|
The web pages actually at the top of Google have
only one thing clearly in common: good writing.
Don't let the usual SEO sacred cows and bugbears,
such as PageRank, frames, and JavaScript, distract
you from the importance of good content.
I was recently struck by the fact that the top-ranking
web pages on Google are consistently much better
written than the vast majority of what one reads
on the web. Yet traditional SEO wisdom has little
to say about good writing. Does Google, the world's
wealthiest media company, really only display
web pages that meet arcane technical criteria?
Does Google, like so many website owners, really
get so caught up in the process of the algorithm
that it misses the whole point?
Apparently not.
Most Common On-the-Page Website Content Success
Factors
Whatever the technical mechanism, Google is doing
a pretty good job of identifying websites with
good content and rewarding them with high rankings.
I looked at Google's top five pages for the five
most searched-on keywords, as identified by WordTracker
on June 27, 2005. Typically, the top five pages
receive an overwhelming majority of the traffic
delivered by Google.
The web pages that contained written content
(a small but significant portion were image galleries)
all shared the following features:
Updating: frequent updating of content, at least
once every few weeks, and more often, once a week
or more.
Spelling and grammar: few or no errors. No page
had more than three misspelled words or four grammatical
errors. Note: spelling and grammar errors were
identified by using Microsoft Word's check feature,
and then ruling out words marked as misspellings
that are either proper names or new words that
are simply not in the dictionary. Does Google
use SpellCheck? I can already hear the scoffing
on the other side of this computer screen. Before
you dismiss the idea completely, keep in mind
that no one really does know what the 100 factors
in Google's algorithm are. But whether the mechanism
is SpellCheck or a better shot at link popularity
thanks to great credibility, or something else
entirely, the results remain the same.
Paragraphs: primarily brief (1-4 sentences).
Few or no long blocks of text.
Lists: both bulleted and numbered, form a large
part of the text.
Sentence length: mostly brief (10 words or fewer).
Medium-length and long sentences are sprinkled
throughout the text rather than clumped together.
Contextual relevance: text contains numerous
terms related to the keyword, as well as stem
variations of the keyword. The page may contain
the keyword itself few times or not at all.
SEO "Do's" and "Don'ts"
A hard look at the results slaughters a number
of SEO bugbears and sacred cows.
PageRank. The median PageRank was 4. One page
had a PageRank of 0. Of course, this might simply
be yet another demonstration that the little PageRank
number you get in your browser window is not what
Google's algo is using. But if you're one of those
people who attaches an overriding value to that
little number, this is food for thought.
Frames. The top two web pages listed for the
most searched-on keyword employ frames. Frames
may still be a bad web design idea from a usability
standpoint, and they may ruin your search engine
rankings if your site's linking system depends
on them. But there are worse ways you could shoot
yourself in the foot.
JavaScript-formatted internal links. Most of
the websites use JavaScript for their internal
page links. Again, that's not the best web design
practice, but there are worse things you could
do.
Keyword optimization. Except for two pages, keyword
optimization was conspicuous by its absence. In
more than half the web pages, the keyword did
not appear more than three times, meaning a very
low density. Many of the pages did not contain
the keyword at all. That may just demonstrate
the power of anchor text in inbound links. It
also may demonstrate that Google takes a site's
entire content into account when categorizing
it and deciding what page to display.
Sub-headings. On most pages, sub-headings were
either absent or in the form of images rather
than text. That's a very bad design practice,
and particularly cruel to blind users. But again,
Google is more forgiving.
Links: Most of the web pages contained ten or
more links; many contain over 30, in defiance
of the SEO bugbears about "link popularity
bleeding." Moreover, nearly all the pages
contained a significant number of non-relevant
links. On many pages, non-relevant links outnumbered
relevant ones. Of course, it's not clear what
benefit the website owners hope to get from placing
irrelevant links on pages. It has been a proven
way of lowering conversion rates and losing visitors.
But Google doesn't seem to care if your website
makes money.
Originality: a significant number of pages contained
content copied from other websites. In all cases,
the content was professionally written content
apparently distributed on a free-reprint basis.
Note: the reprint content did not consist of content
feeds. However, no website consisted solely of
free-reprint content. There was always at least
a significant portion of original content, usually
the majority of the page.
Recommendations
Make sure a professional writer, or at least
someone who can tell good writing from bad, is
creating your site's content, particularly in
the case of a search-engine optimization campaign.
If you are an SEO, make sure you get a pro to
do the content. A shocking number of SEOs write
incredibly badly. I've even had clients whose
websites got fewer conversions or page views after
their SEOs got through with them, even when they
got a sharp uptick in unique visitors. Most visitors
simply hit the "back" button when confronted
with the unpalatable text, so the increased traffic
is just wasted bandwidth.
If you write your own content, make sure that
it passes through the hands of a skilled copyeditor
or writer before going online.
Update your content often. It's important both
to add new pages and update existing pages. If
you can't afford original content, use free-reprint
content.
Distribute your content to other websites on
a free-reprint basis. This will help your website
get links in exchange for the right to publish
the content. It will also help spread your message
and enhance your visibility. Fears of a "duplicate
content penalty" for free-reprint content
(as opposed to duplication of content within a
single website) are unjustified.
In short, if you have a mature website that is
already indexed and getting traffic, you should
consider making sure the bulk of your investment
in your website is devoted to its content, rather
than graphic design, old-school search-engine
optimization, or linking campaigns.
About the author:
Joel Walsh is the owner, founder and head-writer
of UpMarket Content. To read more about website
content best practices, get a consultation with
Mr. Walsh, or get a sample page for your site
at no charge, go to the SEO website content page:
http://www.upmarketcontent.com/website-content/##seo
>> Return to Web
Design Article Knowledgebase Index
|
