Political Campaign SEO

[Mark_Ginsberg]

Sounds very interesting and like a great opportunity for you.

What I don't get - why build a strategy for a site that you're going to eventually 301? Why not register the candidate's name, build up the content and the brand of the candidate over there, and then eventually just launch a site redesign/more formal look on the site once the candidacy is announced. Why the need to 301 to a new site? You don't want to lose some of your hard earned equity in 301s.

I also think in terms of social, be authentic, and let the candidate tweet about issues facing the community, etc. I think an authentic social media campaign will be more successful than a political censored one even before the candidate announces that they're running.

[Alex-Harford]

I don't see why you'd 301 either, if the site was something like the client's name.com why would you need to?

If past social activities had been censored, I'd wonder what a candidate had to hide. Part of the problem with many people in politics is that they don't seem to have a human side.

Here's a good article I read a couple of days ago, it could be right up your street!
http://www.stateofsearch.com/political-seo-can-it-be-done/

[BenGMKT]

If it were me, I would build a few blogs on the subdomain to start generating DA rather than doing a 301. You could have an opt-in or one page lander on the main site with coming soon or something like that. Then once your ready to go, make a design change rather than a 301. That way you have a lot of Authority at launch and hopefully some people interested in what you are all about.

I have never run a political campaign, but I would think that reputation management would be an easy up-sell as well. I would buy all of the xyzcrook.com, xyzisacrook.com, and getxyzoutofoffice.com stuff like and create a 301 to a seperate blog where you rank for those scam keywords but spin them to the positive.

Just a few thoughts I had.

[brianhughes]

Hello Robert,

I have some experience working with political candidates and what you definitely need to prepare for is online identity management. I would say that is going to be 75% of your efforts. I would start on that immediately after you make your decision and saturate the SERP's targeting the candidates name. I would suggest heavy video marketing and Press Release marketing as well to help with these efforts. Also take advantage of the grass roots folks to help with Social Media and Blog marketing. If you would like some more info you can contact me directly.

Brian

[RobertFisher]

Good points. First, my thought was that the first was to be with nothing political just Joe.com and that was it. Then JoeForSenate.com. I do agree you could do without the 301 though and simply redesign.

I was not talking about politically censored, but more about that with a person who is in their early 40's with tons of family and friends on their social is exposing a lot and that it is too easy today to turn a harmless comment from a friend into an incendiary. one of the things I like about this person is they are real.

[RobertFisher]

Alex,

Thanks for the great article.

Most of what the candidate has done socially is known and within normal limits. Not sure of any kangaroos or etc. in closet. Good kids, kind to animals, etc.

I will push to keep the candidate human as I like them and would hate for them to become a politician...

Thanks,

[RobertFisher]

One thing Brian that might clarify for all is that the candidate cannot announce prior to a certain date within the next 6 months. That was the reason for the somewhat understated site prior to the official launch.

As I go forward, I will PM you.

Thanks,

[brianhughes]

Robert, I definitely understand what you are saying and know that there can be no leaks. But in the mean time your team could work with the candidate on his online reputation management. By creating non campaign media and content and optimizing it for the targeted keywords which will be the candidates full name.

A great example of a candidate who failed at this preparation was GOP presidential candidate Rick Santorum. Danny Sullivan wrote about here. For four years leading up to his announcement to run, his campaign should have had a team working on his online reputation management problem. So that by the time he announced it, his name would have owned the first three pages of the SERP's. Instead, for most of his campaign the number 2 result on Google was a website defining Santorum as something disgusting that you wouldn't want your grandmother to find and negatively affecting his online presence. For most of the campaign there were two other negative sites that also showed up on the first page for his names SERP. If you ask me, I believe it could have been avoided.

I understand that your possible candidate probably isn't as high profile but that doesn't mean it won't get ugly during the race. I believe it would be better to own the SERP's now than have to try to play catch up. I hope that is helpful.

[brianhughes]

Yes, please PM me anytime.

[RobertFisher]

Great stuff, we will talk soon Brian. I am looking forward to it.

Best

[brianhughes]

Thanks Robert, me too!