The Importance of Being Ernest By H Samuel
Posted under: Jewellery Stores H Samuel and Ernest Jones have issued affiliates with new terms and conditions regarding the use of misspellings for SEO purposes. Ray has already blogged about the new terms and discussion is ongoing on affiliates4u.
As ever there’s a bit of annoyance and speculation as to the reasons behind the decision – which takes us neatly to the first point.
Network’s why not actually tell affiliates the reasons behind your client’s decisions?
As is, all we and other affiliates can do is assume that it’s brand related and perhaps nay on impossible to police effectively.
For example, if an affiliate is writing quality content about Ernest Jones and makes a spelling mistake that results in them getting good SEO then they really shouldn’t be penalised. Mistakes do happen!
But, the problem is, it may lead to content being created to deliberately contain mistakes (“sorry guv, it was an honest error, I’ll get that changed right away”) and that’ll make things very difficult to monitor and determine who’s playing by the rules.
There’s also the possibility that affiliates will resort to hidden text or other tactics to get SEO position.
Should We Criticise a Merchant Over Brand Protection?
Let’s assume it is a brand led decision! H Samuel and Ernest Jones want their affiliates to represent their brand in a certain way. I do think that”s fair and whilst I can see SEO reasons for putting in misspellings and filling up landing pages with “H Samuel can also be spelt…” it doesn’t really look good in promotion of the merchant to the consumer.
Just because it’s tidy and neat within a site, it’s simply keyword stuffing for SEO purposes.
Now before you say “but this is a good way to get misspelling sales” and I’m going to do as I please – ask yourself one question.
Would you be happy if your sitename is used against your wishes in order to attract your potential users to a competitor? Yes or No?
Now for your sitename, substitute H Samuel or Ernest Jones and for competitor substitute affiliate sales channel… all they’re asking is that their brand is not misused so potential sales go via an affiliate site. Is that ok? Yes or No?
Yet haven’t we previously seen a number of code affiliates annoyed because another affiliate was taking advantage of their brand. They requested the offending text was removed or linked in as they were unhappy that this affiliate was doing as he pleased.
So what’s the difference?
does anyone ever remember the “&” saga with Marks and Spencer?
This is stupid – i dont get how merchants can dictate to us how to generate sales, as long as were sending them sales in an ethical way what’s the problem?