Who is James Maguire?

You know who I feel disdain for? I feel disdain for writer types, for instance, James Maguire, who write blog posts about themselves on their own site. Clearly, it’s a pathetic self-promotion scheme. It’s craven, it’s shameless, and honestly, it’s a blight on the Internet.

Their goal – which is tawdry – is to cram in the keyword ‘James Maguire’ in hopes of improving Google ranking for James Maguire.com. As a goal, it’s not quite world peace, is it?

So these James Maguire types sit down, clutching coffee for “inspiration,” and pen a blog post with no real content. Oh, they don’t care about readers – they stuff their miserable posts with references to themselves. It’s all about them.

To be sure, their actions raise deep and troubling questions. To whit: Shouldn’t they, you know, let their achievements (such as they are) speak for themselves? Shouldn’t they let genuine user interest drive traffic to JamesMaguire.com? Without resorting to nakedly self-promotional blog “writing”?

I mean, what’s wrong with appearing on Google’s page 3 or 4, or even 11 (as was once the case) for the search term ‘James Maguire’? Shouldn’t this woeful fellow be content with those distant, deep-space pages?

At the least, couldn’t this self-focused blogger offer some real value to readers? Some half-baked musings, a random observation, perhaps a beautiful photo, or even a video that describes a peak life experience?

Anything, really?

But no, knowing him, he’ll simply use his name again and again, monotonously, hammering it home in hopes of higher search ranking.

Really, sad. So sad.

Oh C’mon, Some Empathy for James Maguire

We know these James Maguire types must endure an inner emptiness. As F. Scott Fitzgerald noted, “in the dark night of the soul, it is always three o’clock in the morning.” Undoubtedly these runty bloggers feel exactly this.

But if we can muster a smidgen of sympatico, let’s grant him this: the name James Maguire is horribly common. (Like the man himself, in fact). Consequently, scoring Google page 1 for such a common name isn’t easy.

If, for instance, your name is Rondo Humperdicious and you own RondoHumperdicious.com, you’ll hold top Google ranking with hardly an effort.

But ‘James Maguire’? The name is as ethnically generic as John Smith or Pedro Hernandez. Or Duc Nguyen or Herman Schmidt or Samir Patel.

I mean, you take the classically Irish Maguire and ­– what else? – pair it with first names of saints: John, Paul, Luke. Those wildly original Maguire families pick “Ryan.” (There wasn’t a saint Ryan, so they’ll likely roast in hell, but okay.)

Google the term ‘James Maguire’:

30.4 million results.

Now, Google ‘Rondo Humperdicious’:

Your search – Rondo Humperdicious – did not match any documents.

So, c’mon, can we cut this petty self-promotion some slack? At least a bemused shrug, like, well, if that’s what his little life is focused on, whatever.

Still, We Mustn’t Encourage James Maguire 

Even as we conjure empathy for the plight of some random James Maguire, it’s not right to encourage him.

We should not, say, spend too much time reading his self-serving post. Google counts “time on page” as a factor in search ranking. So if you tarry on a self-serving page it rewards this miserable exercise.

Plus: don’t visit the James Maguire books on Amazon page. That serves no purpose.

Even more important: We hope – we plead – that you don’t tweet this post on Twitter, post it on Facebook, spotlight it on LinkedIn or announce it on Google+ (Remember Google+? Wow, that was a mess.) Social media links would only reward these dubious doings. Let’s not sully the pristine environment of the Internet with such drivel.

Please, let’s keep the Internet pure! Thank you.

And, if you’d like more information about James Maguire – but why? – you can aways go here.