Ecommerce Blog

I’m writing this article because one of the most asked questions we get at ContentNow.co.uk is “can you help us get our site listed in Google News”. The answer is yes, in fact we launched our News product recently for that specific purpose. However, whether your write your own content, have in house content writers or outsource your content to a company like ours I hope you find the following article of use. As I get asked about Google News so often I though it would be a good idea to share my experiences. So first of all…

What is Google News?

In their own words, Google News is “aggregated headlines and a search engine of many of the world’s news sources”. So to put it simply it’s a massive online resource of “news” items taken from all over the world and covering many different sectors.

What are the benefits of appearing in Google News?

1. Your site will be seen as an “authority” on your subject. The very fact that is is featured in Google News implies authority as in “it must be a trustworthy source if Google deem it to be so”. This alone can be invaluable.

2. Backlinks - as you are an authority you will find other websites and news aggregators also linking to you and quoting your site in their articles. These links can come from other trusted sites and are very valuable in terms of search engine equity.

3. More traffic/visitors - your site will be exposed to a whole new audience, the tens of millions of people that visit Google News every week. So make sure you not only write frequently but make sure your content is interesting to stand out in the crowd and also to ensure repeat visitors.

How do I make sure my site adheres to Google News guidelines?

A lot of people think that there are stringent guidelines that you have to adhere to in order to get into Google News. This isn’t the case, although there are some technical guidelines there isn’t anything that you shouldn’t already be doing as best practice anyway. Other than that there are 3 main rules that I would stick to in order to ensure that you get into Google News.

1. Word Count: Ensure that you news articles are a minimum of 250 words each, ideally 300. Now before people comment saying that they have seen sites in Google News that are 200 words and less, yes so have I. But we have anecdotal evidence that news articles of around the 300 word mark have a better chance of getting in. Google won’t confirm or deny this but we have had some clients at Content Now who have tried and failed to get into Google News but upon securing our services and producing news articles of this length, have started to appear.

2. Frequency: Personally speaking I would aim to publish at least 1 news article per day to your site. More if you can manage it. Obviously the more you publish the more frequently the Googlebot will come to visit and the more often your items will be featured in Google News and you will benefit from increased traffic as a result.

3. Write for people, not search engines: Don’t use one of those horrible content bot services that churn out lots of so called “unique” content for your site. They *may* fool the search engines for a little while but they will not fool your visitors. Don’t try to stuff your content with keywords and write to keyword densities etc. Instead write engaging content that humans will enjoy. This will ensure that you get visitors coming back to your site and if you have comments open or forums then they are more likely to engage with you and eventually become a loyal member of your community. As well as “news” pieces try to write opinion pieces or humorous pieces too. All of which will make your site stand out of the crowd.

What is the difference between traditional content and news?

News content should be much in tune with what’s currently happening in your sector. For example, we have a client active in the stocks and shares market, SharePrices.com who have just successfully been included in Google News. We provide the site with twice daily news items that relate specifically to the UK shares, stocks and investments markets. The articles focus on the stockmarket in general and news as to why a particular company has suddenly proved popular/unpopular. Just like this and this both published yesterday.

Alternatively news could come in the shape of a new product review for something just announced/released. Maybe a review of the forthcoming Apple iPad or a new video game. It’s also possible to get really good coverage from other sites if you include videos in your news items. For example, Recombu (not a ContentNow client) did this excellent piece on the new HTC Desire, it was picked up (via Google News) from leading authority on all things tech, Gizmodo. By creating innovative and engaging content, Recombu have firmly established themselves as a major authority in their field, so much so that the main players in online tech are now quoting them regularly in their articles.

How many writers do I need in order to qualify for Google News?

I don’t remember where I read it but I do remember a Google News representative being quoted somewhere as saying that “multiple” authors were needed in order to qualify. This would seem to be backed up by the Google News submission page that asks for a link to a “list of authors and editors available on your site”. So a page like this one from SharePrices.com is a must. It would seem that Google News are looking for a clear organisational structure with multiple editors and authors, so it’s important to have this in place before submitting our site.

When should I submit my site to Google News?

Again there is no hard and fast rule for this. Personally I would wait until I had been up and running and producing quality news content on a daily basis for  2 to 3 months before applying. This will prove to Google that you have a track record and hopefully improve your chances of submission. A site with no history and no historical news content will almost certainly be rejected.

Overall, if you ensure that you’re writing good quality original content daily that isn’t copied from other sources then getting into Google News isn’t too difficult. The hardest part is maintaining the frequency and of course coming up with original content on a daily basis. And that’s why I set up ContenNow.co.uk, as I myself struggled with this and used to spend too much time writing content when I should have been looking at the bigger picture. Writing quality content is really time consuming, if you’re lucky enough to have in house content writers then perfect. If not then an outside provider such as ourselves may just be able to help

If anybody has any questions then I would be happy to answer them in the comments. Likewise, please feel free to share your experiences with Google News.

What I’m listening to right now: Gorillaz Pirate Playlist

Post from Kieron’s Blog

Getting your site featured in Google News - with case studies

Original post by Kieron

I read with interest today about the Macbook AirGate scandal on TechCrunch. Basically it tells a story of how one of their interns, a young guy named Daniel Brusilovsky had allegedly asked for a Macbook Air in return for writing a post about a startup. TechCrunch got wind of this, the intern admitted it and now all posts from the intern have been removed.

Now, as soon as I read this, I thought I may know what post they are referring to. I clearly remember in November last year reading a post on TechCrunch about new tech site TechnoBuffalo. The TechCrunch review stood out to me because (forgive me TechnoBuffalo) TechnoBuffalo is nothing new, exciting or imaginative. It’s a tech blog and IMHO an average one at best, certain not newsworthy in any shape, way or form. There are thousands of tech blogs just like it and as far as I know, none have ever graced the pages of TechCrunch. So for those reasons I remember thinking at the time that someone was definitely calling in a favour somewhere as it just stood out a million miles as a post that should never have appeared on TechCrunch. I also remember that lots of TechCrunch readers left similar comments on the blog post itself. It seemed that nobody could understand why the post ever appeared in the first place.

Then today I read about Daniel at TechCrunch and “MacBook AirGate” and the first thing I think of is that TechnoBuffalo post. I wonder…

A quick search of TechCrunch finds that the original TechnoBuffalo post has disappeared. TechCrunch said that they had removed all posts by the intern so its possible that this is one of his. Luckily the Google cache of the original post is still up (gotta love Google). As you will see, the post is written by the intern in question, Daniel Brusilovsky.

Now I’m not saying that Techno Buffalo were the ones who gave Daniel a Macbook Air in return for a review. I have no evidence of this and I’m certainly not making any allegations. I’m simply saying that if you looked at the above evidence you could be forgiven for thinking that was the case.

The problem I have, is not with Techno Buffalo or with Daniel but with TechCrunch. If I, and others (judging by the original comments now sadly deleted, that were made on the post) then why couldn’t the TechCrunch editors? Surely TechCrunch has better editorial control in place than that? Especially for junior members of the team and interns. This whole thing wouldn’t bother me as much is it wasn’t for the fact that TechCrunch position themselves as being impartial and even go so far as accusing others of less than impartial reviews when receiving free products.

At least my bribe posts are clearly labelled

What I’m listening to right now: Usher — Little Freak (Feat. Nicki Minaj)

Post from Kieron’s Blog

TechCrunch “Macbook AirGate”

Original post by Kieron

I read with interest today about the Macbook AirGate scandal on TechCrunch. Basically it tells a story of how one of their interns, a young guy named Daniel Brusilovsky had allegedly asked for a Macbook Air in return for writing a post about a startup. TechCrunch got wind of this, the intern admitted it and now all posts from the intern have been removed.

Now, as soon as I read this, I thought I may know what post they are referring to. I clearly remember in November last year reading a post on TechCrunch about new tech site TechnoBuffalo. The TechCrunch review stood out to me because (forgive me TechnoBuffalo) TechnoBuffalo is nothing new, exciting or imaginative. It’s a tech blog and IMHO an average one at best, certain not newsworthy in any shape, way or form. There are thousands of tech blogs just like it and as far as I know, none have ever graced the pages of TechCrunch. So for those reasons I remember thinking at the time that someone was definitely calling in a favour somewhere as it just stood out a million miles as a post that should never have appeared on TechCrunch. I also remember that lots of TechCrunch readers left similar comments on the blog post itself. It seemed that nobody could understand why the post ever appeared in the first place.

Then today I read about Daniel at TechCrunch and “MacBook AirGate” and the first thing I think of is that TechnoBuffalo post. I wonder…

A quick search of TechCrunch finds that the original TechnoBuffalo post has disappeared. TechCrunch said that they had removed all posts by the intern so its possible that this is one of his. Luckily the Google cache of the original post is still up (gotta love Google). As you will see, the post is written by the intern in question, Daniel Brusilovsky.

Now I’m not saying that Techno Buffalo were the ones who gave Daniel a Macbook Air in return for a review. I have no evidence of this and I’m certainly not making any allegations. I’m simply saying that if you looked at the above evidence you could be forgiven for thinking that was the case.

The problem I have, is not with Techno Buffalo or with Daniel but with TechCrunch. If I, and others (judging by the original comments now sadly deleted, that were made on the post) then why couldn’t the TechCrunch editors? Surely TechCrunch has better editorial control in place than that? Especially for junior members of the team and interns. This whole thing wouldn’t bother me as much is it wasn’t for the fact that TechCrunch position themselves as being impartial and even go so far as accusing others of less than impartial reviews when receiving free products.

At least my bribe posts are clearly labelled

UPDATE: John Rettinger from TechnoBuffalo has responded to this post in the comments below, hopefully there is more to come on this story.

What I’m listening to right now: Usher — Little Freak (Feat. Nicki Minaj)

Post from Kieron’s Blog

TechCrunch “Macbook AirGate”

Original post by Kieron

Disclaimer: As I’ve said on this blog loads of times, I love Spotify, I think it’s the bees knees and the best music app ever. I think Daniel Ek is one of the most creative entrepreneurs we have ever seen and I have tons and tons of respect for the whole Spotify team. They are doing a bloody fantastic job in changing the way we all listen to music. And yes, I run a Spotify community site called ShareMyPlaylists.com - for exactly all the reasons mentioned above. I am unashamedly a Spotify fanboy.

I thought long and hard about whether I should write this post or not. On the one hand, this isn’t my fight, I don’t work for Spotify and I should just let this article wash over me and put it down to Sarah Lacy having a quiet day with little else to write about. But then again I’m not one to keep my thoughts to myself so felt compelled to put pen to paper, or fingers to keyboard if you will.

The article I’m referring to is this article from Sarah Lacy at TechCrunch that has annoyed me. At best it’s an opinion piece that doesn’t really have any place on TechCrunch, at worse it’s an unprovoked and unnecessary attack on a startup. It starts with Sarah saying possibly the only sensible thing in the whole article “no one likes a blogger who says “I told you so.””. With that Sarah, I agree 100%.

From there Sarah basically tries to say “I told you so” because, and this is the best part, as far as she can guess, according to third parties not involved in Spotify and other rumours, Spotify isn’t profitable yet. Sigh. Really? Is this a story worthy of TechCrunch? Sadly, these days yes it is.

Bizarrely, the basis of the whole “Spotify isn’t profitable yet” slant to the story seems to be this article where Rob Wells, the senior vice-president Digital for Universal Music Group International said that Spotify has a very sustainable financial model. I’m not sure how Sarah managed to interpret this in a negative manner but because Rob Wells (who does NOT work for Spotify btw) claimed that Spotify needed 10% to 12% of it’s users to be paying Premium subscribers in order to hit profitability and in the UK it’s “lagging behind” then it’s hashtag FAIL in Sarah’s eyes.

Sarah then goes on to call Spotify out because they haven’t launched in the US yet despite saying they “definitely” would by early 2010. It’s only January. Sarah makes sweeping statements that “Americans don’t like to pay for things online” citing Netflix as “only” having 10 million paying customers.

What really annoys me, apart from all the guesswork is the general negativity of the article. On the one hand Sarah says seems to offer praise:

“Look, I love the service, I love that the founders believe in it enough to invest their own money and I love that the company is ballsy enough to think it can succeed where hundreds of music startups have failed”

She then takes it away by saying that Spotify would be “better in someone else’s hands” (linking to this article about Mark Zuckerberg’s love of Spotify) and that a bidding war would be good for Spotify. How very rude. I would argue that Daniel Ek and the Spotify team have made more advances in dragging the music industry into the 21st century than anybody else. Anybody. Yet Sarah thinks that Spotify should be sold off? Now I know that we need tech correspondents like Sarah to report on our industry and to maintain some sort of checks and balances but a little part of me thinks “What the hell gives Sarah the right to put Spotify down like this? Has she ran a startup and come up against the same challenges that Spotify has?” No. Anyone can sit at a desk somewhere and write inaccurate rubbish passing it off as journalism, it’s far easier to write about startups that actually run one I guess.

What baffles me is that TechCrunch can publish this nice fluffly story praising Pandora about reaching 40 million users but give no mention of revenue and profitability. What gives TechCrunch? You’re happy to speculate on Spotify’s revenues and it hasn’t even launched in the USA, yet no mention of Pandora’s bottom line in your fluff piece?

One part of the article that did make me raise a smile was Daniel Ek’s reasoning as to why he doesn’t give Sarah an interview, he “doesn’t like (my) tone.” Good on him for having principles and not being scared to air them.

I’m counting down the days to when Spotify is bigger than iTunes, totally changes the digital music landscape forever, is responsible for “plays” to be recorded and counted in official music charts worldwide and is eventually sold off for many billions of dollars. It will by my turn then to say I told you so.

What I’m listening to right now: Balearic Beats

Post from Kieron’s Blog

No need for the negativity

Original post by Kieron

Any readers of this blog or anybody who saw me speak at the A4U Expo this year will know that I’m a big fan of Twitter and use it for lots and lots of things, mainly as a marketing channel in it’s own right. When I was asked at one session to recommend a future niche with little competition and plenty of opportunity I said that Twitter community sites/apps had huge potential. Well, here’s an example of what I mean. Twitter Lists.

For anyone who doesn’t know, Twitter Lists are gradually being rolled out to all Twitter users as we speak - currently about 50% of all Twitter users can see the Lists feature, eventually everybody will after the full roll out. Anyway, Twitter Lists are really simple (like all good ideas), it’s a feature that enables you to keep track of people’s Twitter feeds by splitting out the people you follow into…you guessed it…lists. So lets say you want to keep track of everybody on Twitter involved in Affiliate Marketing then simply create a List called “Affiliate Marketing” or whatever, and add some nice affiliate people into that list. Simple. For some more in-depth explanations click here and here.

For example, when you have the List function enabled this is what you will see:

What this basically means is that 7 people have put me into their Lists. So if we click on the number 7 then it shows you just who and what the lists are called:

From this page you can follow other people’s lists and generally keep tabs on what lists you feature in. As you can imagine this is very interesting. BTW @Cmoz has me in her “onehb” list which I obviously thought meant “one hot boy” but disappointingly the name comes from a lecture at TED, 5000 days of the Web by Kevin Kelly, its 1 Human Brain, meaning the Internet is and ultimate thinking machine. This is where CMoz puts all her brainy, innovators & “smarties”. Clearly I don’t fit in that group but I won’t tell her.

Anyway, the point of my post is that while Twitter Lists is cool I think there is a potential for a community site to be built around it. In the same way that Spotify is a fantastic music app it’s not designed to help you discover new music and playlists, hence I built ShareMyPlaylists.com. The same thing applies here, Twitter Lists can be fantastic resources but the only way you can discover them at the moment is if you are featured in one. So instead of building ShareMyTwitterLists.com (available to register right now btw) I’m writing this blog post to see if anybody else wants a go at it.

Why do I think Twitter Lists will be big? Here’s why…a few Tweets I’ve noticed today:

What does everybody else think? Are we all going to be measured by how many Twitter Lists we are errm listed on?

UPDATE: Literally 20 seconds after I published this post someone tweeted me to show me Listorious.com. Just goes to show how fast things move. Anyway, it looks good, can anybody better it?

What I’m listening to right now: “Kieron’s Electro Vol. 1“

Post from Kieron’s Blog

Twitter Lists - big opportunity - ShareMyTwitterLists.com anyone?

Original post by Kieron

Want a free book? A real book made from real paper and not a crapola ebook? Then click here, avoid the dodgy sales letter type page and sign up for your free business book. You have to pay £2.97 postage but that’s it. Or you can go to Amazon and pay £8.97 for it plus postage. There are currently only 270 free books left so be quick.

What I’m listening to right now: Lenny Kravitz - Playlist

Post from Kieron’s Blog

Free book, a real book and not a pretend ebook

Original post by Kieron

I thought it would be fun to make some predictions of what I think is going to happen in Internetland this year. I’ve tried to stay away from obvious stuff like “more businesses will close because we’re in a recession” and have put my neck out on the line with some more specific stuff. Let’s see what happens.

1. Despite my advice we will see loads more affiliate discount codes and cashback sites in 2009. Disappointing.

2. Affiliates in particular will be best placed to make money from iPhone/iPod apps. We haven’t seen any big success stories here in the UK yet but over in the USA Joel is making $30,000 a day wih his iFart app. Come on guys we can do better than that can’t we?

3. Yahoo’s struggles will continue (their net income fell by two thirds between 2005 and 2007)  and they will eventually be mopped up and purchased by someone. Although I have to say I really can’t see any value in them as Yahoo! Answers and Flickr are their only decent properties.

4. Likewise Affiliate Window will finally be sold this year.

5. Professional SEO services will continue to be a high growth market as the economy continues it’s downturn and many advertisers decide not to pay the silly CPC’s in certain PPC sectors. Instead they will divert more funds into organic search and longer term strategies. A good year to be in SEO I think.

6. Google will buy Twitter. In 2009 Twitter will really come into it’s own. It’s growth in 2008 has been dramatic but I think this year we will see it become mainstream and must be the next high profile buyout that Google needs to diversify it’s revenue streams. Twitter already rejected a $500 millon offer from FaceBook last year but I’m sure Google could double that offer. BTW you can follow me on Twitter here.

7. Google Chrome will grab 10% market share by yearend, currently it has around 1%.

8. 2009 will be the year of the super-blog. Last year we saw Bankaholic sell for $15m and this is just the beginning. With super blogs like Perez Hilton already charging $54,000 for a banner placement for a week we can expect 2009 to be the year that “new media” overtakes “traditional media” in terms of advertising revenue. I’ve always said WordPress is a killer app and all you ever need to create a blog/site.

9. At least one major daily newspaper will close it’s doors. Increasing costs and an even bigger shift of advertisers budgets from “traditional” to “new media” (see 8 ) will be the cause.

10. ContentNow will launch a very exciting new content service in late January/early February

Does anybody have any more? Please let me know via comments

What I’m listening to right now: Chris Brown – “Take You Down”

a

10 predictions for 2009

Original post by Kieron

I thought it would be fun to make some predictions of what I think is going to happen in Internetland this year. I’ve tried to stay away from obvious stuff like “more businesses will close because we’re in a recession” and have put my neck out on the line with some more specific stuff. Let’s see what happens.

1. Despite my advice we will see loads more affiliate discount codes and cashback sites in 2009. Disappointing.

2. Affiliates in particular will be best placed to make money from iPhone/iPod apps. We haven’t seen any big success stories here in the UK yet but over in the USA Joel is making $30,000 a day wih his iFart app. Come on guys we can do better than that can’t we?

3. Yahoo’s struggles will continue (their net income fell by two thirds between 2005 and 2007)  and they will eventually be mopped up and purchased by someone. Although I have to say I really can’t see any value in them as Yahoo! Answers and Flickr are their only decent properties.

4. Likewise Affiliate Window will finally be sold this year.

5. Professional SEO services will continue to be a high growth market as the economy continues it’s downturn and many advertisers decide not to pay the silly CPC’s in certain PPC sectors. Instead they will divert more funds into organic search and longer term strategies. A good year to be in SEO I think.

6. Google will buy Twitter. In 2009 Twitter will really come into it’s own. It’s growth in 2008 has been dramatic but I think this year we will see it become mainstream and must be the next high profile buyout that Google needs to diversify it’s revenue streams. Twitter already rejected a $500 millon offer from FaceBook last year but I’m sure Google could double that offer. BTW you can follow me on Twitter here.

7. Google Chrome will grab 10% market share by yearend, currently it has around 1%.

8. 2009 will be the year of the super-blog. Last year we saw Bankaholic sell for $15m and this is just the beginning. With super blogs like Perez Hilton already charging $54,000 for a banner placement for a week we can expect 2009 to be the year that “new media” overtakes “traditional media” in terms of advertising revenue. I’ve always said WordPress is a killer app and all you ever need to create a blog/site.

9. At least one major daily newspaper will close it’s doors. Increasing costs and an even bigger shift of advertisers budgets from “traditional” to “new media” (see 8 ) will be the cause.

10. ContentNow will launch a very exciting new content service in late January/early February

Does anybody have any more? Please let me know via comments

What I’m listening to right now: Chris Brown – “Take You Down”

a

10 predictions for 2009

Original post by Kieron

I don’t watch ITV’s “I’m A Celebrity Get Me Out Here” but was channel hopping tonight and caught it for a bit and felt compelled to make some observations.

Dani Behr is gorgeous. Simply lush.

What is Martina Navratilova doing in there? She’s arguably the best female tennis player ever. Surely she doesn’t need the publicity?

Likewise why is George Takei in the jungle? The man is awesome, he was Mr. Sulu in Star Trek and also appeared in Heroes for heaven’s sake. Legend!

David Van Day is the most irritating annoying obnoxious little man ever.

Ant and Dec are still the best TV presenters in the UK.

Who is Brian Paddick? Nicola McLean? Joe Swash? Carly Zucker?

Simon Webbe seems a good guy, just needs to work on his music a bit is all.

I feel kind of sad for Esther Rantzen. She just doesn’t seem to want to be there and kind of sad.

Timmy Mallett is no Biggins.

What I’m listening to right now: Prince - “Funk”

Post from: Affiliate Marketing Blog Here.org.uk

I’m A Celebrity…Ramblings

Share This

Original post by Kieron

I don’t watch ITV’s “I’m A Celebrity Get Me Out Here” but was channel hopping tonight and caught it for a bit and felt compelled to make some observations.

Dani Behr is gorgeous. Simply lush.

What is Martina Navratilova doing in there? She’s arguably the best female tennis player ever. Surely she doesn’t need the publicity?

Likewise why is George Takei in the jungle? The man is awesome, he was Mr. Sulu in Star Trek and also appeared in Heroes for heaven’s sake. Legend!

David Van Day is the most irritating annoying obnoxious little man ever.

Ant and Dec are still the best TV presenters in the UK.

Who is Brian Paddick? Nicola McLean? Joe Swash? Carly Zucker?

Simon Webbe seems a good guy, just needs to work on his music a bit is all.

I feel kind of sad for Esther Rantzen. She just doesn’t seem to want to be there and kind of sad.

Timmy Mallett is no Biggins.

What I’m listening to right now: Prince - “Funk”

Post from: Affiliate Marketing Blog Here.org.uk

I’m A Celebrity…Ramblings

Share This

Original post by Kieron

Stuff is a great word isn’t it? I use it loads to describe all sorts of…well stuff.

In this case though it means a collection of news and tidbits that I’ve been reading/thinking about and pondering over the last few days…

I was very glad to see Jeremy Clarkson and co. on this week’s Top Gear agree with my blog post in March on how boring people have become when picking colours for their new cars. Come on people, there are more colours other than silver or black. Maybe I should start a campaign to bring a bit of colour to our cars?

Over 230 people voted in my Revels poll and I’m delighted that coffee won!! Come on Mars, bring it back ASAP!

Fancy a night out in Newcastle next month? Sign up to the Buy.at Christmas Cracker here, it’s free!

Hi to my new blog sponsors CPays. For bingo/poker/casino affiliate programmes they rock!

I love this post from Scott at Self Made Minds. There are some silly people out there!

Mike is looking for help from merchants who may have products that fit in with his site Isawitonthebox.com. Get in touch with him if you want some exposure for your stuff!

What I’ml istening to right now: Young Nate Ft Tinie Tempah - “Mixed Messages Remix”

Post from: Affiliate Marketing Blog Here.org.uk

Stuff

Share This

Original post by Kieron

First the Jonathan and Russell fiasco, now further evidence that the world has gone stark raving bonkers.

After eating healthy for a few days now I decided I deserved a treat in the form of a little bit of chocolate to ease my craving. So I headed to the shop, picked up a bag of my favourite chocolates - Revels, and proceeded to wolf them down like they were the last sweeties on earth. A couple of mouthfuls later I noticed an odd, unexpected taste that I couldn’t quite identify. It was pretty unpleasant, so I looked a bit closer at the packet to see if they were out of date. I wish they had been, as to my horror I noticed the “new sweets” flash on the packet (see pic above) along with a note that coffee had been “evicted” - due to some stupid marketing promotion - and was now replaced by a mystery flavour. So I bit the remaining Revels in half until I saw the culprit, a red Revel! Strawberry! Yuk!!!

Now I like strawberry creams when you get them in boxes of Cadbury Roses etc, but the strawberry Revels are plain disgusting, horrid, rank, rancid and minging - all combined.

I’m gutted. Revels are my favourite sweets ever, I even put up with the horrible toffee ones because the others are so lush. But alas I can not buy any more Revels as the strawberry ones are just disgusting beyond words. I’m very sad.

On the plus side, the rumour is that coffee will make a (very) welcome return in the near future. Not soon enough, in my opinion. I’m going to have to switch to Munchies until that time.

The question is, which do you prefer? Coffee or strawberry. Please vote below and tell everyone you know too! I can’t be the only fan of coffee Revels out there can I?

Note: There is a poll embedded within this post, please visit the site to participate in this post’s poll.

What I’m listening to right now: De La Soul - “3 Feet High and Rising” - best hip-hop album in the world ever?

Post from: Affiliate Marketing Blog Here.org.uk

Strawberry Revels replace Coffee Revels - the world has gone mad. Vote for your favourite here

Share This

Original post by Kieron

I was going to blog about this yesterday but thought, no it’ll blow over soon, it must be a slow news day. How wrong I was. Today we have Gordon Brown and David Cameron appearing on TV and in the press giving their opinions on the whole debacle. Seriously, have our leaders got nothing better to do? Has nobody told them we’re *on the brink/in the middle (*delete where appropriate depending on what newspaper you read) of a recession?

I half expected the so called media “gurus” and “pundits” - mainly from the Guardian mind you - to grab their 15 minutes of fame and appear on the news to say that Jonathan and Russel were being bad lads and bleating on about them being a waste of our licence fees etc etc. But Gordon Brown?? Dear God.

I’ve read the transcript of the show and yes it could be perceived as distasteful and offensive but so is a lot of TV/radio. Have you ever seen Russell Brand live? He’s no angel. But then again neither is Jonathan Ross, he regularly tells his guests to f*** off on his Friday night TV show and gives them plenty of abuse. Do people complain? Sometimes yes, but not the Prime Minister!

Yes both comedians and the BBC should apologise to Andrew Sachs, and they have. And that should be the end of it. But no, our politicians are jumping in and adding their 2p worth. Why? Shouldn’t they be running the country, bailing out the banks and lowering fuel prices so I can afford to fill up my Range Rover? Do they really need to be involved with something so trivial? It was even reported tonight that 2 people have lodged complaints with the police. For goodness sake, do we really need to get them involved too? Heaven forbid they have to get up out of their “safety camera” vans to waste their time on this. Oh, wait…

What I’m listening to right now: Joe - “Joe Thomas, New Man”

Post from: Affiliate Marketing Blog Here.org.uk

Jonathan Ross & Russell Brand’s “offensive” call to Andrew Sachs - is it a slow news day?

Share This

Original post by Kieron

I was going to blog about this yesterday but thought, no it’ll blow over soon, it must be a slow news day. How wrong I was. Today we have Gordon Brown and David Cameron appearing on TV and in the press giving their opinions on the whole debacle. Seriously, have our leaders got nothing better to do? Has nobody told them we’re *on the brink/in the middle (*delete where appropriate depending on what newspaper you read) of a recession?

I half expected the so called media “gurus” and “pundits” - mainly from the Guardian mind you - to grab their 15 minutes of fame and appear on the news to say that Jonathan and Russel were being bad lads and bleating on about them being a waste of our licence fees etc etc. But Gordon Brown?? Dear God.

I’ve read the transcript of the show and yes it could be perceived as distasteful and offensive but so is a lot of TV/radio. Have you ever seen Russell Brand live? He’s no angel. But then again neither is Jonathan Ross, he regularly tells his guests to f*** off on his Friday night TV show and gives them plenty of abuse. Do people complain? Sometimes yes, but not the Prime Minister!

Yes both comedians and the BBC should apologise to Andrew Sachs, and they have. And that should be the end of it. But no, our politicians are jumping in and adding their 2p worth. Why? Shouldn’t they be running the country, bailing out the banks and lowering fuel prices so I can afford to fill up my Range Rover? Do they really need to be involved with something so trivial? It was even reported tonight that 2 people have lodged complaints with the police. For goodness sake, do we really need to get them involved too? Heaven forbid they have to get up out of their “safety camera” vans to waste their time on this. Oh, wait…

UPDATE: It’s now October 30th, 12 days after the TV broadcast. In the news the United Nations say that they are “deeply concerned” about the safety of tens of thousands of people in the eastern Democratic Republic of Congo; with the very real chance of a civil war imminent. But what does the 6pm news lead with today? Bloody Jonathan Ross and Russell Brand yet again. For goodness sake, Russell has quit, Jonathan has been suspended for 3 months and the controller of Radio 2 has resigned. Let’s move on shall we? BTW did you know that before the Mail on Sunday put this story on the front page there had only been 2 complaints made?

What I’m listening to right now: Joe - “Joe Thomas, New Man”

Post from: Affiliate Marketing Blog Here.org.uk

Jonathan Ross & Russell Brand’s “offensive” call to Andrew Sachs - is it a slow news day?

Share This

Original post by Kieron

Domain names can be a bit like babies, you may think your son/daughter is the most beautiful baby in the world, when others just see a hairless chimpanzee.You may think your nice semi generic domain is the best thing in the world and worth £500k easily. Others will offer you £10.

But really, I mean really what were people thinking when they register domain names with a hyphen after every single letter in them? Take b-u-s-i-n-e-s-s.com as a perfect example. Who is going to type that into a browser? Yes people may type business.com into a browser but not with all the hyphens. Will it be any good for SEO purposes? Or course not. So why oh why do I still see these domains for sale. I mean here and now in 2008 people actually still think there is a market for these stupid domains with hyphens in. Just last week I saw some for sale on a couple of forums.

And what about those domains with the “www” as part of the domain, i.e. wwwbusiness.com. Again, who is going to type in www.wwwbusiness.com anywhere? If it was 1998 again and I saw these domains for sale I would half forgive the registrants for trying to flog them on, as it’s still a relatively new emerging market. But here and now, 10 years later what’s the excuse for trying to sell them on? Does anybody know?

What I’m listening to right now: Robin Thicke - “Something Else”

Post from: Affiliate Marketing Blog Here.org.uk

Stupid domain names

Share This

Original post by Kieron