You or I can waste a lot of time looking for answers to our internet marketing questions.
Why are such searches time wasters?
One BIG reason is the millions of websites clawing at our eyeballs, with “article title hooks”, that are intended to trigger our brain’s basic human instincts.
So, how do you find the good stuff – real brainfood, not junk food, amidst all the cunning, deception and noise?
One way it to use “filters”, preferably high quality ones that filter out the detritus (waste material) and cancel noise.
What’s an example of a decent working filter? One that works, except to the degree that it may suffer a bit from social campaigning yet still manages to deliver value?
Take a look at The Semmys, self-touted as “the year’s best posts in search engine marketing”.
Are the articles really “the best”? They’re pretty good. Better than you might discover “by search alone”.
Effective use of filters requires a bit of mindfulness. In this case mindfulness that any version of online voting can be subjected to social campaigning, i.e., getting your friends and social networks to vote for your article. In the case of The Semmys social networking skills and strategic efforts to win are to be assumed.
That, in itself, might not negate the value of the winning articles, particularly in the case of the Semmys.
Why? It’s the filters, once again.
IF an author can win a “Semmys election” – amidst the highly competitive field of candidates – THEN there’s a good chance that the winner-author has the just demonstrated the very skills that should be a prerequisite . . . to writing about . . . internet marketing and social media marketing . . . in the first place. 
Examples of other sources I use as filters for continuing my online marketing education:
Search Engine Land, because most of the contributing authors qualify for the title “professional” in my analysis and the topics all lie near the bulls-eye of the insights and skills to succeed in online marketing.
WebmasterWorld’s Homepage, because it represents the confluence of what is on people’s minds and what they wish to talk about with a decent degree of editorial discretion. (Disclosure: I am a moderator at WebmasterWorld.)
SEOMoz’s Homepage. Although they’re selling themselves and their services and their approach, SEOMoz provides more depth and analysis than most, while allowing engagement/comment to either fill in any whole or challenge the presentation’s methods or findings.
Honorable mention goes to Aaron Wall’s SEOBook.com with the qualifier that, of late, a healthy chunk of the public content has focused on what is broken or wrong with Google. He does a great job of articulating and supporting his writings, and if he wants to lead the charge then that’s his prerogative, but . .
I guess sometimes you have to pay for the “good stuff”. 
No related posts.