Calendar
Network
Feeds
- 55
- Sphinn It!
Went Hot: September 6, 2007 - 8:05 am
Posted By: dannysullivan 318 days ago
Topic Type: News Story (Jump to http://searchengineland.com)
Category: SEO
20 Comments
Went Hot: September 6, 2007 - 8:05 am
Posted By: dannysullivan 318 days ago
Topic Type: News Story (Jump to http://searchengineland.com)
Category: SEO
20 Comments
Top 10 Most Sphunn
In What's New
- Google Loses $13 Billion Overnight…... (15)
- Matt Cutts on Spam [video] (15)
- Google To Test A Search Interface T... (14)
- Improving Your Skillset: Your Path ... (13)
- Insight into Google's Digg-like Soc... (13)
- 13 areas to evaluate your ecommerce... (12)
- 5 most effective ways to write a Bl... (12)
- Ultimate Guide to Search Marketing (12)
- Social Search Is the New Black (11)
- Top 5 SEO Blogs Ever (11)
Latest Comments
- I've had only minor problems with 2.6 but I have to say I really wish wordp…
- Why are comScore's numbers always way below everyone else's for G's share o…
- "No, I didn't say that either."Yeah, you did. Sure he desphunn …
- @SpostareDuro - p1r was not "stifled" becuase "Sphinn's reputation was at s…
- Well said, Mike. All you need is love. :)…
- OMG OMG ZOMG ZOMG this article is like so totally the most anmazing thin…
- Good article. …
- What it boils down to is pr1 was stifled because Sphinns reputation was at …
- - read more -
Save the date for:
• SMX Local & Mobile - San Francisco, CA (July 24-25) See the agenda, and register now!
• SMX Sao Paolo - Brazil - (Aug. 7-8)
• SMX China - September 23 & 24, 2008
• SMX Stockholm - September 23 & 24, 2008
• SMX East - NYC - (Oct. 6-8) Registration is now open.
• SMX London - November 4 & 5, 2008
Comments
FYI, my test got outted over here:
http://sphinn.com/story/4721
So figured I'd better just finish up the article.
I conducted a similar test over a year ago and found the same results. Nice extensive write up on this, Danny, which will hopefully forever lay to rest the question that gets asked too often - "Is the keyword meta tag good for anything?"
The title and meta description have a nicely defined role: often used for the title and snippet in the SERPs.
The meta keywords tag seemed like it was an add-on idea looking for a purpose, from day one. I hate it to.
Sod it! I was testing this. Thanks Danny! :( :)
Bah Danny!
Why are you wasting your time and bandwidth with this useless old news? You don't really think this article will put anything to rest any more than any of the zillions of others you've written over the years, do ya?
Blech...and now I just wasted time and bandwidth too!
It's only useless old news because the result is the same as yesterday.
I think it's worth every now and again testing conventions especially if you have time on your hands lounging about your mansion. :)
Yeah. I don't think that describes Danny.
Because, Jill, as I said in the article, I was kind of dumbfounded to be on a panel where I had search reps themselves not even knowing what the status is -- and people are still asking. So now if they ask me, I can point them to a fresh update when they don't listen to my main point of don't worry about it :)
Leave it to Danny Sullivan to tackle subjects others had forgotten about. Good article D-man. Although you should have titled it: "If you have used the Meta Keywords Tag in the past decade, you wasted your time". I know it is not short and sweet but it is to the point.
Great timing Danny! This article basically takes the blog post that "outted" your test, http://sphinn.com/story/4721, and expands upon it twofold, though your message of not to worry about the tag is a bit more solid of advice.
Your comment "Moreover, beginners are especially likely to spend far too long worrying about getting the "right" words in the meta keywords tag rather than just writing good body copy" rings true for me. Though I still consider myself a beginner in terms of years of experience (though I am much, much further along than I was just a few months ago since joining High Rankings) I was guilty of this. I remember trying to get the "right" words as well as getting as many of them I could, for my previous companies' web site. This was before I had the knowledge I do now which basically is verbatim to what you profess in this article. If I know the value (or lack thereof) of this tag, then I can see where this article is handy for those who still get confused by it.
Amazing article, Danny. Thank you so much for taking the time to not only test it but write it up. I've passed your article to a few of my coworkers to read.
I admit I still use the keywords tag, I figure for the just in case... I try not to stress over it, but if it doesn't hurt and it's still worthwhile somewhere, I don't see how it's a problem.
Thanks again!
Nice update! We were linking to your older META articles on SEW so this will make a more up to date resource link for our SEO101 students, thank you. But if I might put on my grammar nazi helmet for a minute, isn't the title of your article missing the word *to*? It should probably read "Meta Keywords Tag 101: How [TO] 'Legally' Hide Words On Your Pages For Search Engines" right?
Kalena, I'm sure your mistaken. I just looked, and the word "to" is in there. :) heh, thanks for the catch.
no worries
Apologises for outting the test Danny.
I presumed there was probably a reason behind the meta keywords, although at the time I thought it might just be a cynical piss take to the use of the meta keywords tag to those in the know.
Don't worry about it at all. I figured someone would notice :)
It is said Meta tags are important but how keywords are used is much more important. Keywords are a very important part of site optimization. They can be used in different ways. They can be included in the title, descriptions, text, alt text, images, folders can be named, titles of articles, anchor text while linking to other blogs etc. Keywords are still very important as they help us to identify what the entire website is all about. They should be properly scattered in the text keeping in mind the text to keyword ratio, keyword prominence, density, relativeness and position. Optimize pages with single or two or three keywords they will yield greater results.
Where he says to ignore the specs because they don't specify the correct format for meta keywords, he's incorrect (I've linked to my Sphinn comment rather than cross-posting it).
Nice work Danny -- I frequently refer to this post as my definitive Exhibit A when explaining to clients that the Meta Kw era is over. In fact, we just put out a Youtube video in a series called "10 Myths About SEO" in which you and your article are mentioned:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jzk1bcUhd3E
1) Your test for "qiskodslajdmnkd, ddakaieciuaj jkdalladpaoaw, wdaopeqndlkakljad" only proves that two engines don't use it for SERP display if the keywords in a meta tag don't appear on a page. Two do. Anything beyond that is conjecture as to cause-and-effect. This test was way too simplistic to prove anything more than that.
simplistic but brilliant. If, google for instance, penalized him for not having that content on the page, wouldn't it be just that, a penalty, and not completely block the listing?
my webpage has alot of spamming of keywords that needs cleaned, while it does penalize me on google for that word, it doesn't remove me altogether, at least not yet.