Well I’ve been on a tear lately sharing examples of bad marketing. It’s hard not to do this when people keep lobbing them at me. But blatant SEO / social media spam? From a major B2B company that should definitely know better? How can we not share?
Today’s example of doing it wrong comes courtesy of public relations software provider Cision (the artist formerly known as Bacons). BTW Cision, why, oh why would you ever change your name away from something so delicious?
So what has Cision been up to? Spamming the blog comments here at The Future Buzz, for one.
A company who produces software and services for PR people doesn’t even understand their own market. Yeah, you read that right: let’s call a spade a spade.
Exhibit A: Spam Comments With Manipulative Links
They left a first comment which was a bit fishy, but I approved it anyway because it would be fun to use as an example of what not to do. Here’s that comment:
Small businesses should focus more on the quality of their marketing campaigns because consumers are, indeed, conducting more research now than ever before. Cision has tools that can help you monitor your results and offers insight on your campaign success! Here is a link to some of the PR-Tools from Cision.
Meri A is an advocate for Cision
Really Cision? Thanks for blatantly trying to sell to my readers when you haven’t earned any permission or built a relationship with any of us here. Do you see the quality of other comments from this community? It is inappropriate of you to leave a comment like this when the discussion section is respected by everyone else who contribute thoughtful, valuable comments and not simply try to push their wares. You are trying to take but not give.
I have underlined the anchor text Cision hyperlinked in their comment, but stripped out the link. That is because Cision does not warrant editorial link love: they are link spammers! How do we know they are link spammers? Read on!
After this comment was left, I figured I’d give them a biting chance to respond. So I Tweeted that I was going to use their comment as an example on my blog.
Note I wasn’t very snarky, and in fact even smiled at them. It was my hopes that the discussion would actually be positive. Except after leaving this Tweet, another spam comment appeared. This one I haven’t approved because enough is enough. Here’s the second comment:
Another junk comment of no value + link spam. This does not help SEO (the link is no-follow anyway) it merely cheapens Cisions brand. What do you think about them when you see this nonsense?
Exhibit B: Email Response From Cision
I went about the rest of my day, but not without another piece to this puzzle floating into my inbox. This time from Cision’s social media manager who filled out my contact form (emphasis in her comments mine):
Dear Adam:I saw your tweet earlier today with some feedback regarding some Cision-related spam in the comments section of your blog. First and foremost, I want to apologize for the frustration you felt after a comment was left on your post, An Introduction To How Digital Branding Campaigns Work. We’re constantly working to find the right balance between authentic social media engagement and SEO best practices.
With this particular comment from Cision, I would be interested in opening a conversation to get your unique perspective on SEO vs. social media. Since you have experience with TopRank and are quickly becoming an authority on social media, I think we could all learn a lot from the insights you have regarding this somewhat murky territory!
Again, as a fellow blogger, I understand your frustrations. Please know that we’re constantly working to refine our interactions in the social media space. Have a good night,
Andrea WeinfurtSocial Media Marketing Manager, Cision
At first I thought this comment was benign. But then I thought about it more on my walk home from work and realized Cision has definitely put SEO and social media into silos. Exactly the wrong thing to do.
Further, blog comments like these are neither “authentic social media,” whatever that means, nor SEO. They are spam. They’re also no-followed. Is your SEO firm reporting these links as results? I hope the chart looks pretty, because your marketing is shameful for such an esteemed B2B company. There is negative value here: it takes you down a peg mentally to any savvy digital marketing and PR pros.
So my immediate next thought was back to the two comments. Cision couldn’t be outsourcing commenting on marketing industry blogs to solicit link spam. Or could they?
Exhibit C: IP Trace Of Cision’s Outsourced SEO Spam Firm: Vivid Ascent
A little IP sleuthing of the address of “Meri A.” quickly uncovered the source of these comments: an SEO spam shop called Vivid Ascent (spam shop in that beyond these comments, I found their IP in a few databases that report spammers):
Check their website, vividascent.com (no link love, obviously). Video (self-playing when the homepage loads!) by their CEO is laughably bad and blog content is hypocritical – seriously who would hire these snake oil salesmen? Their website screams spammers. Well, Cision for one, amongst these other companies:
So: AllState, Rust-Oleum, Cision, CBOE (College Board Options Exchange), Hudson Professional Services, CDW, Ice, TruePartners Consulting, Meb Options, Trading Technologies, Trinity Internation University, NYSE Liffe, and Recognia – you are all with a firm employing spam tactics to try to game search engine results pages and in blatant opposition to any smart, holistic digital marketing. I really hope you don’t get penalized like some recent examples but you run a real risk with an agency like Vivid Ascent (has anyone even heard of them?) who employ these shady tactics. And your risk is not just in search, but also in social.
Also I noted their blog content is hypcritical. Well, here’s your moment of zen:
Almost makes you want to fall out of your chair laughing, right?
What both Cision and Vivid Ascent don’t realize is the internet does not happen in silos. And what they also don’t realize is that users and search engines are fighting back against manipulative tactics like this. In the end I am confident users and communities like you and top search spam teams are going to do the right thing. Until that happens if you see examples like the above you should continue to call them out so they change their ways or lose clients. They are at the detriment to the rest of our industries: both SEO and social media.
For those who want the TL;DR version:
- Cision hires shady SEO firm.
- SEO firm spams my blog with anchor text link comments and copy-pasted sales messages.
- I Tweet to Cision that this happened.
- Cision SEO firm continues to link spam me even after this because Cision has put SEO and social media into silos. Their separate digital teams clearly have no idea what anyone is doing. Except the web of course sees it all.
- Cision social media marketing manager follows up via email, noting they are trying to find the balance between “authentic social media and SEO.” What? This stuff isn’t new, and being in the industry they are in there is no excuse for misunderstanding how the intersection works.
Funny that Cision’s social media manager mentions my former employer, TopRank Marketing (a legit SEO shop). My previous CEO there, Lee Odden, recently wrote a good post about this subject. Clearly none of these parties read that.
Oh, also my current employer LEWIS PR is a Cision customer. Letting a cheap vendor spam your own customer’s team members? Come on.
Over to the community: what do you think of major brands hiring spammers to abuse our discussions? SEOs / social media pros – what do you think of digital chop shops injecting low value, spammy, sales-oriented links throughout the web?
If You Found This Useful, Also Check Out:
JOIN 25,000+ DIGITAL PROFESSIONALS
Stay up to date with the latest trends for free. Enter your email
below to join The Future Buzz community of more than 25,000
passionate marketers, bloggers, developers and entrepreneurs
across platforms. Your information will never be shared.
adam replied | Mar 15, 2011(2 comments)
I think one of the thing a lot of agencies and organizations — large and small — still struggle with is the level of effort required to do the manual work necessary to build relationships through social media. To me, that’s one of the key things in building a meaningful online presence and becoming recognized as an authority.
You can’t just stamp that effort out like on an assembly line, nor do I think you can farm it out. It takes time to build.
Great post, BTW. We use Cision too, and I was disappointed to read about this terrible tactic.
Adam Singer replied | Mar 15, 2011(633 comments)
Thanks for the comment Adam. And I agree, it doesn’t make sense at all for Cision to implement this tactic. It is totally wrong for their brand.
I expect it from a cheap affiliate .com, but not a tier-1 B2B company.
Adam replied | Mar 15, 2011(2 comments)
I guess unless or until companies see the value in the time and effort it takes to cultivate those kinds of relationships, we’ll continue to see this kind of garbage.
Robert Diana replied | Mar 15, 2011(4 comments)
This is really disappointing considering what their business does. They could have been considered a leader with their combination of PR, SEO and social media. Now they are just a disappointment. Excellent teardown, Adam.
Joe replied | Mar 15, 2011(2 comments)
I’m by no means excusing this tactic because they should know better. But part of me thinks they genuinely believed what they did was ethical, or else why would they sign it “an advocate for Cision”?
Alan Bleiweiss replied | Mar 15, 2011(4 comments)
Great take on the problem Adam. At this point I’m so used to seeing big name PR and marketing firms butcher online efforts because they either buy into the “its worth the risk” mentality, or put zero effort into validating or confirming what they’re being offered by their own vendors. It’s easy for them to just blindly hire a vendor rather than expending the resources for due diligence.
Well, it WAS easy. Hopefully this year enough main-stream exposure will force them to acknowledge the need to become more savvy when it comes to social media and SEO.
Vanessa Bugasch replied | Mar 15, 2011(2 comments)
Adam,
Reading your blog post has encouraged us to reevaluate the marketing mix Cision chooses to employ on a regular basis. As a large brand, we are continually working with a number of agencies and experimenting with different marketing tactics. In this case, the tactic was not executed well and as a result, we have elected to drop it from our marketing approach. Your blog pointed out the need for authentic, honest and meaningful engagement and the comment in question fell short of these standards. We always strive to maintain the closest possible oversight over engagement and we will continue to work diligently to embrace the best practices you regularly champion.
Vanessa Bugasch
SVP, Marketing & Product Marketing
Cision
Adam Singer replied | Mar 15, 2011(633 comments)
Thanks Vanessa for commenting. Cision is more than welcome to be a part of this community so long as the contribution adds value. If you ever want to leave useful comments or even guest post to provide tips, trends or your viewpoint, we’re open to it. I think readers here very much appreciate when a brand is willing to reevaluate their approach to the web and share lessons learned. Pete Cashmore of Mashable did a great job of that previously (see this thread: http://thefuturebuzz.com/2010/01/08/pete-cashmore-mashable-responds/ ).
Danny Brown replied | Mar 16, 2011(20 comments)
Great to see you stepping up to the plate and accepting “blame” and moving forward, Vanessa – not many do, so kudos.
One thing I’m curious about – how do you vet agencies? I’m guessing this one offered how they’d approach their marketing for you, and I wondered if the pitch was the same as the physical?
Vanessa Bugasch replied | Mar 17, 2011(2 comments)
Thanks Danny – it isn’t always easy to be transparent about mistakes, but is almost always worth it in the long run. To answer your question regarding how we vet agencies, we are comfortable with our selection process which can vary depending on the project. In this case it wasn’t that the agency in question delivered something different than their original pitch, but that Cision did not dig deep enough into the exact methods used to reach the business objectives. If there is one thing we will do differently in the future, it will be to have a better understanding and management of our agencies’ specific activities.
Lee Odden replied | Mar 15, 2011(3 comments)
There is no lack of passion from you Adam and that makes us all better. 🙂
While I do think this is certainly one of those “they should have known better” situations, it is good to see the quick response by Vanessa. Hopefully they follow through – although hopefully not too good because Vocus is our client 🙂
Ironically, my blog Comment Spam post at Online Marketing Blog that you pointed to ( http://tprk.us/eDUiJR ) just received a comment signed as the name of a PR firm (Airfoil PR) linking to a specific service page on the Airfoil web site. But the commenter (Angie) uses an email address from an Internet Marketing agency Oneupweb.
It’s either incredibly bold or fundamentally stupid to comment spam a blog post about comment spam. By any account it’s certainly questionable in the transparency department. Who does the commenter REALLY represent? The PR firm or the Internet Marketing agency?
What’s really unfortunate is that these companies have the resources to earn the best links of all, yet resort to the kind of activity that no one would want to admit to publicly. And they do it in public!
John Barlowe replied | Mar 15, 2011(2 comments)
Nice save, Vanessa. I was about to do my share of hurtin’ on Cision… but now I’ll just go away quietly.
Love, John (new fan of Adam Singer, Internet Cop!)
LJ Jones replied | Mar 15, 2011(3 comments)
Comments on a blog are a discussion and are not intended for self promotion. Anytime a PR firm, SEO firm or spammer joins the conversation with the purpose of promoting something, they become spam. Are they joining the conversation or hijacking it for promotion? Its not a discussion if your comment includes phrases like “Company X has tools that do Y”.
Tim ‘Gonzo’ Gordon replied | Mar 15, 2011(1 comment)
Disappointing…but very revealing. I’ve used Cision for about three months to do SM research for a client. Good tool, certainly, but from the beginning they’ve been all about the deal and not so much about the service. This post reinforces some of the vague feelings I’ve had about them for the past 100 days…
Maggie McGary replied | Mar 15, 2011(1 comment)
I don’t understand why any company would still even offer blog comment spamming as an SEO technique. I mean, does ANYONE click on that crap? How can it possibly be worth the negatives of having your company tied to such stupid and shady practices? The sad/scary part is that your’e totally right about the silo thing–it’s easy to see how this could happen when social media is in one silo and marketing is in another (as it is where I work).
Also, what LJ said–there’s no murkiness at all when it comes to what’s spam vs. not spam when it comes to blog comments. A comment should be a comment for the sake of adding to the discussion.
JD replied | Mar 15, 2011(1 comment)
Interesting that this “SEO/PR” company hasn’t come to its own defense after such a vicious blog post about their work. I applaud Cision for doing the right thing after the fact: admitting fault and joining the conversation. Kudos for behaving like a real media company.
One of the problems with emerging media is that many people don’t understand it. I wonder if vivid ascent (what’s up with that name by the way?!) is reluctant to reply because they know they have been exposed or because they don’t know any better?? From looking at their website it seems to be the later. I think Joe is right, these people are just clueless. This “SEO” company has a website that has many flaws, including a horribly low page rank. The comment SPAM techniques also demonstrate a fundamental lack of understanding about marketing. The best part of this article is that the comment in question was on a page with “no-follow” tags! Classic.
Key take away – do research on every agencies you work with and carefully vet ALL of the tactics they employ. This is where Cision was at fault.
Wonder if the agency will jump in with a comment on this thread that includes a link to their website?
Hilary replied | Mar 16, 2011(3 comments)
Great post Adam! This is why I LOVE the Internet! BS is so much harder to get away with. Gotta love transparency and authenticity!
Lisa Thorell replied | Mar 16, 2011(4 comments)
Amazing story, Adam. And even better analysis. ( I also loved your response to Vanessa and open invitation to participate — i truly look forward to their taking you up on that. ) You know, I was looking for a superb example of “black hat social media” and here it is.
Tad replied | Mar 22, 2011(1 comment)
I would be more worried about the SEO shop than the purchaser. Many times budget-conscious brands buy SEO or other digital marketing and wind up with services like this. It should be a lesson to all of us that digital isn’t a minor affair, and it sure isn’t going away, so those responsible at the home office should: 1. educate themselves; 2. take an active role; and 3. remember you get what you pay for.
That said, it’s also worth remembering that Google has an algorithm because it cannot replicate the human brain. The algorithm is designed to emulate the relevancy decisions our brains make. As time goes on and the algorithm gets better, it will be able to emulate our relevancy judgments more, and SEO will have to become progressively more genuine. IE: no more link spamming, no more directories in Bangladesh, no more reciprocal links with your church or kid’s school…
Bottom line, the SEO firm should have known better.
Otis Gheewala replied | Apr 3, 2011(1 comment)
Have you ever considered about adding a little bit more than just your articles? I mean, what you say is important and all. Nevertheless just imagine if you added some great visuals or video clips to give your posts more, “pop”! Your content is excellent but with pics and videos, this site could definitely be one of the most beneficial in its field. Fantastic blog!
Adam Singer replied | Apr 3, 2011(633 comments)
yeah – it’s something I’m considering. Video takes more time to produce – easier to write articles. But you’re right, it’s nice to have some dynamic content too.
Pervara Kapadia replied | Apr 26, 2011(1 comment)
Thanks for this great post Adam. Indeed an eye opener for persons who spam. I have shared this on my Page as an example of how you can get negative image by spamming. Thanks.
Regards
Pervara
Michael Webster replied | Apr 26, 2011(2 comments)
Adam, I wonder if it just wouldn’t have been better to a) for you to do the research, and then b) pick up the phone and contact someone at Cision about this type of comments.
I understand the difficult in writing for the machine that is Google and for real people, and agree that this crossed the line.
But I wonder if there wasn’t a better solution.
Adam Singer replied | Apr 26, 2011(633 comments)
That would have been a quieter solution. Although one of my objectives is to push the envelope with the media I publish. It’s tough to ignore an opportunity to do so. And actually, I’d argue this is good for Cision (although I know not everyone sees it that way). This is because we are at least talking about them in some way, shape or form. Because of that, they’ve won awareness today even if people didn’t like it. Cision has sparked an emotional connection with us, which is great – because anger turns to love much easier than indifference. What Cision should do next is take this discussion to their blog and continue it!