Search Engine Results Web Design

MartinKelley.com is a web design house based in Hammonton, South Jersey. Owner Martin Kelley has twenty years of real-world experience and practical advice for small businesses and nonprofits.

Call (609) 365-0123 or email at martink@martinkelley.com

What Customers Are Saying:

✔ “Good communicator, is very value-conscious.”
✔ “Flexible in working with me to achieve what I was looking for within my budget.”
✔ “One of the most honest and trustworthy people I've ever hired.”
✔ “Highly-personable, an expert in current technological approaches.”
✔ “Our ‘go-to’ guy, especially involving Web 2.0 and Search Engine optimization.”

Full quotes on the References page.

Check the Contact Page for rates, typical costs and information on housecalls!

Collected from the LinkedIn:

"Martin has provided -- and continues to provide excellent service and consultation as a Web site developer. For my site on New York-based architecture and history, Mindfulwalker.com, I asked for some complex developments of and changes to a WordPress theme and the site installation. I received the service that I needed and more, and I'm very happy with the site today. Martin brings a variety of assets to his role: He is extremely knowledgeable and capable in programming and Web tools. He's also a good communicator, is very value-conscious about the service he delivers for the cost, and is understanding of client needs. Beyond this, Martin helped with some excellent tutorials as I took over the site. I plan to hire Martin again as I look forward to enhancements and additional developments for my site and business. Martin is excellent at what he does!" May 10, 2009

Susan DeMark, Journalist.
Hired Martin as a Graphic/Web Designer in 2007
Top qualities: Great Results, Good Value, High Integrity


"Martin provided great value in designing a website for my law practice. He was accessible and facilitated the process, despite our geographical distance, through email and telephone consultations. He was flexible in working with me to achieve what I was looking for within my budget." May 1, 2009

John Kindley, Lawyer.
Hired Martin as a Graphic/Web Designer in 2008
Top qualities: Personable, Good Value, High Integrity


"Martin is not only highly competent as a Web site developer, he's also one of the most honest and trustworthy people I've ever hired. I highly recommend Martin." April 30, 2009

James Maguire, Author.
Hired Martin as a Graphic/Web Designer in 2006, and hired Martin more than once.
Top qualities: Great Results, Personable, Expert


"Martin has worked for our school to integrate Web 2.0 technologies into our communication materials. Martin is highly-personable and his is an expert in current technological approaches. This is a hard match to find in consultants." April 30, 2009

Michael Moulton, Technology Director, William Penn Charter School.
Hired Martin as a IT Consultant in 2007, and hired Martin more than once.
Top qualities: Personable, Expert, High Integrity.


"Martin has an outstanding grasp of everything there is to know about the internet. He is our "go-to" guy whenever we encounter something new and different, especially involving Web 2.0 and Search Engine optimization. He is also an experienced and skilled designer and has excellent PHP/CSS/HTML programming knowledge. Martin is a pleasure to work with in every respect!" May 1, 2009

    Barbara Raphael, Founder/Owner/Designer/Developer, Raphael Webscapes, LLC.
    Worked directly with Martin at Raphael Webscapes.
Categories: references
Tags: Architecture, Budget, Communication, Consultations, Go-To Guy, Graphic, Haddonfield, History, Honest, It Consultant, Journalist, Law Practice, Lawyer, Linkedin, New York City, Raphael Webscapes, School, Search Engine Optimization, Technology Directory, Trustworthy, Web 2.0, Web Designer, Website, Wordpress | Edit
This is part of my Beyond SEO series where I look at the myths and realities behind search engine optimization, with practical tips about publicizing your site and building your personal brand. Read all of my Beyond SEO articles.

The Google blog asks for user input into what makes a good SEO and reports that they've just rewritten their page that warns against rogue SEO artists and gives recommendations about what to look out for. It starts with their definition
SEO is an acronym for "search engine optimization" or "search engine optimizer." Deciding to hire an SEO is a big decision. Make sure to research the potential advantages as well as the damage that an irresponsible SEO can do to your site. Many SEOs and other agencies and consultants provide useful services for website owners.
The blog asks "how would you define SEO? What questions would you ask a prospective SEO?" I've been doing a lot more optimization for clients lately. What's particularly fun is running across the work of the SEO scam artists their competition have brought in. I've seen many instances where the other SEO firm has stepped over the bounds of fair practice and been penalized by Google.

Google's job and our job

I've always taken the approach that it's Google's job to give people the most useful and relevant return for their search and our job to make sure we have useful and relevant material and arrange it in such a way that Google can access it.

SEO is important but only in the context of smart web design and a coherent and well thought out internet marketing strategy. Firms that claim to do SEO without checking the analytics data and consulting with the client about their business strategy will not help the site in the long run.

What your SEO expert should be doing

I would agree with most of Google's recommendations of what to look out against. But what to look for? A quick list would include:

  • A SEO consultant that looks at analytics data before making any changes. If the client doesn't already have Google Analytics running on the site I install it and wait a month before doing anything. I do that because you want:
  • Quantifiable results. You should be able to see shifting use patterns if the optimization is working. The internet gives us precise figures and it's often very easy to demonstrate the value of the work you've done. Clients should have full access to the analytics and be trained enough to be able to independently verify the results.
  • A consultant that frequently answers questions with "Hmmm..., I don't know." No one knows what Google is doing. You try something, then you try something else. Anyone who claims to know everything is scamming you.
  • Someone who looks at your entire business model and asks hard questions about your internet strategy. What do you hope to accomplish with your site. Are there specific goals that we can measure?
  • Think about your Inbound and Outbound strategies. Google will send people your way if you have useful material so think about what compelling content you can offer the universe. And once people come to the site you have to make it compelling for them to stay a while, subscribe, etc.
  • The SEO consultant should make you sweat: anyone who says they can significantly boost your site without you having to lift a finger is fooling you. You will almost always have to add compelling content and it will take you committing staff time to the project (a good development team will look for ways to make this fit into your existing staff routines so that it's as painless as possible!).
Any others suggestions for what to look for in potential SEO consultants?
Categories: Beyond SEO | Edit
Whenever I talk with fellow web designers, the issue of "SEO" invariably comes up. That's techie slang for "search engine optimization," of course, that black science of making sure Google lists your site higher than your competitors. Over the years a small army of shady characters have tried to game the search engine results.

I've always thought such tricks were pathetic and bound to lose over the long term. Search engines want to feature good sites. It's in their best interest to make sure the sites listed are the ones people want to see. A search engine that returns unsatisfactory results quickly becomes a has-been in the search engine competition. So as soon as a site such as Google notices some new SEO trick is skewing the rankings they tweak their secret search algorithm to fix the SEO loophole.

Just Give Google the Content It Loves

In theory it's easy to make Google, Yahoo, MSN and the other big search engines happy: give potential visitors site they'll want to visit. Forget the tricks and spend your time putting together an amazing site. Search engines like text, so write, write, write.

I'm looking to join a web design house, which means I've been interviewing with slick web developers lately and whenever they ask me the best way to increase SEO for their clients, I tell them to start a blog. They look at me like I'm an idiot but it's absolutely true: two blog posts a week will end up being over 100 pages of pure content. All of these sites full of Flash animation get you nowhere with Google.

Just a note that any kind of text-rich web system can achieve many of the same results--blogs are just the easiest way yet to get content on your site.

Presenting What You Already Have: Blog your Water Cooler Chat

When I talk to people about starting a corporate blog they quickly start telling me how much work it will be. Bah and Humbug--your company's life is probably already filled with bloggable material!

I used to work in a bookstore where I did most of the customer service, much of it by email. About two or three times a week I'd get a particularly intriguing query and would spend a little time researching an answer (mostly by looking through the indexes of our books and searching the arcane sites of our niche). This research didn't always pan out to a book sale, but it marked our bookstore as a place to get answers and gave us a competitive advantage over Amazon and its ilk. Each of my email answers could have easily been reformatted to become a blog post. By the end of a year, I'm sure the volume coming from these obscure searches would be quite high (see yesterday's Long Tail Strategy post on the HitTail blog for an account of how attention to search engine's one-hit-wonders helped achieve a widespread keyword dominance).

Whenever something new happens that breaks you out of your routine, think about whether it's bloggable. At the bookstore, a new book would come in and we'd spend ten minutes talking about it. That conversation reached half-a-dozen people at most. In that same ten minutes we could have written up a blog post saying much the same thing.

Last Spring a controversial article appeared in the local newspaper that tangentially involved my employer. That morning my workmates gathered together in the reception area for the better part of an hour trading opinions and wisecracks. After about five minutes of this, I slipped back to my office and wrote my opinions and wisecracks down into my blog. I hit post and came back to the reception area--to find my workmates still blathering on, natch. My post reached hundreds and took no more time out of the work day than the reception pontifications.

Humans are social animals. We're always blogging. It's just that most of the time we're doing it verbally around the water cooler with three other people. Learn to type it in and you've got yourself a high-volume blog that will add invaluable content and SEO magic to your site.

Mix up your content: Tag Your Site

Lastly, a point to webmasters: it usually pays to think about ways to re-package your content. My most recently experience of this was tagifying my personal blog over at "QuakerRanter.org." Every time I post there a Movable Type plugin fishes out the key words in the article and lists them afterwards as tags. These tags are all linked in such a way that results send the term through the site's search engine to give back an on-the-fly index page of all the posts where I've used that term.

Tags are like categories except they pick up everything we talk about (when we use them aggressively at least, and especially when we automate them). We don't necessarily know the categories that our potential audience might be searching for and tagifying our sites increases our keyword outreach exponentially. My personal blog has 239 entries but 3,860 pages according to Google. It's the parsed out and re-packaged content that accounts for all of this extra volume. This doesn't increase traffic by that nearly that much, but last month about 30% of my Google visits came from these tag indexes. More on the mechanics of this on my post about the tagging.

Categories: Beyond SEO
Tags: Google Yahoo, Loophole, Search Algorithm, Search Engine Optimization, Search Engine Results, Search Engines, Seo, Yahoo | Edit
Every web designer under the sun talks about search engine optimization (SEO), but it amazes me to see how often basic principles are ignored. I'm in-between jobs right now, which means I'm spending a lot of time looking at potential employers' websites. I've decided to start a series of posts on SEO myths and realities that will talk about designing for maximum visibility.

I'm not going to focus on any of the underhanded tricks to fool search engines into listing an inappropriate page. Google hates this kind of tactic and so do I. You get visits for having good content. Good search rankings are based on good content and the best way to boost your content is to present your page in a way that lets both humans and search engines find the content they want. Part one is on website analysis and tracking.

Don't assume that your website is easy to navigate. One of the neatest things about the web is that we have instant feedback on use. With just a little tracking we can see what pages people are looking at, how they're finding our site and what they're doing once they're here.

Javascript Trackers:

My most advanced sites are currently using four different tracking methods. Most utilize javascript "bugs," tiny snippets of code that send individual results to an advanced software tracking system. I put the code inside a Moveable Type "Modules Template" which is automatically imported to all pages. Installing a new system is as easy as cutting-and-pasting the javascript into the Template and rebuilding the site.

AXS Visitors Tracking System
This software installs on your server but don't let that scare you: this is one of the easiest installations I've ever seen. AXS gives you great charts of usage: you can narrow it specific pages on your site, or even particular search engines or search phrases.

There's also a option to view the lastest traffic by visitor. I love watching this! You can see how individuals are using the site and where they're navigating. I've been able to identify different types of visitors this way and understand the complexity of the audience.

It doesn't seem like AXS is not being developed anymore. The latest stable version came out over two years go, which is a shame.

HitTail
This service watches search-engine links and makes recommendations for new keywords. I wrote about this service yesterday in Blogging for the Long Tail.

Reeferss.com
This is a simple simple bit of software. Like every other tracking system it keeps track of referrers: search engines and websites that bring traffic to your site. But unlike the others that's all it does. Why care then? It provides a real-time RSS feed of these visitors. I bring the feed into my "Netvibes" page (a customized start page, see below) and scan the results multiple times a day.

Google Analytics
The internet's gatekeeper bought the Urchin analytics company in April 2005 and relaunched the product as Google Analytics shortly thereafter. This is becoming an essential tracker. It's free and it's powerful, though I haven't been as impressed by it as others have. See its Wiki page for more.

Internet Trackers:

It's easy to find out what people are saying about you online.

Technorati
This service tracks blogs but you don't need to have a blog to use it, for Technorati will tell you where blogs are linking. Give it your URLs (or those of your competitors!) and you'll know whenever a blogger puts in a link to you. You can also give it keywords and find out when a blog uses them.

Google Blog Search
Google can also let you follow blog references or keyword mentions on the blogs. Google will also track beyond blogs of course. Type "site:www.yourdomain.com" into the main Google search page and you'll see who's linking to your site (or to the competition). There are lots of other services that track blogs and mentions--Sphere, Bloglines, etc. They all have different strengths so try them and see what you think.

Feedburner
The best RSS massager has always focused on ways to track your RSS feed. They've recently introduced page tracking software too. It looks great but I just installed it this week. I still have to see if it's as good as Feedburner's other offerings.

Keeping on top of this flow of data:

It's easy to get overwhelmed by all of this information. Most of the tracking services provide RSS feeds (See The Wonders of RSS Feeds for an intro). I use Netvibes, a customized start page, to pull these all together into a single page that I can scan every morning. Here's a screenshot of part of my Netvibes tracking page--the full page currently shows fourteen tracking feeds on one screen:

So why is tracking important to SEO?

With tracking you find out what people are looking for on the internet. This helps you create pages and services that people will want to find. You might be surprised to see what they're already finding on your site. Some examples:

  • Analyzing one site, I noticed that few pages I thought were obscure were bringing in high Google traffic. I looked at these pages again and realized they did a good job of describing the company's mission. I consequently redesigned the site homepage to feature them and I made sure that those pages contained direct links to its most important services.
  • When I started work for another client I looked at their site and suspected that they're most important articles were not being seen--visitors had to click through about four times to get to them. Six months of tracking confirmed my hunch and gave me the hard data to convince the executive director that we made some small modifications to the design. Having this strong content linked right off the homepage helped bring in Google traffic.
Categories: Analytics , Beyond SEO
Tags: Design, Google, Maximum Visibility, Myths And Realities, Search Engine Optimization, Seo | Edit
One of the neatest observations to gain popularity in the last few years is that of The Long Tail, first coined a few years ago by Wired magazine editor Chris Anderson (here's the original article). He noticed that the internet had opened up access to niches--that searches and national distribution networks had given new markets to obscure and small-market products. The classic example is Netflix, the direct-mail movie rental service, that has a huge catalog of titles, the great majority of which are so obscure that no local video rental store could afford to carry them. But Netflix actually rents them all and if you add all these low-volume rentals together you'll find the total volume exceeds that season's blockbusters.
I learned just how strong the long tail can be a few years ago when I worked on Quakerfinder.org, a meeting/church look-up service. For the first year, the site got moderate traffic from search engines. Google wasn't able to index the actual church listings because users were required to type towns and postal codes in to get results. The only search engine visitors we got came in on very generic phrases like "find quaker meetings."

Suspecting we were losing a large potential audience, I redesigned the site so Google could index each and every meeting (adding a few tricks so each listing traded links with half-a-dozen other listings). Once the change was in effect (help from our programmer), those old generic search phrases were still the most popular. But now we got small numbers of visits on thousands of terms which we hadn't hit before: "Quakers Poughkeepsie" and "Quaker Churches in San Francisco," etc. This was the long tail in effect. Our visits jumped fourfold within a few months (see chart). The long tail made us much more visible. (More on the Googlization effort in that year's analytic report.)

A great new traffic analysis service is called HitTail. Like many other programs it tells you what search phrases have brought traffic to your site. But what's cool is that it gives suggestions--keywords it thinks will bring even more visitors in. Some of the suggestions are funny. For example, it thinks I should post about "traditional sweat lodge songs," "ticklish armpits" and "how to dress with personality" over on Quaker Ranter. But it also thinks I might consider posting on "small church local outreach ideas," "new online magazines" and "christian quakers."

If all one was worried about was sheer traffic volume, then a post on each keyword might be in order. But this would bring a lot of random traffic and dilute any focus the blog might have (I already get a lot of traffic on a particular non-typical post that I wrote partly as an SEO experiment). My guess is you should go through the HitTail suggestions list to find topics that match your site's focus but do so in language that you might not normally use.

I might try some experimental posts on my personal blog soon. I'll definitely report back about them here on the MartinKelley.com design blog. In the meantime, check out HitTail's blog, which has some good links.
Categories: Beyond SEO
Tags: Direct Mail, Moderate Traffic, Netflix, Niches, Original Article, Rents, Search Engines Google | Edit
I just relaunched my personal blog a few days ago, moving it from nonviolence.org/martink to quakerranter.org. I plan to write a whole big piece about it in the near future. But my access logs just picked up something amazing.

An important part of the redesign was an automatic keyword generator. Posts were run through a script that automatically pulled out keywords from the text. My 2003 article, Going all the way with Movable Type generated the following tags, which appear as links after the post:

Following the links takes you to similarly-tagged articles. At least that's the conceit. When you follow a tag's link you're simply doing a site search for that keyword. A little htaccess rewrite magic is making the result look like it's a static category page.

"Fine and well" you're thinking, "big deal." Well, here's what's cool. There are 225 entries on the QuakerRanter blog. Google's just gone through and indexed the site and is now claiming it contains 1300 pages. Each tag is being indexed as its own page. Every time I mention any interesting term, it becomes a page that Google indexes and delivers to its searchers.

Which brings us to today's cool piece from the access logs. In December of 2004 a rather innocent post on Quaker Ranter became the center of a mini-whirlwind on the political blogs when it mentioned that I had gotten a call from a CBS News publicist interested in Nonviolence.org. All political blogs get publicity calls from news and opinion think tanks trying to suggest (or plant) stories but no one's supposed to talk about it. I only mentioned it because it was so unusual. One of the blogs denouncing the liberal conspiracy my post revealed was the somewhat slimy Little Green Footballs. After a few weeks the denunciations died down.

But this morning, someone looked up littlegreenfootballs in Google and came to my site. Because of my automatic keyword generator, tags, and static-loooking links, I'm now the number two entry, on two three-year old posts, now relocated to a days old quakerranter.org. Cool.

This mixing and matching of content and rich manipulation of data is sometimes lumped together in the cool bu zzphrase folksonomy. Note that none of what I've done is a tricking of Google. Every tag is really going to a page with that content. These are "natural" and "organic" search results in the lingo of SEO. I'm just presenting my information in multiple formats that appeal that the widest array of audiences.

For what it's worth, I don't think I deserve #2 status for "littlegreenfootballs" and I don't think Google will keep it there for long. It's a bit odd that they have elevated that particular term so high and no others tags seem so stratospheric.


Positive Results:

As of February 2007, Google indexes 3,540 pages on QuakerRanter.org, a blog of only 239 posts. In December 2006 30% of my Google visits were to one of the "tags" page. Reconfiguring the blog in this kind of tag-intensive way has more than doubled search engines visits, again in a very natural and organic way. Adding tags has simply made what I've written more accessible to search engines. Very cool.

Negative Ramifications:

Shortly after installing this new system, my servers started periodically crashing (about once/week). The problem would be multiple MT-Search processes overloading the memory.

My guess is that a search engine spider came along and started indexing all of the tags. Each link initiated a search query in Movable Type. The built-in search for Movable Type is just not able to handle this volume of traffic.

I installed Fast Search to solve the problem (tip of the hat to Al-Muhajabah). It took awhile: Fast Search required a MySQL upgrade at my host. After that I needed to install these plugin fixes. Then it was fine-tuning the htaccess files. It was been more work than I initially expected and the tag results now forward to a funny URL that Google doesn't love as much.

Categories: Niche Marketing
Tags: Blogs, Htaccess, Keyword Generator, Magic, Movable Type, Movabletype, Nonviolence, Personal Blog, Quotes, Rewrite, Run Through | Edit
A 2004 Denominational Website Report

When I wrote this in the Fall of 2004, I was working as the webmaster for Friends General Conference, the US/Canadian denominational body for the liberal branch of unprogrammed Quakers (www.fgcquaker.org). As webmaster, I felt that one of my most important responsibilities was to understand how religious seekers use the internet and how our nonprofit organization could benefit from understanding these patterns.

My 2004 report on the three FGC websites touched on a lot of these issues. I offer it here because I hope it can give other nonprofit and denominational websites some ideas about how to measure their site's use. Too often we put up websites without any follow-up analysis of their use. You just can't make an effective website like this and if your work is ministry you don't want its reach constrained by minor navigational design issues. Please feel free to use the comment page to start a discussion on any of these issues.

State of the Websites

Report for FGC Central Committee, October 2004
By Martin Kelley, webmaster

It's important to start off with a little editorial about why we need reports like this. We put up a website and we know people use it. Why bother spending time collecting data?

The internet is simultaneously vague and precise. We can say definitively that the FGC website received 114,097 "unique visitors" in the past fiscal year. But how many people does that represent? Is that a high number or low number? How did these users react when they came to the site. Did they think to themselves "whoops, not what I want" and leave, or did they go "wow, what's this FGC?, hey this is great." LESSON: We need data to know if the site is being used well.

Everyone who reads this report is by definition an insider. None of us are able to step into the shoes of an unknowledgeable seeker. In my study of usage patterns, I have found that the differences in website use between Quaker insiders and seekers is so great that they might as well be looking at different websites, if not different media altogether (see How Insiders and Seekers Use the Quaker Net. Because of this gap we cannot design the site based on whims or personal preferences. It is incredibly difficult to imagine how newcomers might navigate the site. We can only consider the design of the site after we've examined in usage, both in detail (actual users moving through the site) and in aggregate (pages and links visited over periods of time). See also: How to measure the peace movement. LESSON: We can only effectively design the site if we incorporate sophisticated and detailed data about how the site is being used.


Part 2, Googlization

By far the most significant change in our websites over the past year has been the "googlization" of Quakerbooks and Quakerfinder, both of which now have over four times the visitors they were getting last year.

The Google Problem: Both Quakerbooks and Quakerfinder have had great content from their start. The former lists the entire inventory of FGC's bookstore, along with book descriptions and reader commentary. The latter has our list of meetings--addresses, worship times, and contact information. But on both sites the bulk of the content was locked up in databases. Before users could benefit from the sites, they had to find them. This limited much of the use to people who already know about FGC and our resources. Because internet search engines can't search website databases (a problem known as the hidden or deep web), they could index only a limited number of pages on these sites and they made referrals on only the most generic search phrases (e.g., "quaker bookstore" "quaker meeting directory").

We made various changes to both sites (technical details below) that have made them searchable by Google and the other search engines, which now return our sites for very specific search queries, e.g., "Quakers in conflict Ingle" and "Quakers Poughkeepsie".

A Wider, More Inclusive Audience: What's great is that this has given us not just a bigger audience, but our target audience. Most of these visitors don't know enough about how Friends are organized to even know where to look for information. With Quakerfinder and Quakerbooks, we're now be visible on their terms.

We're giving them the basic information they're seeking and we're doing it when they are actively seeking it. This last point is important. I spend a lot of time watching how people use websites. If you email someone out of the blue with a link to a website, they might follow it but only half-heartedly. They might be doing five other things at the same time and they rarely stay to full use the website's resources. When someone comes to a site via a search engine they're much more likely to look around: this is the visit that they are initiating because they have something specific they're trying to find.

Having a "googlified" Quakerfinder means we're actually reaching people who are ready to try out a Quaker meeting and we're giving them that most basic information that's often hard to find. With a searchable Quakerbooks we're selling books to people who might not even have thought about Quakers as a possible spiritual path. I suspect that both sites are doing more outreach about Quakerism than any of us expect.

Update, 11/29/04: I recently met someone who came to Friends after reading the Quaker entry in Wikipedia. He had gone through the list of religious denominations in the U.S. till he found one that spoke to his condition. In the past month FGC has gotten 57 visitors from Wikipedia.

The Fixes

In the official committee report I tried to steer clear of too many technical details since I wanted people to read it. So I'll expand on them here on the website version.

Unique Domains: I don't think it really helped to give Quakerfinder.org and Quakerbooks.org their own domains, at least initially. In last year's report I noted that most of the traffic to those sites came from the main FGCQuaker.org site and that the separate domains weren't particularly useful. Now the sites do have their own sort of identity, thanks to the "googlization," which was a different process for the two sites.

Quakerbooks.org: Visitors to the Quakerbooks.org site are given session IDs to allow us to follow along with them as they make their selections. Since some users don't allow cookies, this ID sometimes appears in the URL (it appears as something like "?sessionid=1514" appended to the end of the address). Google really hates session IDs because its automated software doesn't know if the different URLs are different pages (to be indexed separately) or merely different sessions looking at the same page. So Googles just ignores anything that looks like this. The easiest fix is to have the software look to see if the visitor is Google and take of the session IDs (Google is okay with this workaround; I also used this method to allow them to index my Nonviolence.org discussion board.)

Quakerfinder: On Quakerfinder.org, the problem was that visitors had to type in a zip code to get to any of the content. Google's not that interactive and only follows links. Until recently, it thought there was only three pages to the site. To fix this we set up an alternative way to navigate the site: from the homepage you can now follow a link to lists of Quaker Meetings by state. The zip code lookup is so much more convenient that we don't suspect many live people will look up by state, but Google will and because of this it now lists 808 pages on the site. Now Google acts as a alternate lookup service, one that doesn't depend on people finding our site beforehand.


Part 3, Comparing the Sites

Visitors

The basic measure used to measure website traffic is that of the "unique visitor," which counts user sessions. Here are this year's comparisons to last year's. Numbers represent the monthly average "unique visitors" to each of our three websites.

     Site	      FY 03/04 total  FY 02/03 total  Increase
FGCQuaker.org 114,097 82,747 38%
Quakerfinder.org 48,084 23,964 100%
Quakerbooks.org 69,924 19,332 262%

The last two sites have truly remarkable jumps. The numbers are a little misleading, however, as the increase in traffic hasn't been gradual but sudden and climbing. Compare the last full month (September 2004) with the same month the previous year and all three sites have higher jumps.

     Site             Sept 04         Sept 03         Increase
FGCQuaker.org 9459 8254 15%
Quakerfinder.org 8782 1997 340%
Quakerbooks.org 7498 1611 366%

While the internet grows in use every year, the increases on Quakerfinder and Quakerbooks represent a quantum leap over that incremental increase. They represent "search engine optimization" of those sites, or what we all refer to the "googlization" of the sites.

Links:

One way of measuring the visibility of a website is to count how many other webpages link to it. Here are

     Site              October 2004    October 2003    Increase
FGCQuaker.org 496 396 25%
Quakerfinder.org 196 46 326%
Quakerbooks.org 151 96 57%

For comparison: Quaker.org is up to 11,900 links, Phila. Yearly Meeting is 248, PendleHill.org is 420, FCNL.org is 10,200, Nonviolence.org is 20,900 and AFSC.org is 21,800. See Miscellaneous & Notes at end to see how numbers were obtained. See How Can We Measure the State of the Peace Movement? for more on this method of measurement.


Part 4, The FGCQuaker.org Site

Visitors

Use of FGCQuaker.org continues to grow at a good clip. We have a 38% increase this fiscal year compared with last's. The site received over 114,000 unique visitors from October 1, 2003 to September 30, 2004.

To the right is the chart showing unique visitors by month for the past three years:

Referrers: Where did visitors come from?

In September 2004, there were 9459 "unique visits" to the FGCQuaker.org site, still our most-visited site. Here's where they came from.

1021 from Quakerfinder.org. One surprise this year is the jump in Quakerfinder-referred visits. This is due of course to the phenomenal visibility of that site. In a recent one-month period, FGCQuaker received 983 visits from Quakerfinder links, two-thirds of which came from the "googlized" Quakerfinder pages. About one in ten visitors are now coming to FGCQuaker through Quakerfinder. Up 288% from last year.

842 from Google. We get a lot of Google traffic because we have a lot of content on our site: dozens of pamphlets, years worth of FGConnections, large parts of the old Fostering Vital Friends Meetings resource binder. Visitors via search engines often don't know FGC exists but they want to know about our programs and work. Because FGC does such great work (and because we publicize it online!), many of our resources answer questions people have. I think this is great outreach.

Here's an example. This Spring I noticed that we were getting visits on fairly generic searches for racism. Here's a list of search inquiries that brought people to the CMR pages on FGC:

"ending racism"
"racially diverse communities"
"quaker racial diversity"
"diversity in friends"
"ethnic diversity"
"responsibilities to racism"
"pastoral care racism"
"activities for ending racism"
"testimonies racial unity"

This is a fascinating list precisely because these are generic searches. People aren't looking for "Quakers ending racism," they're looking for anyone "ending racism" and Google is bringing them to us (we're number 6 on that search term). This is surprising: I would think the much bigger denominations would all have committees ending racism that would come up higher just because of their larger institutional clout. That we are so high suggests that this work is not as common as I we might hope and that Friends might have the opportunity to play a role in larger faith dialogues.

When people use search engines, they get results from all over the FGC website. Searches might pull up some four-year article on FGConnections, or one of the "Friends And..." pamphlets that we've put online. Google up 12% from last year. There were about 83 more visits from regional Google sites.

434 from Quaker.org. Most of these people are coming directly from the Quaker.org homepage to the FGCQuaker.org homepage. I estimate that about 60% of these visitors leave the FGC site without clicking on any links. They're probably just superficially curious about us, but not enough to look around the site. Up 39% from last year.

253 from other search engines: 118 from Yahoo (118), MSN (74), AOL (42), Ask (19).

81 from Beliefnet. Beliefnet has a popular "Belief-o-Matic" qui zthat will magically tell you what religious faith you should join. It's rigged in such a way that a lot of people unexpectedly come up as Quaker. The qui zthen directs people to an information page on Friends, which includes some links to FGC. Most of the Beliefnet visitors are coming from that information page directly to the FGC homepage. Up 200% from last year.

69 from UVa's Religious Movements site. This is a pretty good description of Quakerism

60 from Quakerbooks. Our own bookstore website attracts a lot of new people who aren't part of the established Quaker networks and many of them first learn of FGC this way.

53 from Religious Tolerance. A popular website from a Canadian Unitarian that profiles religions..

52 from QuakerInfo.org. This is the Philadelphia Quaker Information Center, a joint project of a number of Quaker organizations, including FGC.

Where did people go?

Top Destinations in September 04:
* To the homepage: 2396;
* Library's "Welcome to Quakerism" pages: 463;
* A&O "Resources for Meetings": 320 (prominently linked from Quakerfinder);
* Gathering pages: 309;
* "Silent Worship Quaker Values" tract on the Library section;
* Gathering's pictures from last year: 149;
* Religious Ed: 149;
* FGConnections articles: 129;
* Ideas for First Day School": 127;
* Advancement & Outreach homepage: 124;
* Young Quakes: 118;
* Publications: 100;
* Development 97.

These are pretty typical numbers. The only significant variation over the year comes in Spring, when traffic to the Gathering pages goes up. In May 2004, 961 people visited the Gathering homepage, and 355 visited the workshop listings.

Forget the Aggregates: How Do People Use the Site?

So far I've looked at tallied-up numbers: how many people visited, how many pages were looked at. The problem with this sort of statistic is that it doesn't give us a feel for how individuals are actually using the site. Looking at usage explodes the preconceptions that many of us "Insider Quakers" might bring to the web.

The first lesson: most people don't come into our site via the FGC homepage. Even more shocking: close to half never even see the homepage! This blew me away when I first realized it. We spend so much time designing the homepage and wondering how we're going to direct seekers from it but a lot of this work is in vain.

Of that 45% or so that enter the site via the FGC homepage, most of them leave the site immediately without following any link whatsoever.

Let's splice this another way: 70% of the people who hit our site (wherever they enter) don't look at any page other than that first one. They don't click on anything but the back button.

What are some of the lessons on this: one is that content is all important. Those majority of visitors who bypass the homepage to parachute directly inside the site are coming for specific information. Many of them don't know anything about FGC and most of them don't care to learn about FGC the organization. They're looking for some specific piece of information on Quakers ("painting of Pennsylvania Abolitionist Society Quakers" and "Quakers prison reform"), or on religious education in general ("religious meeting"), or on how churches are dealing with racism ("racial diversity" and "do blacks worship with only blacks"). These are all search phrases that have brought visitors to FGCQuaker.org. So it's great that we have our pamphlets online and FGConnections and RE materials and A&O brochures. There are hundreds of pages on our site, most of which we probably forget are there, but Google knows them and will display them up when the query is right.

Another lesson is that we shouldn't rely on our homepage to help visitors navigate. We shouldn't even worry much about using how its design will work for both insiders and seekers: most of the seekers never even go there. Most of the people coming to the FGC homepage are looking for FGC the organization.

Committee Page Case Study: One committee, Advancement & Outreach, is considering redesigning their committee page. In preparation I've looked at the usage and I think it makes a good case study. The A&O committee gets the most visible link on the FGC Homepage (top left, it gets this position because the committee list is alphabetical). Despite this prominence, almost no visitors actually follow this link. Only 1.5% of visitors to the FGCQuaker.org site ever get to the A&O homepage and even at that it's the most visited committee page on our site!

Most of the visitors that did get to the A&O page left without clicking on anything. It is safe to say that most of those visitors didn't thoroughly read through the page. The most-followed link is the first one, for the "Inreach/Outreach" review. In the one-month period I examined only 9 people followed this link! This doesn't mean A&O material isn't used: Quakerfinder is very successful and the pamphlet "Resources for Local meetings" is popular. And over 300 people in this month came to some part of the A&O site. Committee pages are useful for the relative trickle of Quaker insiders who visit the page, but we should focus more on the content committees are producing.

The lesson is clear: visitors are primarily looking for 1) good useful content from the "Quaker Library" resources and 2) practical information about the Gathering. Pages about committees and internal FGC workings are not well used. We need to continue the focus on practical resources. We also have to accept that people will not be looking at what we think they should be looking at. Through these visits we will slowly build up FGC's reputation but many people only dimly know what they're looking at.

What I didn't say in the report

In my official FGC report, I only hinted at the differences between institutional websites and focused online new media sites.

One surprising find that didn't make it into the report is that the three most-viewed pages on my own Quaker Ranter site were seen by more people than all but the two most-viewed FGC pages. The most viewed pages on FGCQuaker are the homepage and the Welcome to Quakerism page. Three of the pages on "Quaker Ranter" are seen by more people than any other page on the FGC website. FGC's Religious Education and Advancement and Outreach and Publications pages all are more obscure than my homepage or my "resources on plain dress" directory.

Institutional websites by their very nature have too many conflicting audiences and too timid a voice to act as much more than a reference resource. The Friends General Conference website is probably more friendly to seekers than most other institutional websites out there but even it gets a lot of people hitting the "back" button as soon as they hit the homepage.

Religious seekers are looking for individual voices with something to say and I suspect new media seeker websites will only become more important as time goes on. I suspect this will come as a surprise to institutional insiders as it happens. Sort of relatedly, see my Peace and Twenty-Somethings for some of the generational aspects of this shift. My Books and Media section collects similar sorts of essays.

One more piece in this: the FGC websites didn't get a lot of blog traffic. If all I were was the webmaster of Friends General Conference, I'd assume that all this blog talk in the media was hype. But as the "Quaker Ranter" I know that a popular blog and/or personal site can get a lot of readers. The lesson here is that there's little cross-over. Blogs seem to send little traffic to institutional websites and vice versa (actually institutional websites can't really send people to bloggers for a variety of reasons). I've had a number of people read my blog and declare they'll be coming to the next FGC Gathering so I know personal blogs can help raise organization profiles but that interest doesn't manifest itself as an immediately-followed link. I suspect the community being formed by the blogs is far more important than the raw number of referral links.


Part 5, Quakerbooks.org and Quakerfinder.org

Quakerbooks.org

The first of our two sites to be "googlified" was Quakerbooks.org. I had long hoped to have our book listings show up on the search engines, especially since we carry a lot of hard-to-find ones. I had opened up the discussion board of my peace site to Google and been happy with the results.

Back in early 2003 we installed new software by Steve Beuret to power the bookstore website, one that would allow easy transfer of information between the website and our inventory program. The website could now list whether a book was in stock, and orders would go directly into the system (no more retyping them!). Once the new system was running smoothly, I emailed Steve about optimizing it for Google. There were two parts to this: having the books show up (Steve) and linking them in such a way that Google would index them properly (me). It took awhile to get ito all working but on December 17, 2003 Google came through and indexed the site.

The most visited pages are the introductory ones:

  • Welcome to Quakerism
  • Becoming a Member
  • Basics for Everyone

The search phrases that are bringing in visitors used to be generic ("quaker bookstore") they now are very specific. September's list is typical:

  • crash by jerry spinnelli
  • Andrew Goldsworthy
  • celebration of discipline
  • the misfits by james howe
  • rufus jones

I knew we'd show up high in the Google rankings for obscure books but I've been pleased that we're right up there with Amazon and Barnes and Noble even with mainstream books.

Our online best sellers are pretty

  • Grounded in God: Care And Nurture In Friends Meetings
  • Friends for 350 Years
  • The Quaker Way
  • Philadelphia Faith and Practice
  • Listening Spirituality Volume 1
  • Silence and Witness
  • The Journal of George Fox

The bookstore inventory software is not very good at pulling marketing statistics. While it's very good at telling us what books have sold and what books need to be reordered, it won't tally up things by type of sale (phone vs. web vs. mail-order). The bookstore report should include more information on actual web sales.

Anecdotally it appears as if about half our web orders are new customers. Many of them are from geographic areas which are not traditionally Quaker. A&O has produced a flyer which goes into orders for new customers.

Quakerfinder.org

After we saw how successful the "googlization" of Quakerbooks was, I thought we should try it for Quakerfinder. It took a little seasoning to get everyone on A&O to sign off on the project but I am delighted to say they saw their way clear. The result has been nothing sort of amazing. Use of the site has grown by 340%. But the actual numbers are even more important: by my best estimate, over 6000 a month are using Quakerfinder who would not have even found the resource if we hadn't made it search engine friendly. That's 72,000 people a year--twice FGC's membership, and these are the EXTRA people coming. Altogether at our current rate, this site is being used by over 100,000 unique visitors. Even if only one in ten of them make it to a Meeting, that's a lot of people.

In last year's report I pointed out that most of Quakerfinder's traffic was coming from the FGC site. At that point, it didn't looking like giving the location look-up utility it's own domain name was paying off in any tangible way. Now it's clearly worth it. Just the extra 600 or so visitors Quakerfinder is throwing to FGCQUaker.org site makes it worth it! Horray!

Twenty Times the Google-Linked Visits: I compared two typical months, one before and the other after the "search engine optimization." In May 2004 Quakerfinder received 241 visitors from Google searches (footnote 1). In September, it received 3813 visitors--that's over twenty times the visits. Overall visits almost tripled, from 2292 to 6037, with 60% of those extra visitors directly attributed to the Google bounce. The chart to the left shows daily Google-referred visits since the middle of March.

More Than Just Google: Other search engines were affected too: all together search engine visits went from from 311 in May to 4134 in September. For those interested, the top five search engines for Quakerfinder traffic are:

  • Google.com 83%
  • AOL: 5%
  • Google Canada: 3%
  • Yahoo: 1%
  • Comcast: 0.8%

As you can see, Google far overwhelms everyone else, which is why we often just call this "the googlization" of Quakerfinder!


Part 6, Miscellaneous and Notes

Miscellaneous

Mailing Lists

Late in the fiscal year, we purchased bulk email software. No, we're not going to try to sell Viagra or a new home mortgage. This program will help us get information out to our bookstore customers and committee lists. Our occasional bookstore emails ("Book Musings from Lucy") have been very well received, with only a tiny fraction of recipients asking to be taken off the list.

Web Host Changes

A big project, though not very exciting, is that we're changing our web hosting company. FGCQuaker.org is with the new company (OLM)and Quakerfinder.org and Quakerbooks.org will be moving shortly. The new company organizes our accounts better and we hope that their service is better. (We'd recommend avoiding Data Realm also known as Serve.com.)

Notes

Programs I Use to Collect Stats:

  • For overall numbers, I used a extremely-common program called Webalizer, which gives useful monthly summaries.
  • For details I used a program called AXS Visitor Tracking Program, which lets me watch individual users as they navigate the site. With AXS I can also get details on where visitors to specific pages come from.
  • I have a list of key words which I watch on Google; every few weeks I record where our sites stand on those phrases and watch how navigational changes I make affect our Google rankings.
  • I also use Google to see what other websites are linking to us. I look at what they link to (often not our homepage) and how many sites there are linking.
  • I also follow links using more specific search engines such as Technorati, which indexes blogs ("web blogs" or personal diary-like sites).

Measuring Links:

I use Altavista's search engine to measure how many links a site has. For good reasons, Google doesn't list obscure websites and also counts how a site's links back to itself. Here's a sample Altavista query:

link:www.fgcquaker.org/ -site:www.fgcquaker.org

See How Can We Measure the State of the Peace Movement? for more on this method of measurement.

Unique Visitors:

The most standard measure of website usage, here is a definition: "A real visitor to a web site. Web servers record the IP addresses of each visitor, and this is used to determine the number of real people who have visited a web site. If for example, someone visits twenty pages within a web site, the server will count only one unique visitor (because the page accesses are all associated with the same IP address) but twenty page accesses."

Categories: Analytics
Tags: Denomination, Friends, Liberal Branch, Navigational Design, Nonprofit Organization, Quakers, Religious Seekers | Edit

Hire Martin! I build sites and online promotion campaigns to your specs and budgets and can be your guide to social media marketing.

Also available: my resume, a brief biography, organizations I've worked with, speaking and workshop engagements, client recommendations and a portfolio of recent work:

Recent Entries

Recent Comments

Archives