Curious Use of “MLS” in Meta Tags at Realtor.com

Author: Jay T. - The Editor

Posted on February 14, 2008 
Filed Under NAR - General

The Realtor Code of Ethics Standard of Practice 12-10 states:

REALTORS®’ obligation to present a true picture in their advertising and representations to the public includes the URLs and domain names they use, and prohibits REALTORS® from:
1) engaging in deceptive or unauthorized framing of real estate brokerage websites;
2) manipulating (e.g., presenting content developed by others) listing content in any way that produces a deceptive or misleading result; or
3) deceptively using metatags, keywords or other devices/ methods to direct, drive, or divert Internet traffic, or to otherwise mislead consumers. (Adopted 1/07)

(Bold is my emphasis.)

At the NAR Board of Directors meeting at the 2007 NAR Realtors Conference & Expo, they:

Added optional MLS provision allowing prohibition of MLS participants, subscribers, licensees from claiming to be or suggesting that they are an MLS, including in domain name and email address;

There are associations out there forbidding their members from using terms including “MLS” on their web sites.

Why then does Realtor.com, the “Official Site of the NAR”, have “MLS” in their meta keywords?

Just….seems…..wrong….


.

Comments

12 Responses to “Curious Use of “MLS” in Meta Tags at Realtor.com”

  1. Jim Duncan on February 14th, 2008 5:48 pm

    Realtor.com aren’t Realtors. :)

  2. Jonathan Dalton on February 14th, 2008 7:41 pm

    Think Jim has it right, though it’s still a bit slimy.

  3. Curious Use of MLS in Meta Tags at Realtor.com | The Long List of Odysseus Medal Nominees | Realtors and real estate, mortgages, lending, investments on February 15th, 2008 10:42 am

    […] Curious Use of MLS in Meta Tags at Realtor.com, by Jay Thompson. […]

  4. Ernie Tabel on February 15th, 2008 11:24 am

    Perhaps because most of their data is MLS data?

    If one was searching Google for MLS data, wouldn’t it make sense for websites that display lots of MLS data to show up in the search results?

    Realtor.com’s meta tag doesn’t say “we are an MLS” (which would be misleading consumers). It just suggests that the keyword “MLS” is relevant to their site. Is it not?

  5. Dave Phillips on February 15th, 2008 3:24 pm

    I do not have a problem with R.com having a MLS meta tag, but I think the standard of practice you mention puts REALTORS at a disadvantage to non-realtors. Non-realtors can use MLS in their urls, meta tags, and search engines, but REALTORS can not? Unfortunately we can not trademark the initials MLS to prevent non-realtors from using it. Just Google MLS or check out the wiki for MLS.

  6. Jay T. - The Editor on February 15th, 2008 4:01 pm

    Ernie - the IDX search on my web site is nothing but Phoenix MLS data repackaged. Yet my association could (it hasn’t yet) prohibit me from using terms like “Search the MLS” or “Find MLS listings” on my web page.

    My understanding is that some associations are preventing Realtors from using “MLS” in any fashion on their site.

    Yes, the listings data on R.com comes from the MLS. Just as it does on any agents site with an IDX feed.

    Dave - I don’t have a problem with R.com having MLS in their meta tags either. But if it’s OK for them, seems it would be OK for anyone.

    I agree *completely* that Realtors are being put at a disadvantage with that Standard of Practice, and by those associations that have forbidden the use of those three letters, M, L and S.

    I wrote a post about it here.

  7. Tracy on February 15th, 2008 5:56 pm

    Just goes to show you how out of touch the policy makers are (same thing happens all the time at the local level). It’s certainly not the policy makers who added the meta tag. It’s somebody who knows a little about modern consumer preferences and practices.

    Maybe the wonks should step out of their ivory tower and ask the marketing experts for some pointers on real rules for real agents.

  8. Charles Woodall on February 15th, 2008 6:30 pm

    Mr. Stinton, you still around to comment on this?

    Unfortunately, there is nothing we can do, as we don’t have any control over realtor.com.

    I don’t like it…no sir, not one little bit.

  9. Athol Kay on February 16th, 2008 5:33 pm

    I think we’re reaching for this one a little hard Jay.

    To me the kicker is…

    2) manipulating (e.g., presenting content developed by others)

    That sounds like SPLOGS. Maybe we should just stop lodging complaints with Google and start lodging complaints with NAR and/or the brokerage in questions local board of realtors.

  10. Jay T. - The Editor on February 17th, 2008 4:50 pm

    You may be right Athol.

    It just bugs the hell out of me that some associations out there *forbid* their members to use “MLS” on their web sites. Period, at all, manipulating or not.

    It’s just utterly ridiculous.

  11. Athol Kay on February 17th, 2008 5:23 pm

    Well look at it this way. I have published over three hundred posts with “MLS” in the title and page address in the last year.

    If you could protest against me I’d appreciate the spotlight and linkage ;-)

    And yeah, forbiding use of “MLS” is silly. Jeez it’s the most important thing we do. Maybe doctors shouldn’t be allowed to use the word “medication” on a health website… ya’know?

  12. Frank Borges LL0SA- FranklyRealty.com on April 3rd, 2008 3:50 pm

    I’m an Idiot.

    I just do not get the argument over MLS.

    Are “they” complaining that the back end MLS is 100% of the Realtor homes for sale, while an IDX is 99.99% (for that 10 listings that decided not to be syndicated.) Is that the argument?

    Or are they arguing that they own “MLS” and nobody should use it.

    Also if you Google MLS Homes you get as the #1 spot:

    MLS Listings on REALTOR™ The Official Site of REALTOR.com®. Search Millions of MLS Listings.

    Is that somehow acceptable?

    What if you had an asterisk after the MLS that fully disclosed the difference between an IDX being called an MLS vs the back end MLS that Realtors use?

    This is such a silly discussion. I can’t believe we are having it.

Leave a Reply




Check the box above to subscribe to comments by email.