News

Ad and media agencies amateurs at search optimisation

Virtually all of Australia’s major media and advertising agencies are failing to do even the basics to ensure that their web sites show up on Google, research by Mumbrella has revealed.  

In practices that would see their clients lose millions of dollars if they behaved in the same way, many agencies have sacrificed visibility to search engines in order to have all-singing, all-dancing animated Flash sites. In addition, most have not considered the words that Google users will see appear on the page if they do find them. And not a single one of the 20 agencies agencies that Mumbrella examined had an active paid search campaign against their names.

Meanwhile, a large proportion of agencies fall back on a global network site, which often consists of no more local content than contact details for the Australian office – and in the case of media agency PHD, even that was missing.

Mumbrella assigned scores out of 25 to each of the agencies, based on four criteria.

Most importantly, we examined PageRank.  Named after founder Larry Page, this is given to a site by Google to assess its relative importance.

We also gave marks out of five depending  how high up the Google results page the agency came when just its name was typed in.

If an agency had decided to sacrifice search optimisation in order to use Flash, we gave zero out of five. Those who stuck with html received five marks.

And we would have granted five points if agencies had bought key words against their name in the paid search column. But not a single one did.

We made no assessment of the quality of the sites, as the point of this exercise was purely to assess how well agencies understand search, and how easily web users would be able to find them.

In the end, Mitchells media agency scored most highly, while GPY&R was the easiest ad agency to find. Mumbrella will be examing other types of agency on a future occasion.

This exercise was in part inspired by a blog posting at the marketing blog Free Beer, in which WA marketer Bret Treasure observed:

“Either they have as much work as they want or they don’t believe that potential clients search the internet for advertising agencies. Maybe they rely on being in the Yellow Pages.”

He adds: “None of the sites have Title tags that include any reference to ‘advertising’, ‘media’ or ‘marketing’. This is part of the reason why none of their sites are found when you type ‘advertising agency’ into Google.”

“”Clearly none of the agencies understand that you can control the way Google presents your search result. Many of the sites don’t work if you omit the www; this can be fixed with a simple re-direct. And it seems none of them know how to get a full Flash site properly indexed by Google, thereby increasing web traffic.”

Media agencies

IKON

Second on Google, easy to find.

  • Google PageRank: 2/10
  • Positioning on Google: 4/5
  • Paid: No 0/5
  • Flash: Yes 0/5
  • Score: 6/25 = 24%

INITIATIVE

If there’s a local site we couldn’t find it. Mind you, we couldn’t find the global site via Google either. In the end, we gave up and found them by searching for holding company Interpublic Group. From there, we were able to find the global web site which has only some basic contact details for Australia

  • Score = 0

PHD

Tap in PHD, and you’re probably never going to find it. A link to PHD’s global network appears only on Google’s ninth page. No doubt they’d argue that’s because it’s a common abbreviation – but hey, they chose the name. It’s not really going to help the Australian surfer anyway – once you find your way into the page listing their international locations, they’ve forgotten to add PHD Australia, which rebadged from Total last year. It’s nearly as bad searching on the phrase “PHD media agency Australia” – the first link that comes up is rival retail shop PHD Creative. PHD Australia is back in ninth.

  • Google PageRank: 2/10
  • Positioning on Google: 0/5
  • Flash: Yes – 0
  • Paid: No – 0/5
  • Total: 2/25 = 8%

 MEDIACOM

Mediacom Australia comes up first on Google – the non-Flash site probably helps. No paid keyword search though.

  • Google PageRank: 2/10
  • Positioning on Google: 5/5
  • Flash: No – 5/5
  • Paid: No – 0/5
  • Total: 12/25 = 48%

 MEDIAEDGE CIA

While we could easily find a web site for the global network, it contains no more local info than a couple of contact names and phone numbers. If there is local site, we couldn’t find it via Google

  • Score: 0

 MITCHELL COMMUNICATION GROUP

Mitchells gets the basics right. Tap in Mitchells or Mitchell Communications Group and its top. Of course, it no-doubt helps your Google juice if your chairman is the most famous media buyer in the country.

  • Google PageRank: 5/10
  • Positioning on Google: 5/5
  • Flash – No: 5/5
  • Paid – No: 0/5
  • Score: 15/25 = 60%

MINDSHARE

We could easily find the Mindshare global web site, but in terms of local content all we could find was an old press release.

  • Score: 0

OMD

Again, just a global web site with minimal info about the Australian operation.

  • Score: 0

RAZOR MEDIA

We just couldn’t find them on Google. Not even by typing in extra terms like “media agency” and Australia. In the end we got there via a link on digital boss Ryf Quail’s blog.

  • Google PageRank: 4/10
  • Positioning on Google: 0/5
  • Paid- No: 0/5
  • Flash – Yes: 0/5
  • Total: 4/25 = 16%

STARCOM

While the top two listings on Google were for the Starcom and Starcom MediaVest networks (can anyone explain the difference please?), what was confusing was that the third, .com.au listing was for an entirely different company called Starcom.

As far as we could tell, there is no local site or localised content apart from basic contact details.

  • Score: 0

UNIVERSAL MCCANN

They did well on Google – second item, after the international network. Not sure if it can be called a site though. It’s one page, decorated with a photo of MD Jeff Cressall. But this scoring system is only about search, not content.

  • Google PR: 2/10
  • Positioning on Google 4/5
  • Paid – No: 0/5
  • Flash – No: 5/5
  • Total: 11/25 = 44%

 

Advertising agencies

BADJAR OGILVY

This is where our scoring system wobbles a little. The Badjar Ogilvy site currently consists of a single holding page. However, the highish Google Page Rank suggests something more substantial used to reside on the URL. When Google next upgrades the pAGErANK(it happens every three months or so), that score may well fall.

  • Google Page Rank: 4/10
  • Google ranking: 5/5
  • Flash: No: 5/5
  • Paid search -No: 0/5
  • Score: 14/25 = 56%

BMF

First on the list, clear as day. Tough if you haven’t got Flash 8 though.

  • Google Page Rank: 5/10
  • Google ranking: 5/5
  • Flash: Yes – 0/5
  • Paid search:  No 0/5
  • Score: 10/25 = 40%

DDB

Second, after the global network. The site itself consists of a single Flash-based page, which basically acts as a scrolling billboard, not that Google will be able to see the contents

  • Google PageRank: 5/10
  • Google ranking: 4/5
  • Flash – yes: 0/5
  • Paid search: No: 0/5
  • Score: 9/25 = 36%

EURO RSCG

Second, after the global network. Although there is a page architecture, it’s still mainly Flash-based so no Google magic there. No paid search from Euro, although adbrands.net has bought the key word, albeit linking to a profile of Euro RSCG France.

  • Google PageRank: 5/10
  • Google ranking: 4/5
  • Flash – yes: 0/5
  • Paid search – no: 0/5
  • Score: 9/25 = 36%

GPY&R

Finally! An agency that appears to understand basic  SEO. They haven’t nailed it in the info that’s displayed on Google though.

  • Google PageRank: 5/10
  • Google ranking: 5/5
  • Flash – no: 5/5
  • Paid search – no: 0/5
  • Score: 15/25 = 60%

JWT

As you’d expect, the world’s most famous ad agency isn’t hard to find on Google. The network is top, the Australian site second. It’s all Flash though. Again, no paid search although others have bought the keyword.

  • Google PageRank: 4/10
  • Google ranking:  4/5
  • Flash – yes: 0/5
  • Paid search – no: 0/5
  • Score: 8/25 = 32%

Leo Burnett

It seems churlish to chide Leo Burnett for being search muppets when their Flash site has won major awards. But hey, we are churlish. Less impressive is the fact that there are two, different global network sites, one with a French domain, one with .com; with the French one scoring more highly. But neither one has anything local beyond contact details, so nul points.

  • Score: 0

 McCann Ericksonn

Second after the global site. While this is a well executed and creative site, it’s in Flash, so invisible to search engines unless you do clever things. That perhaps explains that while the gateway page scores a PR of 3, the individual offices have a zero PR.

  • Google PageRank: 0/10
  • Google ranking: 4/5
  • Flash – yes: 0/5
  • Paid search – no: 0/5
  • Score: 4/25 = 16%

M&C Saatchi

  • Google PageRank: 4/10
  • Google ranking: 3/5
  • Flash – no:  5/5
  • Paid search – no: 0/5
  • Score: 12/23 = 48%

Saatchi &Saatchi

With senior level departures and the refusal of the agency to return press phone calls , it’s not surprising to see the agency’s Australian outpost having a similarly level of visibility on Google. While the global site is the top link, the Australian .com.au version isn’t to be found via Google. Indeed, rival M&C Saatchi ranks higher. Meanwhile the local content is just a page on the global site.

  • Score: 0
ADVERTISEMENT

Get the latest media and marketing industry news (and views) direct to your inbox.

Sign up to the free Mumbrella newsletter now.

 

SUBSCRIBE

Sign up to our free daily update to get the latest in media and marketing.