Editor Note: This “pro” post is part of a two-part series about the proposed Search Marketing Code of Ethics, as presented by SEMPO. To read the “anti” viewpoint from Kristine Schachinger and Alan Bleiweiss, please consult their respective pieces. This post is not sponsored by any organization or party and was facilitated by the SEJ Editorial Team.
It’s time for the search marketing industry to have a serious discussion about ethics. This discussion may be messy with disagreements and hurt feelings. However, if we as a unified group of industry bodies can decide on a unified code of ethics that is not only enforceable for those who choose to pledge adherence but also provides value to them, we will see our industry gain more credibility across the formal business marketing ecosystem.
Challenges in Creating a Code of Ethics
Defining the search marketing industry is complicated due to its diversity, including agencies, in-house departments, content marketers, link builders, paid search marketers, tool producers, and black-hat practitioners. To start the conversation, we define a search engine marketer as someone who self-identifies with the term. Participation in this discussion is in their best interest.
Too many unfocused voices create noise, so a structure is necessary to allow everyone to feel heard. This represents a challenge because many who need to be part of this conversation are not members of any local organization and might live in areas without eligible regional organizations. The inaugural Search Congress organizers are considering several “virtual” organizations or boards to enable these individuals to either run as a delegate or vote for a delegate who represents them.
Despite efforts to be inclusive, not everyone who wants to vote for delegates will be able to. However, the Search Congress is providing a form to allow anyone to submit ideas for the code of ethics. Every relevant idea submitted will be presented to the delegates before the Search Congress.
What’s Being Proposed?
In October 2014, SEMPO called for delegates to a “Search Congress” to draft a unified Code of Ethics. Delegates will be elected from various regional organizations in North America. These delegates will represent the industry in framing the inaugural code of ethics and may also decide whether a unified code is necessary.
SEMPO’s mission is to provide a foundation for industry growth through building stronger relationships, fostering awareness, providing education, promoting the industry, generating research, and creating a better understanding of search and its role in marketing. Creating and enforcing a code of ethics is beyond SEMPO’s direct mission. However, SEMPO can facilitate the conversation to create a realistic Code of Ethics.
Why Do We Need a Code of Ethics?
Since SEMPO’s formation in 2002, there has been talk about creating a Search Marketing Code of Ethics. Criticisms of SEMPO include the absence of such a code. Previously, the Board struggled with setting industry standards due to lack of support, particularly regarding “black hat SEO.” A Code of Ethics is a wise preliminary step toward setting future standards, providing value and trust for marketers.
Historically, a code of ethics was desirable but not essential. With increasing budgets, the need has evolved. The SEMPO State of Search survey in 2013 showed an increase in digital marketing budgets, with significant allocations for search engine marketing. However, changes in search algorithms and paid search have impacted returns, causing companies to fear hiring search engine marketers and subsequently lowering marketing budgets.
The drop in trust is evident. Companies are wary of search engine marketers due to past negative experiences, leading to a decrease in trust and budgets. A reliable service identifying ethical companies could prevent this mistrust and loss of business.
Some critics argue that Google’s guidelines suffice for ethical practice. However, it’s crucial for search engine marketers to regulate themselves and determine what’s right for their industry.
Concerns about a Code of Ethics fracturing the industry are unfounded. The industry’s perception outside insiders is minimal; thus, a unified, enforceable code could strengthen it and benefit both practitioners and consumers.
Others worry that a Code of Ethics could lead to lawsuits against search engine marketing vendors. Given the nature of service contracts, we believe this is unlikely. Moreover, failure to adhere to a stated code might lead to suits for Negligent Misrepresentation. Legal experts’ insights would be valuable in this discussion.
What the Code of Ethics Should NOT Be
The proposed Code of Ethics will likely not be a tactical best practices guideline. The Search Congress will decide the contents, amendments, enforcement, and future elections regarding the code. Establishing best practices in such a dynamic field is challenging; hence, the creation of a representative body and a Code of Ethics is the first step towards a unified viewpoint.
What Can You Do?
We encourage participation in the process. Regional search engine marketing group leaders can send delegates to the Search Congress. Interested individuals should engage with their regional group or join one if not already a member. You can also submit ideas for the Code of Ethics.
Volunteers are needed to make the Search Congress a reality, including those experienced in self-regulation, legal experts, and content creators. If interested in contributing, please reach out to us.
Thank you for your time and support in helping us evolve our industry towards trusted full inclusion with the “big” marketing channels.
This Post was a Collaborative Effort By:
Tony Wright,
SEMPO Vice President of Communication,
CEO/Founder, WrightIMC,
Twitter: @tonynwright
Chris Boggs,
SEMPO Global Board Member since 2006
Editor Note: This “pro” post is part of a two-part series about the proposed Search Marketing Code of Ethics, as presented by SEMPO. To read the “anti” viewpoint from Kristine Schachinger and Alan Bleiweiss, please consult their respective pieces. This post is not sponsored by any organization or party and was facilitated by the SEJ Editorial Team.
