Keywords from the 60 Minutes program
I tend to rank well for a lot of terms related to the scandal stuff (for obvious reasons I guess), so I was actually more curious about how the program would affect blog traffic than I was about the content on the program (I think I could have guessed what they were going to say…). Anyway, here’s what I have in terms of keywords from the 30th and the 1st.
I am, somehow, ranking #2 behind wikipedia for the keyword “russ hamilton”. Since he was named in the piece, his name generated a ton of traffic. I’m assuming that it spurred somewhere on the order of 8,000 to 10,000 searches. Obviously there were tons of various related searches (like #5). It’s also interesting to note that I tended to get more clicks for UB stuff than AP stuff. A few AP terms were just outside the top 10, but it was clear to me that UB was getting more searches than AP after the segment. Of course, I rank better for UB terms, so it probably isn’t as clear as my data would suggest. And, as is typical, I rank for a bunch of useless jailbait-related terms (because of this post that I made in May). I’m really not sure why I rank for those jailbait terms, but they sure are a huge traffic generator with zero effort.
Anyway, pretty interesting stuff. I’d definitely be curious to see what sort of clicks people who rank for AP managed to get to see how they compared with my clicks from similar UB search positions. It could be a good indicator of which brand came through the crisis better from the point of view of the 60 Minutes audience. If you were simply a casual viewer, which one do you think seemed worse? Obviously neither one came off positively though…
Related posts:
If you enjoyed this post, please consider leaving a comment or subscribing to the feed to get future posts delivered to your feed reader.
Comments
Yea, that’s possible. It’s very very hard to explain what happened on both sites in the span of a 13 minute piece or however long it was. I don’t think I could do it in a 13 minute video and have the vast majority of the public understand it. I mean, even the idea of explaining a “raise” or a “hand history” or a “river call” is a huge process. It’s just impossible to explain the story to a novice without at least an hour and they have to be able to ask direct questions. I personally think 60 Minutes made a bit of mistake making it (not because it wasn’t newsworthy, but because people were definitely going to be confused about it after seeing whatever they were able to produce in their time available).
And yes, boooo. It was obvious people were going to come away with a feeling like that. Pretty sad.
Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.
Neither came off positively, but I talked to several casual viewers who were unable to tell the difference between the two scandals. The 60 Minutes report meshed them together, kept going back and forth, and didn’t distinguish between the AP scandal with the anonymous cheater and the UB scandal with the accused Russ Hamilton. The casual viewers I spoke to were more confused by the end of it than anything else and came away with the idea that the cheating is still happening on those sites and online poker is a crooked industry.
Boo.