I won’t disagree with your list above. For me the issue ends up being that many SEOs would see themselves more as internet marketers and have since the beginning. Search engine optimization just happened to be the name that stuck, though it didn’t really do justice to what a certain group of people were doing.

You see a lot of confusion now about what is and isn’t SEO. The way you organized it makes sense, but know that not everyone is going to be bound by the definition.

If a company went out, bought a domain name, and branded that name they aren’t likely to run out and change it.

I think SEOs in general are an adaptive group who are more concerned with results than in making sure what they do fits into a definition.

Some of those things above that I listed may be only consider Internet Marketing to some, and not SE Marketing. But I don’t view it that way, I see it belonging to both (depending on what effects happen).

Doing all the above well will get you good rankings and SE referral traffic.

Also don’t know why some would only refer to SEM as Paid listings though, because that’s surely not the only case. I mean, that’s why it’s called “PPC” and not “just SEM”.

What I’m really saying is that SEO doesn’t have a good definition. The ‘optimizing yourself’ thing is how I look at it, but I wouldn’t say that’s the most common definition.

Search Engine Marketing usually includes Pay Per Click in addition to optimizing for organic rankings. SEO would be a subset of SEM in that sense, though sometimes I think people refer to SEM as only paid listings and leave SEO to the organic listings.

I definitely wasn’t around in the beginning either (just started on WT within the past year or two), but the way I’ve always looked it as a specific method, and SE Marketing was the “art” behind what you can do to promote your site.

If that is the case, then what is your definition of Search Engine Marketing, as opposed to what you view as SEO?

Both basketball and football are different from the original rules of the game.

With SEO the term was applied to what a group of people were already doing. I wasn’t around in the beginning, but I do think more general marketing was already part of what was going on.

I think it’s also the idea that an SEO is someone who works to improve the quality and quantity of search engine traffic. Early on, perhaps it was enough to tweak some things on page. As search algorithms changed to place more emphasis on links the same group of people who were called SEOs adapted and put more of their focus on acquiring links.

Again I wasn’t around at the beginning, but I don’t think SEO was ever defined the way you’re defining it. Your definition is more about assigning specific tactics to SEO and anything that falls outside of those specific tactics you’re calling something else.

I don’t believe the definition of SEO was ever focused on the specific tactics, but more on the goal. So as the algorithms evolved it necessitated a change in tactics, but it was still SEO.

I realize that SEO’s often do more for the site to get them to rank higher, get traffic, etc. but does that mean that they change the core definition of what SEO is?

Say hypothetically, the NBA began playing their sports games outdoors, they decided to change the shape of their ball and players could only move once the player holding the ball decides to move, the traveling penalty was eliminated, and the sport gets a lot more physical.

Anyways, for all intensive purposes here, the sports’ rules changed into football, and that’s what everyone is now playing. Would you still call them Basketball Players? Or call them for what they are (Football Players)? Because Basketball is still Basketball, no matter what the NBA (or maybe now the NFA) decides to do with it.

While I can see that some feel SEO isn’t all about building a SE-Friendly site, and there may be a little more to it (like keyword research), does SEO describe what the industry does? Or does the industry decide what SEO is?

I understand what you’re saying and it’s kind of my point. The problem is search engine optimization isn’t really an accurate description of what SEOs do. SEOs have been marketing since the beginning, but for whatever reason the word optimization is the one that stuck.

Fast forward to now and there are so many interpretations of what SEO is and isn’t or what it should and shouldn’t include and you find an industry that fights with itself even when it agrees and a very confused group of people outside the industry.

What you’re describing as search engine optimization most people in the industry would refer to as building a search engine friendly site, which would be seen as one component of search engine optimization, but not search engine optimization by itself.

See Search Friendly vs. Search Optimized

Take a car race for example (OK, maybe not the greatest analogy, but I just came up it). Racers want the fastest, most durable, and flexible car possible. So what they’ll do is hire a mechanic (SEO) to work on their car (website)and it’s engine parts, etc. But without oil and gas (SM and links), their car won’t go anywhere.

Everybody wants to cross the finish line and claim their trophy and prizes (Gain traffic and rankings). That’s the goal of getting to the finish line first (really high rankings), it’s not the mechanic’s job yo make sure your car crosses the finish line.

People want their site(s) “optimized” for the SE’s so they have as few limitations and conflictions with the SE’s as possible.

If clients want to rank and gain targeted traffic (which pretty much all do), then I’d say they should hire you as a search engine “marketer”, because that’s what you’re doing for them, marketing their site(s) to the SE’s.

Except, where’d you get the 95% from?