5 ms·

This Spam Infographic About Spam Infographics Makes My Head Hurt

39 points by lotusleaf1987 16y ago

ambiate 16y ago
Sigh, I planned on schooling the system of the system by creating an infographic like this and posting it to Digg/Reddit/HN. I spent all day in chem hall sketching it out and preparing it for the weekend surge. While we may realize this part of the spam game, there's always going to be new schemes to replace this one. The morals and ethics of SEO are always being pushed and bent to get a page #1 in Google for a keyword. I admired some of the infographics and even have a few saved (music/movies/picking a lock). There are much dirtier ways than this to get backlinks and attention. I would actually toss this in the grayhat area, because at least its providing some thought invoking content.
- vaksel 16y ago
  the thing is that only the techies realize that's part of the seo game...99.9999% of the population will not care. And if those seo guys can't get the numbers the way they want...they'll just go and buy links. or create a huge SEO link wheel i.e. something like this chart: http://i55.tinypic.com/2142vdv.jpg http://i55.tinypic.com/2142vdv.jpg
igameddigg 16y ago
"Aside from the Greyhat SEO tricks, your anti-infographic infographic and the post that inspired it are actually just describing successful web-writing and content creation. It’s like there’s a reason people are clicking on it." Ugh. She didn't read the thread, it would seem.
paolomaffei 16y ago
How is this spammier than usual linkbaiting?
- blasdel 16y ago
  There's content but it isn't textually indexed by Google, it's easy to put up statically on any existing domain, and by using huge images it's more likely to be linked to instead of rehosted.
tommizzle 16y ago
I really don't 'get' this anti-infographic movement - What's the difference between text-based content and graphical content? Gaming sites like Digg etc is always going to happen regardless of the format.
- mikemol 16y ago
  In general, I think the problem breaks down this way: 1) Humans respond in intuitive, predictable ways to graphics, particularly with a greater emphasis on emotional response. (As opposed to an analytical response.) 2) All information sources have bias, and any marketing competence on the part of the infographic creator will tend to subconsciously amplify the bias of the graphic's creator. 3) Combining the creator's bias with the infographic's tendency to more easily invoke emotional responses over analytical ones results in a reaction more couched in that emotion than in logic. IIRC, USA Today was criticized for this, decades ago. [edited to fix concatenation of numbers to a single line.)
  - tommizzle 16y ago
    Wow, so people are getting upset that content is causing a greater emotional response, with a direct influence on the graphic's creator? To me that seems as if the designers and marketers are doing their job properly.
    - mikemol 16y ago
      Sure, as long as you're aware that you're reading marketing material, and are aware of the bias that goes with that. People often are more sheeple than critical thinkers, though. [I think] The anger is generally on the part of the critical thinkers against those exploiting sheeple. You can think as critically as you like, but that doesn't mean you won't be drowned out by those who don't.

39 points by lotusleaf1987 16y ago

Sigh, I planned on schooling the system of the system by creating an infographic like this and posting it to Digg/Reddit/HN. I spent all day in chem hall sketching it out and preparing it for the weekend surge. While we may realize this part of the spam game, there's always going to be new schemes to replace this one. The morals and ethics of SEO are always being pushed and bent to get a page #1 in Google for a keyword. I admired some of the infographics and even have a few saved (music/movies/picking a lock). There are much dirtier ways than this to get backlinks and attention. I would actually toss this in the grayhat area, because at least its providing some thought invoking content.

vaksel 16y ago
the thing is that only the techies realize that's part of the seo game...99.9999% of the population will not care. And if those seo guys can't get the numbers the way they want...they'll just go and buy links. or create a huge SEO link wheel i.e. something like this chart: http://i55.tinypic.com/2142vdv.jpg http://i55.tinypic.com/2142vdv.jpg

igameddigg 16y ago

"Aside from the Greyhat SEO tricks, your anti-infographic infographic and the post that inspired it are actually just describing successful web-writing and content creation. It’s like there’s a reason people are clicking on it." Ugh. She didn't read the thread, it would seem.

paolomaffei 16y ago

How is this spammier than usual linkbaiting?

blasdel 16y ago
There's content but it isn't textually indexed by Google, it's easy to put up statically on any existing domain, and by using huge images it's more likely to be linked to instead of rehosted.

tommizzle 16y ago

I really don't 'get' this anti-infographic movement - What's the difference between text-based content and graphical content? Gaming sites like Digg etc is always going to happen regardless of the format.

mikemol 16y ago
In general, I think the problem breaks down this way: 1) Humans respond in intuitive, predictable ways to graphics, particularly with a greater emphasis on emotional response. (As opposed to an analytical response.) 2) All information sources have bias, and any marketing competence on the part of the infographic creator will tend to subconsciously amplify the bias of the graphic's creator. 3) Combining the creator's bias with the infographic's tendency to more easily invoke emotional responses over analytical ones results in a reaction more couched in that emotion than in logic. IIRC, USA Today was criticized for this, decades ago. [edited to fix concatenation of numbers to a single line.)
- tommizzle 16y ago
  Wow, so people are getting upset that content is causing a greater emotional response, with a direct influence on the graphic's creator? To me that seems as if the designers and marketers are doing their job properly.
  - mikemol 16y ago
    Sure, as long as you're aware that you're reading marketing material, and are aware of the bias that goes with that. People often are more sheeple than critical thinkers, though. [I think] The anger is generally on the part of the critical thinkers against those exploiting sheeple. You can think as critically as you like, but that doesn't mean you won't be drowned out by those who don't.