Stephan, thanks for joining us. It’s so great to have an SEO expert on board. 

It’s great to be here. Thank you for having me.

You’ve got so many things that you’ve done over the years, and you’re a podcaster now, but you’ve been an SEO expert and sold the company. There’s a whole bunch of history we’re going to get into, but what I’m interested to know is, is SEO really dead? Because we hear that from people, so let’s dive in with the tough part.

People bait you with that. It’s ridiculous. It’s just to get a rise out of you. You could say that about any particular marketing vehicle or activity just to get controversy going. “Billboards are dead.” “I still see billboards on the freeway. I don’t think so.” “Television is dead.” “No, I think people are making good money still off of advertising on TV.”

What are you seeing with SEO still being indicators that it’s still viable and it’s still making people money? 

The people who are making money are the ones who are staying ahead of the curve because SEO is constantly changing. It’s not stagnant and the best practices of yesteryear are not going to get you through next year and the next five years. Google is powered by so much machine learning, and it will be even more advanced. There’ll be artificial intelligence if you are going to try and outsmart an AI, good luck. The only way that you can outsmart an AI is what do you think?

The only way you can outsmart an AI with bad data.  With emotion.

No, with another AI. If you’re not playing around with machine learning and, eventually, artificial intelligence, how are you going to stay current? You’re going to be optimizing your title tags and doing keyword research, which is all good blocking and tackling, and I recommend it, but that’s not how you win. That’s how you just don’t get completely decimated.

This is true especially true in the eCommerce world, which I want to dive into a little bit later, but let’s back up and let everyone understand why you’ve been such an SEO expert over the years, too, which is important and that’s what I wanted to set up by that question. Tell a little bit about how you got started.

I was studying for PhD in biochemistry in 1994. I met one of the original guys from Netscape, a guy named Rob McCool. He’s the guy who invented Apache, which is the web server that runs most of the web servers on the internet. I met him at the second International Worldwide Web Conference, and I was enamored by the whole internet world. I was developing websites for fun on the side while I was studying for my PhD. I realized like “I could make a lot of money.” That was the first time I had never heard of Netscape, and he was one of the early guys who created the Netscape enterprise server. I quit my PhD within a few months, and I started building websites and then eventually playing around with SEO.

Back in those days it was SEO for Infoseek and WebCrawler. AltaVista is such different. You do stupid stuff that I didn’t want to do. Essentially, the same page eight times for each of the major search engines. I just thought that that’s not sustainable, that’s not a good user experience, and so forth. When Google came around, I was very excited. I wanted to reverse-engineer everything about how Google worked, and I did a pretty good job of that. Figuring out what worked and what didn’t work and how to optimize for the Google algorithm. One of the things for example, that I had figured out that nobody else had was when you used to see indented search listings in Google. You’d have two listings from the same site, and the second listing would be indented.

I always wanted to figure out, “What is the true position of that?” because I knew that those were being grouped together. Back in the day, it was called host crowding. That’s what Google engineers refer to it as. Let’s say you see a competitor, position one, and then you see an indented listing at number two. That wasn’t their true position. Maybe there were a position one and position ten. I was thinking, “If only I could know what the true position is like if it is number ten, instead of how it appears visually as number two, I could go to page two and the research results and give a little boost to some innocuous website that wasn’t a direct competitor to me. Push them onto page one and knock my competitors, indented listing off the page.” That was pretty ninja, and that’s the stuff that I figured out by tinkering, by poking and prodding at the Google Algorithm.

In fact, it was that particular secret that I shared at the first SMX Advance Conference that got a lot of people’s attention, including Rand Fishkin, the founder of Moz, formerly SEO Moz. The next conference at SCS Toronto, he came up to me in the speaker lounge and gave me a big hug. I’d never spoken to him before. That was pretty cool. We had a great conversation, and in that conversation, we decided to do a book together. We got a book deal within a couple of days with O’Reilly. We were going to write the SEO cookbook together, and then the publisher asked us to shift gears and do The Art of SEO instead. The rest is history. We are now on the third edition of The Art of SEO. Rand is no longer involved in the book, but I’ve got two other great coauthors. It’s a thousand-page book now.

We noticed that. Normally, I like to read a book before I interview someone. I was like, “I don’t think I can get through that in the amount of time since we booked this before.”

It’s overwhelming, pretty much. When I tell people, if I give him a copy of the book like at a conference, I’ll say start with chapter seven. Chapter seven is not overly technical. It’s a lot of fun because you get to think about content marketing and link-building and how to be different and how to stand out, how to be remarkable with your content so that it gets great links and how to do outreach and how to get the attention of influencers, the linkerati. Those website owners and bloggers who have so much authority and trust in the eyes of Google. 

Just one link from them would be worth a thousand links from lesser sites. How do you do that? It’s like trying to put on the hat of an ad agency creative director and think, “How can I create the next dollar-shave club commercial?” or something. Something remarkable that everybody wants to talk about and blog about. Outside-the-box thinking is a prerequisite for successful SEO these days. It’s a lot of fun to think about how to be different and increase the note-worthiness of your content. That’s where I tell people to start.

It’s interesting to talk about where you started in the ’90s, and in the late ’90s, we had our own business. We had to code our own website or have somebody do it for us. We weren’t coding, but all websites were coded the hard way. Even the shopping carts, there was no plugin, no WordPress. It definitely has changed. It was interesting about having to make a page for each of the eight different search engines. Those were probably in the days of AltaVista and search engines that were out there besides the one today.

Today, it’s Google. Even the few other search engines that may still be out there they’re following Google pretty much. You mentioned something about poking at the Google algorithm to figure out what would work. Here’s where my next question lies: does anybody outside of Google know? Can you analyze the Google algorithm, like looking at the code, or is it all trial and error in terms of figuring out what works as Google changes things? Because we all know it changes month to month, year to year. In terms of what they’re looking for, what they’re ranking and how they’re doing it.

The way I like to think about it or frame it is not trial and error because that sets you up for a lot of demotivating, bad experiments. I like to think of it as the scientific method. You have a hypothesis, you have a control group, you have an experiment group, and you test stuff, and you see what works and what doesn’t. It’s a science experiment. Everything’s a science experiment. Even though I have a book called The Art of SEO, which is ironic that I think it’s very much a science more than an art, the art part of it is creating something that’s remarkable and worth remarking about. The science is you test everything and see what works and what doesn’t work.

Let’s say that you hear from somebody that H1 tags are really important for SEO. You can test that. You don’t just have to read somebody’s blog posts and take their word for it that it is important or that it’s not important. You simply design an experiment and it’s not a valid experiment if you just add H1 tags across your entire website. Because if you didn’t have keyword-rich headlines before and you add them and you happen to wrap them with an H1 container, you’ve made two edits. You now have two variables you’ve introduced. You can’t do that. Now let’s say that you already had H1 tags with headlines, and you want to test the opposite to see if removing H1 tags will have any deleterious effect, or you could change that H1 to a font tag or an H6 or whatever you want and see what the impact is.

As long as you keep that headline there and now it’s in a different container like H6 or a font container or something else. You can see did it go down in the rankings, and it won’t. H1 tags don’t matter. It’s so important according to a lot of old-school SEO, and it’s not. What matters is the keyword prominence. If you have an important article about SEO for podcasts, I have a great article on that. It’s on Search Engine Land. Let’s say you wanted to rank for SEO for podcasts and you don’t mention it until the last paragraph, and it’s a thousand-word article. “I forgot to tell you, this whole article was about SEO for podcasts.”

Probably not going to do so hot. If you start with the important prominent keywords and its visually prominence with the large font and right front and center, you don’t have to scroll to see it. It’s probably going to get a lot of emphasis as far as Google is concerned, too. It’s not just for users because there’s this patent that Google filed called the reasonable surfer patent, and it applies not just to links. If a reasonable hypothetical web surfer is unlikely to click on the link because it’s so buried, it’s so tiny, and it’s imperceptible to the user, then Google shouldn’t count it either.

That same idea applies to content. You put some great technical specs together. You put it on a tab on the product page. I have to click on a tab that says tech specs, and then I can see it. You doomed all that wonderful copy to get demoted in the eyes of Google. Same thing with reviews. I call that customer review content. You put it in a separate tab instead of making it visible by default on the page. It’s like, “It’s so much cleaner this way. It’s tucked away. You just have to click this tab, and then you can get to all the great user-generated content.” You’ve told Google that it’s not that important. It may not get completely discounted, but it’s going to get partially discounted. You’ve got to think like an algorithm. While you’re trying to figure out what’s working and what’s not working for your SEO, you have to take a scientific approach.

The lesson here is don’t bury the lead. We’re not big lovers of the model of doing SEO for articles and writing. I am a columnist for Inc. and thought that the content was more important. You think that “What my readers want to read and what the topic should be is important, and we never bury the lead.” That’s part of why you have a leading paragraph. You don’t do that in good article writing, but the issue is that you also don’t think about how an algorithm is going to read the terms that you put in. You utilize what is normal language, you use different words combined in there and it doesn’t make a whole lot of sense when you remove them out in a well-written article.

Over time, what I’ve discovered is that Inc. doesn’t want good journalism. They want good SEO, and they don’t care when you switch it up. It is shocking to me. Shocking to us, too, because this was not from day one of Tracy’s journey as a columnist at Inc. This came eighteen months into it. I realized that they were totally trying to shift me over time and but never say, “Just violate every journalistic practice you ever learned and do this.” Over time, that’s what I’ve discovered that’s exactly what they want.

It’s exactly what they want and headlines too. There’s this written policy that you don’t want to be clickbait, but when you see the top ten headlines that they push out to you in a competitive way every month, they’re all clickbait. They’re the same clickbait after two years. They gave to us the top 100 headlines year after year for the last ten years and I could have written that the headlines from ten years ago are the same today.

Here’s the challenge, you need to write for the search engine algorithms and you need to write for humans. As the search engines evolve, they’re going to be more like humans and less like robots. They’re going to look for readability. They’re going to look for good journalism and fact-checking. Not mixing metaphors or doing stuff that would get you an F in English class. You think that this is not important, but if it’s bad for the user, it’s bad for the search engine and writing copy that doesn’t read well, that is clunky, that feels stuffed with keywords.

Keyword-stuffing is never okay. A surface level article, that’s just repetition of key words without being a comprehensive review of the topic is a bad article. If you want to future proof your article writing or any content creation that you’re doing, you need to think about, “How am I serving the user?” because user engagement signals will suffer if you don’t, thus your rankings will suffer. The machine learning algorithms that are getting better and better at reading articles as if they’re humans will put a big red X on your article because it wasn’t written in a very journalistic.

If you want to use a tool that will help you to ideate what to write about and get a comprehensive review of that topic space, of what Google would refer to as the entity, just think of it as a topic.

Let’s say the topic is lawnmowers. If you wanted to write an article about lawnmowers or let’s say it’s a product page about lawnmowers or category page probably, you don’t want to just talk about lawnmowers and then more about lawnmowers and lawnmowers and by the way, the lawnmowers.

You want to talk about grass and about the lawn and about lawn furniture and about the garden and weed wackers and maybe a ride-on lawn mower versus a push mower and summer and all sorts of different keywords in a way that it adds a lot of value. It’s a comprehensive review of the topic of lawnmowers. If you don’t do it like that, you have a short-term strategy that at, best, will only work for a time, and it very likely won’t even work currently because the algorithms are pretty darn sophisticated already.

Is that why you’ve headed into podcasting like we have?

I started podcasting in 2007, and then I stopped. I pod faded after about a year and a half, but I’m back with a vengeance. I’ve been podcasting with two different podcasts for the last almost three years now. What got me back into it wasn’t because it was good for SEO, it is good for SEO, and great for getting links and great for authority building and all that. It’s great for all that. For me, I wanted to create a New York Times best-selling book on personal transformation because I went through a big transformation myself.

I’m literally unrecognizable from the guy I was ten years ago. I look twenty years older than I am now ten years ago, which is pretty crazy to think like, “What the heck?” This is like a real-life Benjamin Button. There’s some secrets to my success and I share that in my podcast, Get Yourself Optimized. That started as a book, Get Yourself Optimized book and I had a ghost writer, a very expensive one helping me with the book. I believe in getting a lot of help when you want to do something well. You get an incredible team, and I’m not one to just try and do a huge book by myself. Like The Art of SEO, I have two co-authors. I had three when we first started.

Makes a lot of sense because you have the perspective of understanding how being in the weeds every single day benefits. Being able to do that scientific method, being able to test out what’s working and what’s not makes you more valuable to your clients and to the people that you serve. Why not hire experts who are doing that every single day and getting bestsellers onto the New York Times list?

This was a ghostwriter who ghostwrote the boxer, Holyfield. A great guy, and he was going to interview all these subject matter experts for my book because I had this who’s-who list of people who have changed my life, and I wanted them all to be in the book, and I’m like, ” You’re going to interview these people that I would die to talk to.” Some of them I knew, but some of them I had not interacted with before. “Then you’re going to throw away the audio.” You’re just going to take a transcript of it and you’re going to take little pieces of it and you’re going to work that into the book.

I hate that idea. I’m cringing over here because wasted content drives me insane.

I was just like, “That’s a big no. That is not how this was going to go. I will do the interviews and I will save those audios and I will turn that into podcast episodes and this is going to be an incredible podcast if nobody reads the book, but they just listen to the podcast. I will change their lives.” That’s what I’m doing, and I’ve been doing it for almost three years. That’s how I got back into it. I started with Get Yourself Optimized, and then four months in I’m like, “My bread and butter is SEO and online marketing. I should get back into podcasting about that too.” Then Marketing Speak was born less than six months later, and I’ve been doing that podcast for over two years now. Both are incredible, I’m passionate about both and I’m sure I’m changing people’s lives and changing their businesses through those two shows.

I’ve heard both shows. I’m a fan of Marketing Speak because I learn something new from every one of the episodes that you do. Your journey on Get Yourself Optimized is interesting, too. You’re telling so many great stories there.

The people that have been on the show are such forces for good in the world. People like Byron Katie and Dave Asprey and Alison Armstrong, Dr. John DeMartini. I love them. They’re world changers.

You mentioned Dave Asprey and I’ve said we would get back to that eCommerce tie in. For those of you who don’t know, he’s founder of Bulletproof. If you’ve ever heard of Bulletproof Coffee, and he has a Bulletproof podcast and books and all kinds of things but eCommerce, I think in a way that ties in between content and eCommerce. He’s part of the reason that explosion and connection happened.

He’s put bio-hacking on the map. People are experimenting with their bodies now like we should be experimenting with our websites. It’s pretty exciting. I’m wearing an Oura Ring which is tracking my activity levels, my heart rates, my sleep, and it syncs with my app on my phone. Tells me if I need to get up and move around more, if I didn’t get enough deep sleep last night. I want to track everything. It’s called the quantified self-movement.

I also want to work on my longevity and adding not just more years to my life, but more life to my years. My wife and I went to get stem cell therapy with Dave Asprey’s stem cell doctor, Dr. Harry Adelson. He was a keynoter at the last Bulletproof Conference. He became a client. We signed up to get the stem cell procedures and then on the initial consult call at the end, he’s like, “Stephan, you have a few extra minutes? I want to talk to you about something completely different.”

That happens the same thing to us all the time where they’re like, “Can we have a few minutes at the end so we could talk about you producing our podcasts for us?” We’re like, “We’ll make time for that.” Let’s talk a little bit about the SEO tie in for eCommerce. You were talking about before that burying the tech specs and the reviews and all of that. It’s different if you treat your eCommerce is searchable.

It’s also a rabbit warren potentially, if you have typical eCommerce features like faceted navigation where you can narrow down the product catalog by things like price range and size, color, brands, and you start clicking around. Googlebot can click around too. It can start exploring by refining by price range and by color and by size and all that stuff. You end up with all these different facets and you might have thousand products, but you might have 100,000 or a million facets and Googlebot doesn’t stop. It keeps going and going and going. 

Then you end up wasting all this what in the SEO world we call crawl budget on these low-value pages that are just a rehashing of the same thousand products over and over and over again. You’ve got to be very, very careful to put your content that’s awesome, front and center and stuff that is thin content or duplicate content or near duplicate content because it’s a reshuffled version of the same content. Ideally, just make that not visible to the search engines.

We’re looking at a lot of things like that as we’ve been working towards how we utilize the excess content from our podcast and things like that as well. What is important to the user and the user interface and balancing that out with what’s important to Google. You have the two models of things and when you were talking before about designed for machine and human, we’re always on the forefront of that on the product side of things. That’s been our business for a long time and at the end of the day, that human matters more because the buying decision is a human decision. You do have to have a weeded value to that, but that other stuff, you could bury it and you can keep it, you can still utilize it. You just don’t need to present it in quite the same way.

When you have great content, you can always find ways to repackage that, repurpose it, and build on it. If you have a winner, you don’t just shelve it and say, “Moving onto the next podcast or the next product or the next article,” or whatever. A past client of mine, Zappos, they had set a Guinness World Record, which is pretty cool. It was the most simultaneous high fives, and they did nothing else with it.

I’m like, “What a tragedy and what a travesty that you didn’t do anything further. You could have repackaged that and all sorts of spin-offs on it, like infographics about hand gestures in different parts of the world and what they mean. You could do a viral video of a man on the street interviews. Tell me what this means.” It’s like, “I don’t know, a thumbs up.” Tell me what this means, and it’s an okay symbol. In different parts of the world, these are quite vulgar or not very nice. To get people’s reactions and then turn that into a viral video to create SlideShare deck of the top ten misused and misunderstood hand gestures and what they mean and how they might end up getting you shot in different parts of the world.

You could repurpose and repackage and spin-off. Start with something that’s a winner and keep going with it until it runs out of steam. You’re not just rehashing the same thing over and over again. We’re not talking about duplicate content, we’re not talking about copy and paste. It’s taking something and turning it into something new. It’s like when you have a great flower and you’re a geneticist or you’re growing flowers and you’re like, “This is unique. I’m going to create new hybrid, grafting. We’re going to try all these different things,” because you picked a winner.

Do that with your podcast. Every episode that I do of both of my shows, we do a checklist of action items and that’s available both as HTML and as PDF download. I do a transcript of every single episode. I do an episode art cover for each episode. I do click to tweets. The show notes with timestamps and everything. It is a complete resource. I’ll even create oftentimes articles pulling the highlights and submitting those to various sites. You could do one for Inc. Magazine on a particularly powerful podcast like this one for example.

I can’t because I write in the innovation section, but I did that. We do exactly that. We do all of those things but part of it came out of us hating to waste content and then part of it came because all of a sudden, we saw the power from it. We didn’t know why. We just saw the power and we were like, “We’re going to do more of that.” That’s how that came about for us quite a few years ago. What you were saying about the topic and diving deep into them, our 3D print podcast has over 530 episodes or something.

A podcast on something as techie and geeky as 3D printing, it gets hard to talk about that same thing the same way all the time. You have to be different and it keeps you excited and interested in it. To me a little bit of the brilliance of podcasting is you get outside perspective through the interviews which leads you to thinking about, “Another spin off topic that I can talk about.” It helps build on itself and it keeps you in that moment where if I sat at my computer to try to write my column and just said, “What can I write about product design this week?” and I’m all alone.

It’s a very different model. It’s not dynamic enough and it can’t keep the interest and it can’t keep on the cutting edge and it’s not future proofing your content and future proofing your site and your business. I want to dive into some of these SEO myths because you have a great little free SEO myth thing, but do you have any of those SEO myths that relate to podcasting?

If we start with a social media and how that ties in to SEO and podcasts, so many people think that all the social stuff they’re doing is directly affecting their SEO. “I’m going take my podcast. I’m going to push it out on social. I’m going to ask my guests to push it out on social.” It’s all social, social, social. The problem with that is not helping your SEO. If it is, it’s only indirectly helping. Social signals are not an SEO factor. It’s not a ranking factor in Google. If you get a link and a tweet or a Facebook post or it’s in the description of a YouTube video or even it’s in a Wikipedia article, you’ve got to create link to a podcast episode. “That’s awesome. That’s so exciting.”

That’s nice for the social media impact that you get, but there’s no SEO impact. If you get an SEO impact, it’s only because some blogger, some website owner saw that tweet, saw that Facebook post or Instagram post or whatever and said, “That looks interesting. I think I might blog about that. I think I might link to that podcast episode, to that show notes page or episode page.” Now you get the SEO benefit. Instead, if you let’s say, ask the guest to not just share on social, but more importantly, “I see you have an interviews page on your site. You have a media page. That’s cool. If you could, would you be willing to put a link on that page?”

We do that for all our guests. We have this thing we refer to as Ego Bait™, where we’re providing an embed code to every guest that populates an image for the show and links back to the blog for the episode on our site. It’s easy for them. They can’t mess it up if you give them the HTML code. They just have to put it on the press or media page. If somebody posts about it on social media and they put a link to your blog about your podcast episode on Facebook or Twitter, is that link haven’t no value?

No value. It’s a no followed link. All social networks, no follow external links. Pinterest, Instagram, YouTube, LinkedIn, Facebook, Twitter, they all no follow external links and that’s because the spammers would have a field day putting all sorts of garbage on those social platforms. They do anyways, but they get no benefit from an SEO standpoint for doing so. Their incentives are less.

Only to the extent that that link might be driving some traffic to your site of people that are genuinely interested to write a blog. Traffic you said is different from the link value of a blog somewhere, but other than the traffic value, or the exposure value, there’s no SEO and link value. Back to Ego Bait™, we developed Ego Bait™ because I was doing all these great Inc. interviews and writing articles about pretty high-profile people and I couldn’t get them to put the article link like you think, “It has the Inc. logo. I was featured in Inc.” but there’d be no link back with that. I was like, “Why are you not sending people to the article? It’s an outside party endorsement of you and your business. 

Why aren’t you doing this?” It took me a while to get to people and find out why they weren’t doing it. In the process I found out is that they don’t know how to use their website and they don’t know how to put stuff in. We made it so stupid simple that it’s like dropping in an image basically. All they had to do was copy and paste everything and say, “Just drop this in, it’ll be fine, or give it to your web developer and they’ll drop it in and it’ll be fine and put it on this page.” We started doing that and that’s how Ego Bait™ was born so there’s a graphic that goes with it. That’s what Tom had mentioned. 

The HTML code populates a graphic and links back to the post. 

They can’t screw it up. It goes to a sub page, not even the homepage. A lot of people would do, “Inc.com,” that’s not helpful either. You’ll never find your article in there when it’s three months old. We had to get them to link to the direct pages, and then we started doing that with our podcast and with all of our clients and all the Brandcasters. 

You can do that same approach or similar approach with things like infographics where you, you have an HTML embed code. If you go to Get Yourself Optimized and then you look at the Are You A Geek? page, there’s an infographic on that with a quiz and everything. Right underneath the infographic is some HTML code that you can embed and includes a text link. The attribution is right there. It’s just super simple. Another thing that might be helpful if you think about people linking to the Inc. article, while that’s cool, that helps Inc. out, it mildly helps you out, but it helps Inc. out. Wouldn’t you like to figure out a way to help yourself out just as much?

A great analogy for this is let’s say that you have a YouTube channel and you’re crushing it on YouTube. You have incredible videos and then journalists and bloggers are writing up about it and linking right and left to your YouTube channel. You’re helping YouTube out. That’s very generous of you and I’m sure they appreciate it, but if you want to help your business, figure out a way that it just is obvious and important for the journalist or the blogger to link to you on your site just as much as it is to link to the YouTube channel. If you think that same approach like, “How can I get people to link to my website as well as the Inc. article?” Let’s say it’s somebody that you write about in this Inc. article, it’s the feature for that particular column for that week. That’s great, what if you did a behind the scenes of the interview, like the stuff that we didn’t share in the Inc. article that’s even more interesting. It’s like that show on MTV, Behind The Music.

You go behind the Inc. column, and then you give them both links. If you have a YouTube channel and you want people to link to your site as well, you could do what Blendtec did. Blendtec has this Will It Blend? videos. Very, very successful marketing campaign that transformed their business because the founder, Tom Dickson, would blend all sorts of crazy stuff on video inside of these blenders like golf clubs and rake handles and then iPods, iPhones, iPads and stuff. They went viral. It wasn’t all about getting traffic to the Youtube.com website, it was about getting traffic and links to their site. What they did that was very clever, they set up a microsite, WillItBlend.com. If you go to Blendtec.com and there’s a Will It Blend? section, it’s not going to be as enticing to journalists but WillItBlend.com, that would be perfect. As a journalist, I’d rather link there than to the YouTube channel. The journalist was scratching their own itch. You didn’t even have to ask for the link. That’s the kind of opportunities that you should start dreaming up as you’re creating your marketing campaigns.

So much thought about what you can do and how exciting this is. We appreciate you coming on the show, Stephan. Sharing with us all sorts of ways to future-proof our podcasts, future-proof our blogs, future-proof our businesses in general and look at the power we still have SEO and some of the things that we’ve got wrong. 

Thank you. If your listeners want to take a first step in SEO, I would recommend chapter seven of The Art of SEO and I’m happy to give that for free to all of your listeners. Let’s send them to MarketingSpeak.com/FeedYourBrand.