figurehead? Are there badges, degrees and stamps of authority we can reference? No. We have to beat our own drum in the face of a hostile/indifferent public and site owners who don’t like what we do because they don’t understand what we do.
Our SEO Heroes are those people who not only do great work, but go out to bat for the team week in, week out. Here’s a few that we could think of – I’m sure you could add to the list:

Rob Taylor 665 days ago
http://www.rob.co.ukGood post – I would add in that this reputational issue affects the work that ‘good’ SEO’ers do.
Although most SEO’ers will ignore the problems and focus on their own work, it would be worth those who do a proper job to do posts and PR such as this to explain what is good , what is bad and what signs of scams there are.
Likewise, for the dodgy / con artists out there to be exposed.
There are cowboys in every industry, but Joe Public are more aware of the warning signs in some more than others.
Matthew Diehl 665 days ago
http://www.matthewsdiehl.comI really like the perspective of not looking at SEOs from the color of hat they wear but whether they are good or bad. The self-policing that we conduct by outing the bad, spammy & clueless will hopefully help shape a better image for SEOs in the future.
Great post!
Becky 665 days ago
http://www.beckynaylor.co.ukGood post .. nice to see it finally out of drafts!
I’d say its hard to pull a list of SEO Heroes together and there are plenty more that could & should be on there, but people can write about good seo.. but how can you tell who actually “does” good seo? Should there be a proper SEO qualification / accreditation developed… and who would develop it?
Kean 665 days ago
http://www.keanrichmond.comQualifications won’t work as the industry moves so fast, even Web Design and Dev although slower moving is too quick for traditional qualifications to keep right up to date.
I don’t think accreditations are going to work either unless there is a specific brand involved; Google. It would be easy to invent an accreditation and plaster badges on a website, but what makes these accreditations worth anything and what stops people inventing accreditations just as a way of false advertising.
Some people they would see an accreditation and instantly see it as a sign of a good seo, even if they didn’t recognise the accreditation. These people are idiots of course. But for those more informed it’s likely that no brand other than Google would be recognisable enough for them to believe the accreditation is a true and proper sign of a good seo.
paul carpenter 665 days ago
http://www.itsafamilything.co.ukI’m kind of with you Kean, but lawyers (to give an entirely random example) manage to have accreditations and professional status and new laws and precedents are set all the time.
I’m not saying that it’s feasible – or even necessarily desirable – it’s just the lack of such a thing makes it very difficult for someone to know whether they’re talking to a scammer or someone genuinely in the know.
steve firth 665 days ago
http://www.devolved.co.ukit’s because most “SEO” aren’t seo at all, they are unqualified spammers and are mostly some totally unrelated office type writing crap on a bunch of poorly titled blog and are incapable of making a web page.
Like account managers they are making a good living by standing in between knowledge and ignorance and bullshitting both,
Last of the snake oil salesmen they charge a fortune for filling the internet with crap.
Steven Holmes 665 days ago
http://www.dotcomdigital.co.ukWhy are SEOs hated?
At the top end it’s because a lot of business owners are ‘old school’ and are disgruntled because most of their old business models and marketing techniques don’t work any more. This means they have to embrace technology, and put their trust in a younger generation who can do things they don’t understand and don’t want to understand.
Consequently they baulk at prices quoted and end up giving a few hundered quid to some two-bit spammer who achieves nothing for them.
SEO is like anything else, you get what you pay for.
Dean Richard 665 days ago
http://www.compass-seo.comGreat post! I think while it is easy to hate on SEO, there are a lot- and the number is growing- of savvy and smart business owners who look beyond the superstition and which-hunting and recognize the true value of SEO. They educate themselves on what to look for, and hire accordingly.
Eventually the good SEOs will triumph because of this, and the spammers will fail, and the people they have duped will flock to the good SEOs!
Matt Webb 665 days ago
http://bluetemplemedia.comReferences. Provide them. We can toot our own horn about how incredibly awesome we are, but letting one business owner talk to another is far more effective.
This may leave the newbie SEO out of the running, but they can still produce something to back up their claims; how well did they optimize their own site?
Alysson 665 days ago
http://www.seoaly.comThe tendency of humanity is to cast suspicion, and even disdain, on that which we don’t understand is powerful. People don’t understand how one person claiming to be an SEO charges $49 and offers a page one guarantee while another charges $2000 a month with no guarantee.
This same psychology is at work when someone opts for plastic surgery on the cheap and proceeds to be shocked when his/her face is ultimately mangled. While spending more isn’t an iron clad guarantee that nothing will go wrong, it is a bit of insurance against falling victim to malicious and purposeful negligence.
As widely known, universally accepted and painfully cliched are the phrases, “you get what you pay for” and “if it sounds too good to be true, it probably isn’t true”, more often than not, they’re accurate. Aspersions are cast on an entire industry not only because of the avarice-driven charlatans, but the ignorant fools whose quest to get something for nothing and reluctance to believe a couple of simple adages make them easy targets.
Ignorance is expensive. And unfortunately we have to foot part of the bill.
Marc Bitanga 665 days ago
http://www.exclamationmarc.com/Nice post. I came to the same conclusion as well a while back when I wrote this blog post on the image problem of SEO (http://www.exclamationmarc.com/seo/image-problem-seo/).
It doesn’t seem like we’ll overcome this image problem anytime soon. It seems spam, snakeoil & hack will be associated with the term SEO for a while in some circles. But that shouldn’t stop those from offering these services to try to distance themselves and properly educate their clients/stakeholders.
Certification has been offered up as a solution; but with much pushback from the community.
But I’m pretty much open to any suggestions that would distance the professionals from “the other guys”.
Susan Suarez 664 days ago
http://susansuarez.comAmazing article. Unfortunately, SEOs in general have gotten a bad wrap due to the idea that this is where the money is and many bad “SEOs” treat it like hustling. For the non-believers in SEO, they don’t realize the full potential of good SEO and how it takes a lot of practice, testing, years of experience and constant upkeep of information to stay on top of it all. It makes me sad when I see people jumping into this world without much background…it only diminishes what good SEOs can really do. I have a client that was scared to move forward because of a bad experience…so we’re taking baby steps and the client is showing renewed faith in this industry.
Alan bleiweiss 664 days ago
http://searchmarketingwisdom.comHere’s another reason we’re hated. http://twitpic.com/29u110 Ironic isn’t it?
Steve 664 days ago
http://twitter.com/danger_mouseWhilst I don’t disagree with the sentiment of your post… SEO is a branch of marketing / online marketing.
Kaushal Shah 664 days ago
http://www.shahkaushal.com/I agree with all the points mentioned why we SEOers are so much hated, but it makes sense to put SEO under Internet Marketing umbrella. There are other activities like Pay-Per-Click, Affiliate marketing, Email Marketing which comes under Internet Marketing.
Because it is such a fast moving industry, standardization of methods and procedures are next to impossible. Only the proper knowledge of What is White hat and What is black hat amongst customers can bring some happiness for all of us.
Andrew Girdwood 664 days ago
http://blog.arhg.netHi, dude. SEO is a branch of marketing.
We became hated because of the black hats and the charlatans. If, from the beginning, SEOs only ever preached good, solid, web-improving advice then there would be no hate.
We’re still hated because we – as a group – refuse to cast out the black hats in the way that all other good professions would cast out and disown their own cowboys and rogue traders.
Andy @ FirstFound 664 days ago
http://www.firstfound-blog.co.uk/I think people have been stung by unscrupulous companies, and just tar us all with the same brush.
Dan Horton SEO 664 days ago
http://www.danhorton.co.ukGreat list Paul and most of those people actively share their seo knowledge to the community as a whole.
Adam Dince 664 days ago
http://www.adamdince.comIn my experience working with Fortune 500 clients, SEOs are not hated. As a matter of fact, we are greatly appreciated. And whenever I meet small business owners, they are always interested in talking search. Sure, there will always be those who have been jaded by bad experiences, but that goes for all channels. Overall, I feel that search as a whole is seen as a highly important part of an online presence.
Jeffrey Smith 663 days ago
http://www.seodesignsolutions.com/blog/Until another viable traffic source arrives that is epic enough to trump Google, they can call us whatever they like…
At the end of the day, the only ones complaining are the people who aren’t in the top 10 results. For the other fortunate types that had the where-with-all to be the early adopters and jump on the SEO bandwagon when it first hit the scene in the 1990′s their trust and authority is baked into the very fabric of the link graph / web as we know it.
Now its a game of catch up for most trying to hit a moving target and you have big G moving the cheese all the time (Florida, Big Daddy, Mayday, etc.).
Call it what it is, but I love it and kudos to you Paul for the wonderful analogies.
I definitely would have liked to have made the list, but maybe it better to be under the radar…
All the best!
July ‘10: Best Search/Marketing Posts 662 days ago
[...] Paul Carpenter: Why SEOs are Hated [...]
KeithTax 661 days ago
http://hubpages.com/hub/5-Steps-to-Retire-RichAre you saying the piss and ironmongery are not working?
The serious side you point out is real. In days of old, editors decided what got published. If one editor thought your stuff was crap you found another editor. Editors provided a valuable service.
Today, anyone can publish online. Google is the only real editor in town and it is a machine deciding what rises to the top. You either play Google’s game or you are in the same boat an the unpublished years ago.
LordManley 661 days ago
http://twitter.com/?status=@LordManleyIs it not just that we all eat our young?
Shannon - SKS Designs 661 days ago
http://www.sksdesigns.comInteresting post. While I agree with the role of the SEO, including “We write for humans not for search engines”, I have to disagree with being hated because we are SEO.
Usually the people that hate SEO or disregard SEO are those that have either been burned by some black hat SEO “professional” or work for a cobbler. Either way, their hatred is based upon the feelings they have for the label of SEO – not for the professional SEO consultants themselves.
When I meet someone who is nervous – or even hates – SEO, I will explain how I my services are different then those they have either heard of or experienced in the past. I am a Linchpin SEO – my 15 years in IT and a MBA in Technology Management – Global eCommerce paired with my innate skills as a SEO make me indispensable.
I also give my potential clients a list of what to look for in a reputable SEO consultant – so that if they should decide to go with someone else, they are better protected from the masses of black hat bad guys.
It’s about building a relationship with your customers and gaining their trust. Only then will the defamatory label of SEO be pushed aside and your name will speak volumes.
Internet Marketing highlights for July 2010 | The Blog of Echo-Stream.com 661 days ago
[...] SEOs the villains and why we hate them [...]
Earl Grey 659 days ago
https://www.syndk8.comYou missed the bit about it being pretty much a snake oil business for most seo`s at whatever level.
There is an seo prostituting their services or seo Consultant round every corner.
I very rarely meet someone who does seo for company’s or clients that has ever had any tangible results for themselves.
Until people stop selling seo services and start making money for themselves it will always be tainted with the smell of bullshit.
Long may it live so all you guys that do seo for customers get to stay in a job.
Chuck Reynolds 659 days ago
http://chuckreynolds.usWell played sir… It’s similar to sheep and sheepdogs, the sheep don’t like us until they need us.
SEO is a buzzword and has been for quite some time… like anything that’s buzzworthy the asshats that don’t know wtf they’re doing jump on it and add it to their ever expanding list of shit they’re an expert of. That swarm of idiots (experts) is a big part of what helped to tarnish our title.
I still fly my SEO flag and I’m proud of it – anybody who knows me or heard me speak knows that I tell it how it is and get people and companies set up right and I deliver good damn results.
And this shit on every site / facebook doesn’t help either kids.
http://twitpic.com/29u110 Ironic isn’t it?
Posizionamento sui motori di ricerca e la guerra dei mondi: cosa hanno in comune ? 659 days ago
[...] c’è un interessante articolo che spiega perchè i SEO SONO ODIATI dal resto del mondo, dal blog di David Naylor (un importante esperto del nostro campo a livello [...]
Gareth jax 659 days ago
http://www.andreascarpetta.comI’m getting the same treatment in italy too, it means that here are a lot of scammers in our work. I’ve added a link from my article on my italian blog where i tell the usual drama of the seo consultant.
Thomas 657 days ago
http://www.seoandpositioning.comActually SEO is misunderstood, when any small business has a website, SEO is the first building block that must be in place, so the next steps will fall together like a puzzle, all fitting perfectly together.
Andy 654 days ago
I agree with Early Grey above. In reality SEO is about position 1,2 and 3 and even then most terms won’t have enough traffic even in those positions to be worth the cost of the work. SEO is full of bullshitters but I don’t think that’s why they are hated as loads of industries have their fair share of them.
There are two reasons SEO has a bad name:
1) Lack of real ROI. People say they can rank you and get you nowhere or put you up for shite terms. You had 3 unique a day, you now have 30 and they say “it’s a 1000% increase…”etc “Oh it takes many, many months…” The main give away is most firms work on a retainer; that means they get paid even if you don’t.
2) SEO’ers are mainly hypocrites. How many firms/individuals do you know that publically say white hat this, or ethical that, or out their competitors for bad practice whilst conducting the exact/similar/ same methods or break the TOS in other ways.
Paul Carpenter 653 days ago
http://www.itsafamilything.co.uk@Andy
“You had 3 unique a day, you now have 30 and they say “it’s a 1000% increase…”
Well that would just be a statement of fact.
“SEO is about position 1,2 and 3 and even then most terms won’t have enough traffic even in those positions to be worth the cost of the work”
To summarise your position: you’re saying there’s not enough traffic from head keywords to be worth the effort chasing them, and longtail queries are just bullshit because any one of them might be worth only a few visits a day.
So you’re saying… there’s not enough traffic to be had from Google to be worth SEO fees. Gotcha.
I’m looking at Analytics right now. Over the last 3 months, a market we’ve been targeting for a client sent 95,000 visits worth £45k in sales. Over the same period last year, the same sector was worth under 40,000 visits and just £5k in sales.
Classic SEO in operation. We target a head term to push for a ranking (last year that keyword was worth £356.20 in sales. This year it was worth £10,304) and on the back of that, the onsite work pulls in a much deeper and better-performing long tail.
That’s just one keyword set for one client – and I could pull out another dozen. Taken together, that’s a lot of revenue that without SEO would have gone somewhere else
But why let facts stand in the way of some strongly held personal prejudices, eh?
Matthew Diehl 653 days ago
http://www.matthewsdiehl.comCan everyone see the difference between the points made by @Andy & @Paul?
Andy brings up positions and traffic while Paul takes it one step farther to include the actual impact on the business. The success metric of increasing client sales from £5k to £45k or £356 to £10k are the real ROI that SEOs can bring to a business.
[hat tip] Thanks to advancements in analytics we are now able track this ROI, absolutely. These are the metrics that can and will save SEOs from the building angst against them.
Real SEOs grow your bottom line.
Tony 647 days ago
http://www.keenonseo.co.ukGood point Matthew. Something that people pitching SEO often struggle with – getting round the fact that SEO should be viewed as a general improvement to the site thus increasing traffic and conversions and not getting FRYING PANS to number 3.
If website conversions increase significantly (as judged by the client) beyond the outlay of the SEO then it is a successful campaign.