7 Land Mines Under Google Red Carpet?

Publicity — By

Editors note: this is the second in a series of three articles about becoming a Google News Publisher via information products like Google Red Carpet.


Google Red Carpet is blowing up. But not always in the way its owners or promoters intended. That’s because there are hidden risks that could blow up in your face. (As proof of exactly that happening check out the comment made by “Idratherkeepmyidentityprivate” to my first article about Google News Publishing.

What could blow up in your face? Well, not being approved as a Google News Publisher. Or what if you are accepted, only to be delisted later and forced to go through acceptance/approval all over again? These are just some of the risks I’ve discovered once I fully examined Google Red Carpet’s pitch. (Disclosure: I don’t have the $497 program, but did evaluate the ebook that spawned it.)

If you missed “The Hook Vs. The Reality: Google News Publisher Pitch Exposed. [Part I], you can access it here. I’d appreciate you spreading the word. (An informed buyer is anyone’s best customer.)

That first article really just laid the foundation and overall value proposition. Some feedback I received proved this was exactly the right approach. Because lots of folks had never heard of becoming a Google News Publisher, E. Brian Rose or Google Red Carpet for that matter.

Now that everyone’s up to speed, here’s where things get very interesting. Because after examining the facts, I’m more convinced then ever that there is A LOT more here than meets the eye than the promoters of Google Red Carpet are telling you.

Land Mine #1: Value Proposition

You build a Google News Site to get accepted as an official Google News Publisher. That, according to E. Brian Rose, is your  “VIP Pass to the first page of Google.” This implies you can easily and quickly get articles on your Google News Site to show on the first page of Google for high priced and competitive keywords.

E. Brian Rose demonstrates this ability via video demos. The time frame is anywhere from 2 minutes to 22 minutes.  I won’t quibble about the difference in time because that’s still impressive.

On one of his optin pages E. Brian Rose says “…how I get to the front page of Google again and again in a few minutes.


Reality check:

  1. To get those “instant rankings” you (or your outsource team) or both need to invest a massive amount of time creating fresh content. See Land Mine #4 for how much time.
  2. News rankings change VERY quickly. One of the video demonstrations (May 28th, 2010) was done at 3 am, a slow news period. This means less competition, and it’s much easier to rank higher faster.
  3. What’s the fallback position if you don’t get accepted as a Google News Publisher? What kind of traffic and rankings can you expect? That’s not really addressed in the two webinars I attended on 9.21.10 and 9.24.10 promoting Google Red Carpet.
  4. Here is what two experts on Search and News have to say: This except is from Top Rank Blogwhere Lee Odden had Jiyan Wei of Vocus/PR web talk about news and blended search.

    What an SEO and a PR expert say about news listings on the first page of Google.

  5. There was a mention about other news sites and other traffic sources but there was no evidence, either in print or video form presented from those other sources as far as I know. After all, the product is called “Google Red Carpet” not Yahoo or Bing Red Carpet.

Land Mine #2: News Listings on Google’s First Page

Ever hear the phrase “blended search results?” When Google begin adding news listings, images and video, that’s when people started talking about blended search.

According to E. Brian Rose’s own video demonstrations, here is what you can expect:

Expectation #1: News listings rank high on Google’s first page

Examples: video demonstrations for “mortgage loan modification” and “Outsource Force” at 00:23:43 and 00:57:05 of the webinar on 09.21.10.


Expectation #2: News listings FOR YOUR KEYWORD(S) will appear on Google’s first page

Examples: video demonstrations for “mortgage loan modification” and “Outsource Force” indicated in Expectation #1.

Reality Check:

E. Brian Rose said that if no listings appear for news items, you could force a news item to appear on Google page one. He didn’t show any proof of that. He also said even if there are no news items for a particular keyword phrase when you do a search, it doesn’t mean there won’t be news items at a later day or time. That last comment is true in my experience. But it does suggest there is a “hit or miss” component that isn’t discussed in promoting Google Red Carpet.

Now it’s my turn for a video demonstration. The video below utilizes software from Jack Duncan called NewsRanker 2.0. I highly recommend it. The software is less than $70 and will “pre-qualify” your keywords to see if they show up in the news listings and blending search results on the first page of Google.

(Disclosure: the Newsranker link is an affiliate link of which I will receive a small commission if you purchase the software.)


While I STRONGLY encourage you to view the video, here are the highlights:

  • Many keywords have NO Google News listings on Google’s first page
  • Google news listings that do make it on the first page of Google often appear MUCH lower, definitely “below the fold” and sometimes at the very bottom of the page
  • For highly competitive keywords there are often hundreds of news listings of which Google will only show the first one, two or three listings
  • The software I’m using can tell you immediately if your keyword is a Google news item and what listing position it currently holds


Land Mine #3: Google Approval Time Frame

Since E. Brian Rose started promoting the idea of being a Google News Publisher, the time frame for getting approved has grown longer and longer.

Example #1: “Days”

Source: cover of E. Brian Rose’s GnewsNow.com ebook


At the time this ebook was released it only took "days" to become a Google News Publisher.



Example #2: “Two weeks for approval/indexing of articles”

Source: Warrior Forum post on May 6, 2010




Example #3: “Average time: 2 weeks”

Source: answer to a question from a webinar on 09/21/10. (At 02:16:00 elapsed time)


Example #4: “Longest time: 6 weeks”

Source: answer to a question on a webinar on 09/21/10. (At 02:16:00 elapsed time)


Reality check: 3 to 6 months or even LONGER?

I have heard anecdotal evidence the time frame is 3 months, maybe 6 months or longer. All the while you have to continue to add fresh, original content EVERY DAY. With no guarantee you will be approved as a Google News Publisher.

When I asked Jack Duncan, the developer of Newsranker 2.0 Software if he had any knowledge of the approval timeframe, he offered this response:

“They are “playing down” the difficulty of actually getting a site in Google News. I spoke with someone who personally has done this “from start to finish”…and after many rejections and a lot of “arm twisting”, he managed to become a Google News site after roughly 2 years.”


Reality check II: even once you are accepted, you won’t get traffic right away. Because there is additional wait time for your site and its pages to be indexed.

Land Mine #4: Total Time Investment

This for me is the biggest deal breaker. If you do it yourself, it’s recommended you add 3 original articles EVERY day. The webinar pitches talk about how easy it is to outsource the article writing at $2 an article.

On one webinar the price was $3 per article.

Reality check:

Lets look at a conservative financial estimate…

So if you have to add “several” articles a day, let’s say 3 articles as it is recommended in the webinar I attended on 09.28.10.

3 articles x 30 days = 90, x 3 months = 270 articles.

Lets also say an extra two weeks while the site is being evaluated = 14 x 3 = 42 additional articles.

270 + 42 = 312 articles x $6 each (that’s a good bulk rate for a native English speaking writer.)

That’s $1,872.00 investment for a site that MIGHT get accepted!

But that’s not all. Let’s say there is also a little bit of site promotion, a little SEO, some ongoing site maintenance, some ad rotating expenses, and of course web hosting. Let’s say that is another $100/month for the 4-month time period until you are getting the traffic promised to you. That’s another $400.

That’s a $2,272 investment for a news site over 4 months.

Now let’s paint a more rosy scenario. What if you get your Google News Site accepted a lot quicker? Well, you’ll still have expenses for ongoing fresh, original content moving forward. Unless you chose to do it yourself. If that’s the case, isn’t that more like having a job with all the ongoing responsibility of the content requirements to keep in Google’s good graces?

Reality check II:

What about the time to manage your outsource writers? What about troubleshooting time for the entire Google approval process?

Land Mine #5: The Fallout from Gaming Google

E. Brian Rose talks about not doing any “black hat” techniques. He said his techniques are fully compliant with the policies of being a Google News Publisher.

Reality Check:

Every hear the expression, “don’t’ throw the baby out with the bath water?” Well even legitimate sites, as the one Google Red Carpet recommends are coming under additional scrutiny by Google.

Why? Because even though you’re not trying to game the system, many others have.

And there’s evidence you’ll be penalized with extra wait time because of it.

In fact, “No Cost Traffic Blueprint” a competitive product to Google Red Carpet has been criticized for questionable tactics like software that artificially backdates articles.

What’s more, the official Google News Publisher forum has an entire thread about exposing spammy Google News Sites. Guess who’s name comes up there? Yes, E. Brian Rose.

To be clear, those could be simple and unproven accusations. But the fact that many Google News Publishers are upset, even outraged, should NOT be ignored. This fact was further brought to light by several comments on my last Google News Publisher article.

I was disappointed that E. Brian Rose made is sound like these publishers are whiny complainers. The quality of these Google News sites is a legitimate concern and deserves a legitimate answer on the matter.

In fact, the quality of Google News Sites even has it’s own thread.


Land Mine #6: Traffic Conversion

The assumption is when you get traffic for very competitive keywords, even if the news item is only on the first page of Google for a matter of hours, you’ll get a lot of visitors. An example in the webinar cited 8,000 visitors in a 24-hour period. (Source: webinar on 9.21.10 at 00:41:01.)


You’ve got the traffic so mission accomplished, right? Not right. Many Google publishers have complained that the traffic doesn’t convert. That’s why E. Brian Rose talks about ways to generate revenue that don’t require purchase. (Like Adsense or CPA offers where you can make money by clicks or when visitors fill out forms.)

Land Mine #7: 30-Day Guarantee

Let’s do the math: how long is it going to take you to build and populate your Google News Site? How long until the site gets accepted and approved by Google? Can you really fully evaluate the validity of E. Brian Rose’s claims in only 30 days?

BONUS Land Mine: Flipping Google News Sites

In both the promotion of the webinars and during the webinars I attended, a major financial benefit being touted was building Google News Sites and “flipping” or selling them.

Reality Check:

I’m sure if you have a successful site, that you could certainly do that. However, recently several sites were sold and then were delisted shortly after the new owner took possession. One Google News Site was delisted 25 hours after purchase. (See the 3rd post from the top.)

Obviously, if you were the buyer you’d want your money back. If you’re the seller, do you really such a possibility hanging over your head?

Some final thoughts

One dynamic that I see in the information product business is that marketers that are pitching products speak of their own experience. And successes. That’s only natural, right? Well, here is where things breakdown. It’s one thing for a marketer to achieve something. But can the average buyer do the same thing in a similar timeframe?

Is that realistic? Is that being authentic and telling it to you straight?

Coming up NEXT:

The third article in the series will look at what the future holds for Google News Publishing and what alternatives exist that may, in the long run, be a much better return on both your time and money.

Please share your feedback and experiences with Google News Publishing, E. Brian Rose, Google Red Carpet or No Cost Traffic Blueprint by Ben Shaffer.

Tags: , , ,


  • Marc Harty says:

    Since this article was released Friday evening, I don’t expect a ton of comments right away. But I am VERY interested in your feedback. I wanted you to know the REAL story, and it took me 2105 words for just this one article!

    ~ Marc

  • David says:

    Great article. I read the first one a few minutes ago and figured I might as well go onto part 2. I’ve been interested in becoming a google publisher, but I definitely wouldn’t use WordPress as my platform (at least not a version with publically available plugins). I think just for real success you need high modifications and a way to monetize everything that happens like what the big PR sites do.

    I’ll be waiting for part 3.

    I do a lot of press releases for myself as well as clients and I know they are a great way to get traffic and buyers. The secret is knowing exactly where to post them. There are definitely advantages of owning your own site where you can publish since you don’t have to worry about overzealous editors shooting down your releases. To me it would be worth buying articles, but just by reading reviews I kind of created a different idea in my mind which I think will be very successful.

    The secret to anything SEO, internet, especially google related is adding your own twist and I think the twist is where everything is. If you do everything verbatim you will be getting banned with everyone else.

  • Mike says:

    Hi Marc,

    First time here.

    Thanks for the heads up, I found your site after watching a webinar about GRC and wanted to qualify it, as it did seem to good to be true, and, we all know the saying!!
    I came across GRC when I was doing re-search on how to actually include Google news on one of my sites, so if you have any info on how to do that I’d be glad to hear it.
    BTW I’ve downloaded your free PR template and bookmarked your site, thanks for sharing your knowledge.


    PS. I will be back to check out part three, just out of curiosity, your view seems to be a valid one, thanks again

  • Marc Harty says:


    Thanks for your feedback. I’ll be investigating Google News more in the future. I’ll keep you posted.

  • Marc Harty says:

    Hi David,

    Very well said. My experience with press releases and Google News is one of the reasons I spoke out about Google Red Carpet. Sounds like you know quite a bit about press releases so please share your feedback on future posts as well.

    Thanks for joining the conversation.

  • Me says:


    Had you asked, I would have given you a peek at the course material, so that you could at least know what you are writing about.

    I have been in the media business for twenty years. When writing an investigative piece about a person, most writers would at least contact their subject and ask for an interview. Had you done that, I would have enjoyed addressing your questions. Also, had you come to me, I would have been able to give you the correct information to your questions, rather than the guesswork that you did in this article. You have laid out a lot of either misleading information or just plain wrong facts.

    You are doing a disservice to your readers by offering a review on something that you have never seen. The ebook that you say that you have is not the course that you are writing about, as none of the material in that book is in my GRC course.

    My course material has been vetted and reviewed by some of the biggest names in Internet marketing. I have spent many hours doing Q and A with very successful and trusted industry experts and none of them have had one bad word to say about the course.

    How can you do an in depth series of articles about a course that you have never seen or an author that you have never spoken to?


  • matt wiggins says:

    Hmmm…this isn’t the first post of it’s kind I’ve seen along these lines. I know the old expression “if you’re not pissing somebody off, you’re not doing something right”, but there’s a difference between ruffling a few eyebrows and and putting out bogus info. This and the other post I saw on the ‘Google Red Carpet’ product both pretty much assumed the latter.

    FWIW, I was on one of ERB’s promoted webinars, and there was one way in which he represented himself that *really* pissed me off, and to be completely honest, made me think he was a complete d-bag. And I’d be willing to bet there are a whole host of others that feel the same way, and have a much bigger right to feel as such.

  • Bill Davis says:

    Two things here:

    1. The method *may* work, but for very short time periods and it takes a LONG time to get rolling. Yeah, you can outsource it (every IMers response to everything it seems, nowadays — let’s blame those IMers for sending jobs overseas — but that’s another topic altogether!), but who cares?

    This is nothing new, either. I read about setting up a news site many months ago. As more people jump on the bandwagon, do you think this method will become more, or less, effective? I know where I’d put my money.

    Google Red Carpet and other schemes like it are like making fishing lures: They’re not designed to catch fish but rather to catch fishermen.

    More power to those folks who succeed with this. I’d say they could succeed without buying the course. But whatever.

    2. The more disturbing thing about this is the general d-baggery of the product and its creator. EBR is an over-hypey salesman. I know, some of that is necessary in this industry: If you just tell it like it is, “it” doesn’t seem so freaking cool!

    There have been a few posts around the web about EBR not being available for support questions and refunds. One is here —

    ==> http://ow.ly/2NFma

    I put it there because the Warrior Forum has been deleting posts that cast a negative light on this product.

    Now, the poster may have been mistaken: Maybe he did get a refund or maybe he requested it incorrectly. But there’s nothing there from EBR rebutting the assertion.

    EBR, as can be seen here and on my site, does take the time to refute posts that question his product.

    But I can hear the wolves howling, it’s so quiet. Maybe he simply expects the negative comments to vanish…I don’t know.

  • John H says:

    Incredibly bizarre article devoid of facts. Seems to be written just to attract an audience from controversy. Lost credibility as soon as promoting another product also on Google News.

  • Marc Harty says:


    I appreciate your feedback. My whole reason for doing this was, as the late Paul Harvey said, was “the rest of the story.” With so many JV marketing partners, it’s easy for people to be overly impressed. I just want to add some balance to the discussion.

  • Marc Harty says:


    Thanks for your in-depth comment. For those of you interested in Bill’s take on Google Red Carpet and E. Brian Rose, you can find that here: http://bit.ly/ccAkV0

  • Marc Harty says:


    Thanks for your comment. I welcome ALL feedback. Now help me understand something here: did you see the facts mentioned in the article? Did you just choose to ignore them?

    Sure, we can agree to disagree. But if you want to offer something constructive other than sniping, what could I have done differently? Educate me please.

    Those who had negative things to say about Google Red Carpet wrote detailed replies. If you are taking the opposite viewpoint, give us the benefit of your positive experience.

    Also, the articles were written because people asked me about this product and its approach. I didn’t do this to pick a fight as a way of gaining notoriety.

    And finally, yes I put in an affiliate link to an inexpensive piece of software. It’s not a competing product to Google Red Carpet. In fact, it probably makes a good complement to it. If that cheapens the 20 hours+ I put into these articles so far, that’s beyond my control. My hope is that most people understand how bloggers generate revenue and when put in context with full disclosure, they’re ok with it.

  • Marc Harty says:

    E. Brian,

    First, thank you for your response. I’m sure we’ll continue to dialog over this.
    Obviously, we have different points of view on this matter. So let me respond to a few of your comments.

    I was very careful and selective about the words I used in writing these articles. Where I agreed with you, based on my experience, I said so. Where I disagreed with you, I said that too and provided support for my position. So where am I misleading people?

    If you have evidence to the contrary, please share it. But also understand what we both know all to well. The Internet, and yes that includes Google and Google News is fluid. And what worked in the past, even if the past was just a few short months ago, might not work as well in the future.

    If anything, I’ve been very balanced in my approach. I was, after all, considering your program seriously at one time.

    Let’s understand my role here. I’m not a JV partner wanted a review copy to see if it’s a good fit my list.

    I am putting myself in the shoes of all those people you are reaching NOW with your webinars.

    You don’t give all of them review copies, do you? I’m not saying don’t buy your product. I’m saying to everyone, whether it’s your product or someone else’s, “do your own homework and make your own decision.” And don’t let a lot of “Big Name” Internet Marketers make that decision for you.

    I did read your ebook “GNewsNow” so it’s not like I don’t have some understanding of the product. I also attended two webinars and watched the replays of both of them several times. So, I don’t think I’m shooting from the hip, here. Again, if I’m putting myself in the prospective buyer’s shoes, that’s all they have to go on.

    What made me skeptical was the way the product was being marketed. And the promises and claims that continue to be made, even when there is evidence to the contrary that the landscape has changed.

    It also seems to me you are contradicting yourself. You use the “only 25,000 Google Publishers” statement often. If it’s so difficult to get accepted, can you honestly say that with the onslaught of new publishers (because of people buying your program), that it won’t be more difficult for those NEW people now, then it was before you were promoting this so aggressively?

    And while we both know you can’t please everyone all the time, there has been enough concerns about Google News Publishing, whether it’s your materials or other competing programs, that I felt it was my responsibility to share my perspective on the matter.


  • John H says:

    What you have done is to write an article about something you admittedly didn’t know anything about yourself but had to ask and research from others about.
    You have also taken as fact that sources you quote are accurate whereas what EBR says is not.
    In addition, you admit openly that you have not seen EBR’s final product, but yet you speak about it as if you have.
    If you truly wanted to help people (the articles were written because people asked me about this product and its approach) then you would have actually tried to build a news site and have it accepted in the way that EBR describes rather than disputing facts.
    By trying to create controversy which seems to be a trend at the moment in the IM community, you have actually made yourself look foolish as you are writing about something which you so obviously haven’t researched properly and know nothing or very little about yourself.

  • Marc Harty says:

    John,Thanks for your reply. Please see my reply to E. Brian Rose. You are making assumptions that are simply not correct and I do address some of those in my reply to EBR.. And while I don’t agree with you on several of your points, I certainly acknowledge your right to express and share them.

  • Bill Davis says:

    Do you really have to own a product and try it out before you point out obvious deficiencies in it?

    Does a news reporter have to experience an abortion before she can do a story on it?

    Does a Ford guy have to buy a Chevy to see how clearly inferior it is?

    I get your objectivity lesson, but you’re coming on a little too strong here. The author of this piece isn’t going to convert the converted anyways.

    He’s just cautioning that “buyer beware.” There were so many IMers touting this that there is a strong odor of fish in the air. If it’s so damned good, why not keep it to themselves and clear the table?

    No, it’s in the selling of the system that money is made, not necessarily using the system itself. And the irony of the thing is that as more people buy it, the system itself becomes less effective while EBR’s pocketbook grows fatter.

    I love that there’s money to be made in this field. What I don’t adore about it is that it is so incestuous and over-the-top.

  • I’d completely agree with you bill. But I do have experience owning both Ford and Chevy and you are WRONG. 🙂

  • I believe the future of media is going to online. I’m actively working on 3 projects that will have a news component. Even had a partnership 4 years back with a buy who did incredible things with his Google News Feed.

    In news, there’s no doubt I’d want to get recognized as a news feed, but my gut reaction is that no matter how good a “beat Google” product is, even if I assume it works today perfectly as promised, GOOG will be out to kill it as best they can.

    Purely a barnacle play.. living off the real business of Google. Why not create such killer content that anyone aggregating news will work to include it?

    The rules will surely change. The advantage of getting a feed goes down with each on they add, and soon you’ll have thousands more local and social versions to contend with

    One thing won’t change. We continue to need great content. Keep up on the technology, learn to build real relationships with real people and be remarkable. That’s going to work no matter what gimmick and counter measures comes along.

  • Kelly says:


    I’ve spoken with member after member of your program, and they say that there’s a huge disconnect between what you say is realistic, and what is actually achievable after you have an approved Google News site.

    I think your program is all hype, and from what I’ve heard, you don’t provide any kind of valuable support after the initial purchase of your system. I know about 5 different members of your system and each one says that your claims aren’t realistic and they believe that you’re more interested in ensuring that you continue to make sales rather than help any of your members.

    I’m sure you would reply that you help people with your system, but I don’t think I would believe you. Especially since I’ve heard otherwise from those actively involved with your program.

  • Bill Davis says:

    That’s funny, Warren! I was making a point, but you knew that. Tables could have been turned and the outcome is the same 🙂

  • Marc Harty says:


    You hit a major point here. And I love the “barnacle play” descriptor. I’d be eager to hear your new projects with a news component. I have some stuff cooking in that arena as well.

  • Marc Harty says:


    First, I want to acknowledge you for sharing your feedback. I’ve received feedback from other buyers of Google Red Carpet, but naturally I want to gather as much information as possible.

    Right now I’m being accused of not reviewing the product as it stands now, so having others that not only have the program, but tried to use it would be critical as this conversation expands and helps others understand both the risks and rewards for being a Google News Publisher.

  • now that I think about it.. the Ford/Chevy Coke/Pepsi Red/Blue examples are just perceptions.

    There are moral and legal issue where “wrong” has consequences, but part of any debate does boil down to us perceiving that there are two choices, and that one has to be “right”

    For instance. I just watched two polical ads for our open Senate seat. BOTH candidates attacked the other for “not bringing Nevada jobs”

    In my reality, jobs don’t come from the government. Apparently, both sides have researched and learned that they can sell with fear of unemployment to get into voter’s brains.

    I suppose this “manipulate the system” products can work at some time for some people and I would assume that the guy responding to Marc’s attack is a real human being who doesn’t want to go to prison. As far as I can see, he believes his product works, is legal and “ethical” (my definition.. he feels good about selling it).

    If I were writing a review, I’d focus on 1) results and 2) best pratices.

    Marc is right to question the results. He doesn’t have to buy and use the product to have an opinion.

    Marc usually writes about best practices. He tells us what he has learned about what works. This post is not the best for that, but valid as an opinion.

    We have strayed from the topic in discussing the discussion.. but that’s our prerogative too 🙂

  • I’m convinced that “old media” will be around, but in decline for the rest our our lives. We still have rotary phones in some places 🙂

    These dinosaurs still have the majority of the revenue flow. While they try to figure out how to buy the new audience (they won’t succeed) I think we can count on huge opportunities for anything that allows a conversation and runs in some manner of decent business model.

    I met with a editorial research at a party attached to the journalist confab her in Vegas. We talked about her database of magzines shrinking so I asked where the growth is.

    1) Special niches like “a newsletter for people who collect toothpick holders”

    2) “blogs and such”

    (#2 is intentionally vague to avoid a discussion of what qualifies.. suffice it to say that if “toothpick holder collectors” works, there is a lot of room here)

    I’m not putting more and more content that I didn’t write on my blog, and see such aggregation of voice being the future of media. We’ll figure out a revenue model that works, and “pitching the media” will change even more drastically than it has in the past decade.

    Where next?

    How about a guest post for http://BestSellerAuthors.com? 🙂

  • Tatyana Gann says:

    Hi Marc

    What I love about this blog post and discussion is that you are real PR person. You learn how to strike yourself in a good way! Also I love what you did with reality check and showing what is really working today! I love this approach.. Not some fluff people are sick and tired of hearing.. The truth sets people free and in this case it can really bring people at peace know what it takes and they can focus on achieving the results they need

    Thank you

    Tatyana Gann

  • Phil Davis says:

    Thank you Marc for giving us the rest of the story.

    I was suspicious from the beginning, there were too many affiliates promoting it.

    And it did not pass my logic test, how many news sites would Google really need or use? Especially about some of the more obscure long tail keyword niches so popular today.

    I passed and you’ve confirmed my feelings.

    Thanks, Phil

  • Marc Harty says:

    I prefer imports, does that make me a commie? 🙂

  • Marc Harty says:


    Be happy to! Some of my best success stories are with authors. Let me know what you need. And let’s reconnect soon. Haven’t been to any events for a while now.

  • Marc Harty says:


    Thanks for your feedback and support. While I will fully acknowledge I didn’t review the entire product end to end, I did have enough to go on. And I have yet to be corrected on any of the specific points I made.

  • Marc Harty says:


    You are welcome! It was quite a job and it’s not over yet. I still have one more article in the pipeline.

    And your “logic test” proves a major point I was trying to make. There are certain elements that draw doubt, even suspicion about what can be done and in what time frame.

  • Michael says:

    Awesome post Marc! I had actually never heard of such a concept or the products promoting it. Thanks for shedding some light on the subject. It’s easy to fall for good marketing, which is why it’s so important to take a step back and really analyze the pros and cons of a product or service. It certainly seems like the cons win on this one!

  • Bill Davis says:

    You said it, “cons” 🙂 Not necessarily what Marc is saying here, but guys who sell products like this do gain your confidence and convince you that you’ll “win” the game.

    And this is nothing more than a game, IMO.

  • Ccrider777 says:

    Please check your math. 30 X 3 = 90. NOT 270! Makes QUITE a difference with the overall amount.

  • Holly Cotter says:

    Marc, I appreciate you exposing the inconsistencies and fallacies of the “Google Red Carpet” tactic so clearly. It’s getting more and more difficult for consumers to discern a good product (one that teaches a solid strategy) from a bad one… with so many “experts” promoting junk products these days.

    From personal experience, I know how stressful it can be to shine the spotlight on a fellow marketer and call them (or their product) out… and how it can put a target on your own back. For this reason, I give you a 2-thumbs up… for the courage to stand up, speak out, and help your readers avoid this particular pitfall.

  • Marc Harty says:


    Thanks for your thoughtful comments. And you are absolutely correct, I was speaking from my experience on what works with Google News, albeit from the perspective of press release marketing.

  • Marc Harty says:


    Thanks for your feedback. For me, the investment of time coupled with the uncertainty about Google’s approval were the biggest stumbling blocks for me.

  • Marc Harty says:

    Thank you for noticing my math error! I have updated the example with the correct numbers. As far as an article investment goes, we’re still looking at 300+ articles and a $2000+ invest under the current scenario.

  • Marc Harty says:


    Thank you SO much for those kind words. Yes, I am in the line of fire with this latest post. I’ve also discovered a rather devious tactic some have tried in an attempt to limit the exposure of this message. That may be another post about it, who knows?

    Again, I do appreciate you standing with me on this.

  • Anonymous says:

    Reading that someone advises outsources writing for $2 an article says it all for me, but I found your review balanced, honest and a demonstration of good investigative reporting. I am sorry that you are taking heat for this but many of us appreciate your willingness to put the work in and present the other side of the story. I am tired of the misleading and down right fraudulent marketing tactics that make people think doing business online has shortcuts that do not require actual hard work. Thank you Marc for your honesty.

  • David2 says:

    I listened to a recording of one of EBR’s webinars, and while it “sounds good”, it struck me as just the same ol same ol when it comes to online promotions. I mean … here’s this super secret killer method that you’d think would have very limited availability, yet it’s being promoted through every online marketer with a decent sized list. Meaning, it’s being pimped like any other product.

    To argue “there are only 25,000 authorized news sites, and a few more won’t really be noticed” is pretty arrogant. I’m a big fan of the US Constitution and especially the First Amendment, but I’d sign a petition to have it set aside long enough to have the so-called “Fox News Network” shut down for treason. We don’t need MORE “news” sites, we need fewer and BETTER ones! I’m personally sick and tired of how online marketers have managed to abuse and pollute just about every aspect of online search and information gathering. The whole thing stinks. So a program that promotes how to “game Google” to get what amounts to a limited number of “ring-side seats” to every event ever held … come on! If there’s one thing online marketers have learned how to do it’s shoot themselves in the foot — repeatedly! It’s amazing any can still walk.

    The predictable result of this and similar programs is … Google is simply going to raise the bar on their qualifications and do whatever they can to eliminate the fraudsters.

    Like most online marketing fads, someone discovered the secret combination on a door that only a few people have. Someone announced it to the world just before they snuck through, and they’re charging people for the combination.

    How long do people seriously believe it will take before that combination is changed and the information is worthless?

    If you search for this guy’s name or the product’s name on Google, you’ll find some threads in the Google News Discussion Forum that clearly show that people are already organizing to stalk these sites down and report them to Google News authorities. In other words, these sites have a great big bulls-eye target on them right from the get-go.

    If you’ve got $500 to spend, why not spend it on press releases from PRWeb, WebWire, and other “real” news sites. It won’t take months of article publishing, maintaining a web site, or sweating changes that GN might make. You can do it right now!

    I think if you were a student in a Journalism program at a University somewhere, this kind of thing would make sense. If you’re just another online marketer, it’s a silly waste of time and money, not to mention a huge distraction from what should be your primary business.

  • Jason Fladlien says:

    Interesting. I promoted Brian’s google red carpet but was VERY clear I wasn’t excited about the “number 1 on google in 10 minutes” angle. There are MANY other benefits to it and IMO, while the seo angle is a sexy hook, it’s not even close to the most powerful aspect.

    I don’t know about anyone else’s experience, but I followed Brian’s trainings to the T and had no issue with getting approved rather quickly by google. Of course, everything I did was above board and whitehat and 100% unique and stuff I created myself… but I had no issues.

    ALSO – the reason most people get denied for applying has little to do with the articles and mostly to do with the technical structure and setup of the blog. Your time is not lost – you simply change your structure and resubmit.

    Seriously Marc you should set up and do a google news site – you’d see it’s not the scary monster it SEEMS to be. I found it relatively easily. Maybe that’s because I’m an experienced and successful marketer or the fact I can just get stuff done quick. Who knows?

  • Rolf says:


    I am pretty shocked!

    Thank you for an excellent post!

    It seems then that the mentioned people are into this to get money. Of course, if you manage to sell 100 products at 497 dollars which is 49 700 dollars I can understand the temptation.

    One way to test these guys is to send them a support ticket with an interesting question and see if you get a fast good reply or not. Chances are you don’t get.

    Thanks for the link to the Google thread about this. It was very revealing.

    It is indeed a very bad thing that people misuse free resources with tricks like backdating. It really ruins things for people trying to make an honest thing either to make money or just for the sake of it.

    Thanks also for the affiliate link to Newsranker. It seems to be just the product I need and I did not know it from before.

    I will certainly pass your message on to a person who has blog content on these scam issues and people following him so more people can be educated and informed of what is going on.

    Best wishes

  • Marc Harty says:


    First, thanks a lot for taking the time for your thoughtful and reasoned comments. And since I raised questions, I did want to hear ALL sides of the story, especially those like yourself that found the materials useful.

    It doesn’t surprise me that you got your site done and accepted. If I have learned anything from you, (and I’ve learned a TON), is that you are one of the most prolific marketers I know.

    I’ll admit I did get concerned about the time element. And like I said before, I saw value in having a Google-approved news site as a great value-add for my prospects and customers.

    Your opinion and recommendation does have significant clout with me and perhaps I will try it at some point.

    Regarding the other matter you referenced, you are absolutely correct. I’ll work with your assistant to get this resolved to everyone’s satisfaction. Our relationship is too important to me not to make things right.

  • Been There Done That says:

    Interesting to note that the very news site EBR uses in his demo videos has now been delisted from the Google News Site Index.


    Wonder if it is a sign of things to come.

    For those not in the know, to check if a site is in the Gnews index.
    Go to http://news.google.com

    Then do a search site:sitename.com just as you would in the normal Google Serps.

  • Tony says:

    It seems that you were right all along about EBR. My son has a few Google News sites and he said at the time that this would ruin it for people who did want to start a genuine news site and that is what has happened.

    Google were soon onto EBR (and his site was soon delisted) and while you could get approved fairly quickly before it can now take months, if you get accepted at all and I would suggest that any sites on WordPress that look like EBR’s will suffer.

    If you already have some Google News sites though there is no problem because my son has just had another one approved after about a week.

    Guess what though – EBR is still trying to wring the last bit of money out of this. I got an email from him selling GRC for $197 instead of $497. $197 for useless info. What do you make of that?

  • Marc Harty says:

    Hi Tony,

    Thanks for your comments. And knowing what I do about Google, you knew they would start cracking down on the “quickie” Google News sites. There’s still quite a spirited conversation going on between google news publishers and EBR defenders.

    I’m glad your son has had success. It’s not that you can’t get a site approved. But it does take time. And you do need to do it the right way.

    One more thing: there are multiple infoproducts on Google News Sites. There’s one on the Warrior Forum from a woman who has had success. It does appear the easy money has been made and EBR has recently moved on to other things.

    When I chose PR as vehicle, I did so with the understanding that it wasn’t a loophole or a trick that would have a short lifespan. But to each their own, especially since it was the new, shiny object that people were often blinded by.

    ~ Marc

Leave a Reply


Leave a Trackback