The creature Rumpelstiltskin guards his name. His name like many names in supernatural stories is a source of power. For instance it is ill-advised to utter the name of a demon. To say “Bael” is to summon the head of the infernal powers. I have discovered the hard way that the same works online. If you are going to write a negative review of a book on your blog, for instance, you will more likely than not receive an email from the author either trying to win you over or trying to defeat you.
Writers are inveterate Googlebators. I’m such a virulant Googlebator, myself, that I’ve set up Google alerts that constantly run. They will send me a notice as soon as my name appears in a new context on the Web. When someone writes something negative, positive, or otherwise about “Matt Briggs +writer” I am notified immediately and can choose like Beal if I will make my presence known.
Writers have often deliberated over their names. They might take up pen names to protect their identity or names to conceal their gender. Lewis Carroll is really Charles Lutwidge Dodgson. George Eliot is really Mary Ann Evans. It is less common I think these days to do this. I imagine that sometime soon writers will consider the unique string (the sequence of characters) to create a unique online handle. A Google alert for the writer Fred Smith would be useless among the hundreds of Smith’s busy posting blog entries and photos to Flickr. A writer named, Dog11&Tree, would at least have the knowledge that she is the only one with that name on the Web.
And conversely if you were a fan of Dog11&Tree, when you wanted to consult Google to find out more about Dog11&Tree your search would uncover information directly related to her. If you were a fan of Fred Smith author of Down For Whatever, you would have a much harder time sorting through entries for Fred Smith the founder of FedEx.
Fred Smith’s problem of getting lost among more prominent Fred Smith’s is an increasingly common one for authors. Fred Smith the author of Down For Whatever for whatever appears on the first page of Google returns, albeit in the last position, in 10th place. The award winning anthropologist and author Fred Smith, author of The Origin of Modern Humans, doesn’t appear until page 5 in Google, in 50th place. More than half of all readers click on the first entry.
Less than three percent of users select the last item (rank 10) on the page. At first it seems that there is nothing you could do — Google has built its empire on having the most accurate returns for any term you enter into a search engine. Likely most people entering Fred Smith into a search engine are actually looking for information about the founder of Fed Ex. Google’s pagerank algorithm looks at a number of factors in determining that a Web page is relevant to the term entered into the search box. The page determined the most relevant appears in the first position for returns and then so on until the pages Google has indexed are exhausted. There are 62 pages of returns for “Fred Smith” and yet nearly 60 percent of Web searchers are going to click the very first return.
Search Engine Optimization (or SEO) is a discipline has grown around strategies to get Web sites to rank higher in search engines. A cut and paste from Wikipedia defines SEO as the process of improving the visibility of a website or a web page in search engines via the “natural” or un-paid (“organic” or “algorithmic”) search results. While is beyond the scope of this post, there are some modest steps an author can take to make sure they are at least visible in search engines.
To make sure you are visible, you will need the following tools:
- Blog
A blog, unlike a static Web page, is generated by software that is continually updated to reflect changes in search engine rank algorithms and to incorporate the latest changes to features in the social Web. Far from being a buzzword, the social Web (or Web 2.0) incorporates some concepts and technologies that differentiate the Web of YouTube and FaceBook from the Web built on HTML 2.0. Frequently updated content pushes into the Web where it can be shared via social bookmarks such as DIG or StumbleUpon. I would recommend using WordPress which produces sites that are favored by the Google. - Links
Links related to your must that point back to your blog. Your blog performs the function of trying together all of the things going on the Web in relation to your name as an author. The number of links to your blog tell Google the authority of your blog in relation to your name as an author. The authority helps determine the relevancy of the page. It is then worth your time to update your name on various social media sites which reflect your role as an author so that you can link back to your page. Link to your site from the Directory of Poets and Writers, GoodReads, and so on. - SEO
Optimize key content in relation to your name. Google is constantly juggling how it ranks pages but find a current content optimization guideline to make sure your page will be ranked. Google uses a piece of software to analyze the web called GoogleBot. This bot visits your page and analyzes the text on the page. The guidelines for structuring the text on the page will reflect the current “best guesses” about how Google works. - Metrics
Use Google Web Master tools at: www.google.com/webmasters/tools. - Monitor (Googlebat)
Finally, monitor your returns on Google to keep abreast of changes in your position. The Web is not static and instead constantly changing. One day another writer with your name could start publishing and easily knock you out of your Google ranking.
For more information see “10 SEO Techniques All Top Web Sites Should Use.”

Damn. Feeling better about my strange name suddenly.
Hi Matt,
You wrote, “I would recommend using WordPress which produces sites that are favored by the Google.” More so than Blogger, which Google owns? Or did you mean compared to other platforms like LiveJournal and whatnot?
Cheers, Ax
Hi Amanda — I know! It would seem that Blogger would be a shoe in, but WordPress is better even for SEO targeted at Google. Furthermore, I am continually amazed by the depth of features offered in plug-ins to WordPress. WordPress has some of the best SEO plug ins and services, such as:
http://wordpress.org/extend/plugins/all-in-one-seo-pack/
If you are a writer serious about SEO, you must have a hosted Domain (supporting your targeted term, i.e., http://yourauthorname.com) and must be running your own version of the blogging software. Blogger and LiveJournal are hosted solutions. I’ve gone with both, and in terms of meeting the constant changes required by SEO, having the control over plug-ins, and templates for the site, a non-hosted solution makes the most sense. My own blog (mattbriggs.wordpress.com) is a hosted blog, and there are many things I’d like to do that I can’t do to support SEO, much less improve the look/feel of the site. (So I will likely add a non-hosted site soon, and keep the my current site so I don’t look the Google juice.)
I’ve noticed that LiveJournal seems to do pretty well when researching particular topics, but I don’t think LiveJournal supports plug-ins. LiveJournal also produces pretty ugly pages. Blogger can be made to look okay. It can rank, but if you are looking at building a publishing platform that is going make it a lot easier to get your content ranked well, you need to go with one that supports plug-ins.
Oh … the other thing about Blogger is that it was an acquisition by Google and actually does not produce very SEO friendly pages. Here is a an explanation that is pretty interesting (despite using “whilst” in its copy. http://andybeard.eu/1832/blogger-blogspot-blogs-seo.html
Here is an article I wrote for the IHT in 2006 that talks about this subject (about 2/3 of the way down), written under a pseudonym (if you read to the end, you’ll see why).
Google this!
by Sally Steinbraker
Who’s Googling who? Answer: everybody, and everybody. These days, it seems, the Googly eye sees all.
For example, I’m room-hunting in Berlin, where I live. I’m doing it through a website where the initial contact takes place by e-mail, and you are encouraged to write a few lines about yourself. I always say I’m an “American writer,” just because those two attributes seem to cover the most territory in the fewest words.
When I went to see my first room, which was dark and cramped, the woman offering the room ushered me to sit down at the kitchen table and began, “So you’re a writer—I Googled you! Your work sounds really interesting!”
I was startled, but it made sense: when she read my e-mail, she was already sitting at the computer, so it was the easiest thing in the world to wander over to the Google search tool and have a looky-loo to see if I was a real (i.e., published; i.e., show up on Google) writer. And to see what kinds of things I write (S&M reportages? A good thing to know about a potential roommate). I didn’t take the room.
The next room I went to see was being offered by a fellow writer, also a woman. I looked at the room, and then sat down with her in the sitting area, which was dominated by a huge punching bag. After a few pleasantries, she began: “So you’re a writer!”
I knew what was coming. Yes, she’d Googled me. But this time, I’d Googled her, too. When no hits came up, I assumed she used a nom de plume, but in the course of our conversation, she told me she hadn’t really published anything yet. (And therefore is not a “real” writer—according to the Google scale of reality. In fact, there’s some question whether she “really” exists. I saw her with my own two eyes, but the Googly eye didn’t see her.)
I didn’t take that room, either; I think it was the punching bag.
I guess this is what they mean by the global village. My anonymity is gone, and I’m not even a well-known writer. I’ve written two books of poetry, and anyone who knows my name can now know that about me, in addition to knowing that I grew up partly in an exotic foreign country and that I received a nasty review on a blog recently. I don’t necessarily want to keep any of that secret, but what bothers me is that I couldn’t keep it secret if I tried.
Google is a kind of Ur-busybody, the village gossip par excellence. With the advantage of total anonymity for the Googler—there’s no need to sneak around. The Googly eye is trained on everyone but the Googler herself.
All the Googler needs is a name, and she’s off. It’s worse if your name is unusual, as mine is. The difference in Googleability between a person with the name “Mary Smith” and a person with my name makes me wonder whether Googleability might one day actually affect how parents name their children. If Mary Smith had been named, instead, Upanishad Smith, she’d be more Googleable. Of course, that’s not to guarantee she’d do anything Googleworthy. But what will future conscientious parents decide? Will Googleability or anonymity be the greater gift?
I really started to feel Googleicious when I saw a therapist recently during a painful breakup. The therapist seemed discreet, but of course she knew my full name, and I felt almost certain she’d Googled me. And if she hadn’t before our session, how could she resist afterward? I told her all about my problems with my ex-boyfriend—that’s what you do in therapy—and without thinking, I mentioned his nationality and other personal details.
As I walked home, I remembered that there happens to be an interview between me and this ex-boyfriend up on a website, so within thirty seconds of my leaving the office, if she’s a Googler (and who among us isn’t these days?), she can know his name, what he looks like, what books he’s written, etc. And next time there’ll be three of us in the room.
What to do? It’s too late to adopt a nom de plume. And a pseudonym for my therapeutic and room-hunting life, while tempting, would be too complicated, legally, to pull off.
I have done one thing, however. I haven’t used my real name as the byline for this story. However much you might want to, you can’t Google me.
I know … that phrase is always causes a mix of emotions: “I Googled you.” Thanks for sharing your article, Donna.