Published: Jan 31, 2009 - 03:50 am
Story Found By: BobGenerale 1212 Days ago
Category: SEO
10 Comments
10 Comments
Search Engine Land produces SMX, the Search Marketing Expo conference series. SMX events deliver the most comprehensive educational and networking experiences - whether you're just starting in search marketing or you're a seasoned expert.
Join us at an upcoming SMX event:
Learn more about search marketing with our free online webcasts and webinars from our sister site, Search Marketing Now. Upcoming online events include:
Comments
Yeah, usability experts wrote about that back in the nineties, people only scan text on the Web. Google prefers huge chunks of text though.
@planecrazy wrote:The Google advice to "write content for users" is starting to directly conflict with SEOs mantra that "content is king".I couldnt disagree more with that statement.
I think that the key here is to understand that "content" doesnt necessarily translate to copy (or lots of copy for that matter).Content can be an article, a blog, tweet, a great image, an alluring video, a cool tool, etc...If its alluring, then users will like it and share it (and link to it) and that will lead to better natural search placement.Therefore, content is still king (not necessarily copy) and in no way does it contradict the idea of writing for users.
But copy, imo, is way more important than content. Which seems to be something most SEOs still arent getting.
@Jill, yeah, like most things, its all about balance.For example, a great image or video might attract a lot of visitors and inbound links, but its always a good idea to include a title and copy snippet above or below the video (as well as alt. image attributes, swfobject, etc...) to ensure that Google is digesting some copy to go along with the dynamic content.I just think that anyone who thinks that theres a magic formula (ie. 150 words or more, 3 exact mentions of a keyword, etc...) that will guarantee SEO nirvana is fooling themselves.
#hugoguzman: imho, writing a phrase like "PLS SPN THS PST R U SLY BRB LOL" is writing for freaking brain-washed inmature kids. That lefts out 99.5% of users, and more important, it left out the NORMAL people, those whom all business (but social networks) are aiming for... So no, that kind of writing is not writing for people. I think that "write content for users" is just the result of combining the "content is king" with some usability...(sorry about my caveman english....)
@ hugoguzman wrote:I just think that anyone who thinks that theres a magic formula (ie. 150 words or more, 3 exact mentions of a keyword, etc...) that will guarantee SEO nirvana is fooling themselves.Exactly, and thats what I was saying in the comment on the original post. Perhaps your longer copy that didnt convert was not the magic formula. Well, not perhaps, obviously it wasnt. SEO copy does not necessarily need to be long. Thats the fallacy with the original post, imo.
@ hugoguzman wrote:I just think that anyone who thinks that theres a magic formula (ie. 150 words or more, 3 exact mentions of a keyword, etc...) that will guarantee SEO nirvana is fooling themselves.perfect answer, couldnt of said it better myself.
@plane crazy said: "but the fact that writing, in general, for people who dont like to read is increasing difficult."Well if your target market is people that dont read, then yeah, its kinda silly to write for them. You should target them other ways.But I suspect that most peoples target audience has a mix of those who like to read and those who dont. The trick is in keeping all the audiences happy.
First of all there are many ways to make a lot of content accesible to readers; bullets, smaller paragrahps, descriptive headings, decent font size etc.Secondly why would you create content for Google first and users second?