Her next move should be to read today's evening standard
If the siege mentality has escalated to them refusing to speak to the media, I imagine all newspapers have been barred from The Valley and a North Korean-style blocking of websites is underway.
Like the slug she is, she is hiding in her shell. She is probably hoping results will pick up and she can ride it out. Not the great example of leadership you would expect from a decent CEO, but we all know she isn’t a decent CEO.
If, as seems the case, RD is not going sell then I think he will jettison KM. She has gone from being an asset (good media coverage, woman in football etc) to a liability. He is ruthless (all such businessmen are) and he will waste no time in removing her if it buys him more time and pours cold water on the protests. Same with Fraeye.
If you Google her name you can see that the negative publicity is starting to have an impact.
The first few returns are her moaning about the "abuse" she's had to face, but the really damming article for her personally, the one written by Medium, is on the first page.
I have no doubt that for someone as ambitious as Katrien, having your "Googleability" damaged will be pretty horrific so getting the articles which tell the truth (like the Medium article) up the rankings should be a priority for us. I know some very basic SEO tips but is there anyone in the game who might have an idea of a strategy ?
Like the slug she is, she is hiding in her shell. She is probably hoping results will pick up and she can ride it out. Not the great example of leadership you would expect from a decent CEO, but we all know she isn’t a decent CEO.
If you Google her name you can see that the negative publicity is starting to have an impact.
The first few returns are her moaning about the "abuse" she's had to face, but the really damming article for her personally, the one written by Medium, is on the first page.
I have no doubt that for someone as ambitious as Katrien, having your "Googleability" damaged will be pretty horrific so getting the articles which tell the truth (like the Medium article) up the rankings should be a priority for us. I know some very basic SEO tips but is there anyone in the game who might have an idea of a strategy ?
Contact the Aussie bloke who won the Apprentice last year. SEO is his business. Good publicity for him. He's also a football fan.
If you Google her name you can see that the negative publicity is starting to have an impact.
The first few returns are her moaning about the "abuse" she's had to face, but the really damming article for her personally, the one written by Medium, is on the first page.
I have no doubt that for someone as ambitious as Katrien, having your "Googleability" damaged will be pretty horrific so getting the articles which tell the truth (like the Medium article) up the rankings should be a priority for us. I know some very basic SEO tips but is there anyone in the game who might have an idea of a strategy ?
Contact the Aussie bloke who won the Apprentice last year. SEO is his business. Good publicity for him. He's also a football fan.
I'd rather call the Irish doctor that won it a couple of years ago !
Her next move should be to read today's evening standard
If the siege mentality has escalated to them refusing to speak to the media, I imagine all newspapers have been barred from The Valley and a North Korean-style blocking of websites is underway.
Banning press is always a stupid move. They'd be silly to do that.
If you Google her name you can see that the negative publicity is starting to have an impact.
The first few returns are her moaning about the "abuse" she's had to face, but the really damming article for her personally, the one written by Medium, is on the first page.
I have no doubt that for someone as ambitious as Katrien, having your "Googleability" damaged will be pretty horrific so getting the articles which tell the truth (like the Medium article) up the rankings should be a priority for us. I know some very basic SEO tips but is there anyone in the game who might have an idea of a strategy ?
Contact the Aussie bloke who won the Apprentice last year. SEO is his business. Good publicity for him. He's also a football fan.
Google crawls the web to find how many times that page is linked to. So, Basically, the more times we post that link, and the more websites we post it on, the higher it ranks. Especially if those websites are high quality (and relevant, e.g. sport and football).
That's the best we can do from our end. I'd imagine medium already has a pretty good SEO profile and the fact it's ranking on page one already is pretty good. Though your search results might be being skewed by your own web history.
I think it also helps when other people link to it if the link is clearly identified as being related to the search term, like this one about Katrien Meire
Guessing this was what you meant, Google probably delivers different result for each individual. Was on page 2 for me.
I think it also helps when other people link to it if the link is clearly identified as being related to the search term, like this one about Katrien Meire
Guessing this was what you meant, Google probably delivers different result for each individual. Was on page 2 for me.
Yep - but if there's anyone in that game (apart from BBC TV series winners) who could help us come up with a comprehensive strategy that would give us a new front.
Her next move should be to read today's evening standard
If the siege mentality has escalated to them refusing to speak to the media, I imagine all newspapers have been barred from The Valley and a North Korean-style blocking of websites is underway.
Banning press is always a stupid move. They'd be silly to do that.
Her next move should be to read today's evening standard
If the siege mentality has escalated to them refusing to speak to the media, I imagine all newspapers have been barred from The Valley and a North Korean-style blocking of websites is underway.
Banning press is always a stupid move. They'd be silly to do that.
I was more thinking of them banning any newspapers inside the ground in case the evil message got spread. And there is so little national coverage of Charlton's matches anyway that banning reporters would hardly raise a ripple
If you Google her name you can see that the negative publicity is starting to have an impact.
The first few returns are her moaning about the "abuse" she's had to face, but the really damming article for her personally, the one written by Medium, is on the first page.
I have no doubt that for someone as ambitious as Katrien, having your "Googleability" damaged will be pretty horrific so getting the articles which tell the truth (like the Medium article) up the rankings should be a priority for us. I know some very basic SEO tips but is there anyone in the game who might have an idea of a strategy ?
Well, one of the guitar forums that I belong to found and outed a guy who was a serial scammer. The guy had his own architectural photography company too, but over a number of years he scammed countless people out of thousands and thousands of pounds by selling on forums but never delivering the items after receiving payment. The forum guys got their heads together and came up with a thread where they discussed the person in question but in every post talked about him as Award winning architectural photographer and well known scam artist. The thread grew and grew and as a result, the thread climbed up the google rankings until it was top.
Eventually, when someone googled his name and added photographer, the first thing to hit on google was the forum page detailing all the stories from a large number of people that were scammed. This caused the guy so many problems because he lost a lot of money on potential new clients, lost current clients, his family found out he was a scammer and obviously the police also got involved. Clearly it didn't end well for him. I believe the thread was hidden by the mods once it had the desired affect. Of course this would need the backing of the folk that run this place, but it wouldn't be hard to do something similar, though obviously with less extreme wording. Perhaps Katrien Meire Charlton CEO, serial fibber and football fan hater.
If you Google her name you can see that the negative publicity is starting to have an impact.
The first few returns are her moaning about the "abuse" she's had to face, but the really damming article for her personally, the one written by Medium, is on the first page.
I have no doubt that for someone as ambitious as Katrien, having your "Googleability" damaged will be pretty horrific so getting the articles which tell the truth (like the Medium article) up the rankings should be a priority for us. I know some very basic SEO tips but is there anyone in the game who might have an idea of a strategy ?
Google-bombing something like "inept liar" would be amusing.
Other than that, pretty much continue on the same path - sharing and producing new content associated with her name and you don't have to do a single thing!
I think 'incompetent communicator and not executive material' would be better and slightly differentiate her for other exceedingly good execs who lie all the time but more successfully
So if I write Katrien Meire, out of her depth and not suitable to be an executive enough times, that helps?
I'm pretty certain that if you kept writing "Katrien Meire is out of her depth, and is certainly not suitable to be an executive" then there's a good chance of it becoming quite common on when you searched for "Katrien Meire".
I mean, there's nothing to lose by writing "Katrien Meire is out of her depth, and is certainly not suitable to be an executive" . Not that I'd condone needlessly writing "Katrien Meire is out of her depth, and is certainly not suitable to be an executive" for no reason..
So if I write Katrien Meire, out of her depth and not suitable to be an executive enough times, that helps?
Technically though, the statement "Katrien Meire is out of her depth, and is certainly not suitable to be an executive" isn't untrue, so perhaps people should know that "Katrien Meire is out of her depth, and is certainly not suitable to be an executive" .
... On a serious note, not that the above isn't incredibly/depressingly serious, it's quite interesting.
The usual tactic is to link to something, i.e CAFC, with a given set of words, i.e "useless owners". (i.e Useless owners) On it's own it will do very little.
The magic happens when you do it numerous times and/or on a couple of popular sites. Google begins to recognise the association, and then associates the words used as the actual link. This is why a lot of spam on the internet has really specific wording for the links.
Unpopular words are going to be quickest to take effect, but here less of an audience. A good example was "litigious bastards" which was used against a tech company who were.. well.. litigious bastards. People did it via forum signatures, their own blogs and it spread really well - and it spread via numbers.
The games console/potato one in the screenshot above pretty much relied upon the popularity of the website, combined with it being recognised as news peculiarly - thus google would recognise there was an image for the "article" and used that as the news image.
So if I write Katrien Meire, out of her depth and not suitable to be an executive enough times, that helps?
Technically though, the statement "Katrien Meire is out of her depth, and is certainly not suitable to be an executive" isn't untrue, so perhaps people should know that "Katrien Meire is out of her depth, and is certainly not suitable to be an executive" .
... On a serious note, not that the above isn't incredibly/depressingly serious, it's quite interesting.
The usual tactic is to link to something, say CAFC, with a given set of words - say "useless owners"; Useless owners. On it's own it does very little.
However, when you post it on multiple times - or even a few times on a popular site - Google starts to recognise the association, and associates the words used in the link with actual site.
Given unpopular words (for searching at least) it can be pretty quick to take effect, although with more common words there's obviously more competition. A good one was "litigious bastards" which was used against a tech company who were.. well.. litigious bastards; purely because of how many people began doing it. People did it via forum signatures, their own blogs and it spread really well - and it spread via numbers.
The games console/potato one in the screenshot above pretty much relied upon the popularity of the website, combined with it being recognised as news - thus google would recognise there was an image for the "article" and used that as the news image.
How can anyone say that Katrien Meire is out of her depth, and is certainly not suitable to be an executive?
Surely it's not the case that Katrien Meire is out of her depth, and is certainly not suitable to be an executive?
Constantly writing Katrien Meire is out of her depth, and is certainly not suitable to be an executive could be considered to be bullying. Please everyone stop writing Katrien Meire is out of her depth, and is certainly not suitable to be an executive.
So if I write Katrien Meire, out of her depth and not suitable to be an executive enough times, that helps?
I'm pretty certain that if you kept writing "Katrien Meire is out of her depth, and is certainly not suitable to be an executive" then there's a good chance of it becoming quite common on when you searched for "Katrien Meire".
I agree, it's terrible that anyone should post the fact that "Katrien Meire is out of her depth, and is certainly not suitable to be an executive" . And I too will not condone needlessly writing "Katrien Meire is out of her depth, and is certainly not suitable to be an executive" for any reason..
I mean, writing "Katrien Meire is out of her depth, and is certainly not suitable to be an executive" surely can't achieve anything?
So if I write Katrien Meire, out of her depth and not suitable to be an executive enough times, that helps?
I'm pretty certain that if you kept writing "Katrien Meire is out of her depth, and is certainly not suitable to be an executive" then there's a good chance of it becoming quite common on when you searched for "Katrien Meire".
I agree, it's terrible that anyone should post the fact that "Katrien Meire is out of her depth, and is certainly not suitable to be an executive" . And I too will not condone needlessly writing "Katrien Meire is out of her depth, and is certainly not suitable to be an executive" for any reason..
I mean, writing "Katrien Meire is out of her depth, and is certainly not suitable to be an executive" surely can't achieve anything?
I guess we will never know, because I for one will never partake in those shenanigans that involve needlessly writing "Katrien Meire is out of her depth, and is certainly not suitable to be an executive".
Comments
The first few returns are her moaning about the "abuse" she's had to face, but the really damming article for her personally, the one written by Medium, is on the first page.
I have no doubt that for someone as ambitious as Katrien, having your "Googleability" damaged will be pretty horrific so getting the articles which tell the truth (like the Medium article) up the rankings should be a priority for us. I know some very basic SEO tips but is there anyone in the game who might have an idea of a strategy ?
That's the best we can do from our end. I'd imagine medium already has a pretty good SEO profile and the fact it's ranking on page one already is pretty good. Though your search results might be being skewed by your own web history.
Guessing this was what you meant, Google probably delivers different result for each individual. Was on page 2 for me.
Eventually, when someone googled his name and added photographer, the first thing to hit on google was the forum page detailing all the stories from a large number of people that were scammed. This caused the guy so many problems because he lost a lot of money on potential new clients, lost current clients, his family found out he was a scammer and obviously the police also got involved. Clearly it didn't end well for him. I believe the thread was hidden by the mods once it had the desired affect. Of course this would need the backing of the folk that run this place, but it wouldn't be hard to do something similar, though obviously with less extreme wording. Perhaps Katrien Meire Charlton CEO, serial fibber and football fan hater.
Other than that, pretty much continue on the same path - sharing and producing new content associated with her name and you don't have to do a single thing!
I mean, there's nothing to lose by writing "Katrien Meire is out of her depth, and is certainly not suitable to be an executive" . Not that I'd condone needlessly writing "Katrien Meire is out of her depth, and is certainly not suitable to be an executive" for no reason..
... On a serious note, not that the above isn't incredibly/depressingly serious, it's quite interesting.
The usual tactic is to link to something, i.e CAFC, with a given set of words, i.e "useless owners". (i.e Useless owners) On it's own it will do very little.
The magic happens when you do it numerous times and/or on a couple of popular sites. Google begins to recognise the association, and then associates the words used as the actual link. This is why a lot of spam on the internet has really specific wording for the links.
Unpopular words are going to be quickest to take effect, but here less of an audience. A good example was "litigious bastards" which was used against a tech company who were.. well.. litigious bastards. People did it via forum signatures, their own blogs and it spread really well - and it spread via numbers.
The games console/potato one in the screenshot above pretty much relied upon the popularity of the website, combined with it being recognised as news peculiarly - thus google would recognise there was an image for the "article" and used that as the news image.
Surely it's not the case that Katrien Meire is out of her depth, and is certainly not suitable to be an executive?
Disgraceful