louisgray.com: louisgray.com: Walking the SEO Balance Beam
Bradley McSpinn
· 1 year ago
Nicely done, Cyndy. I was just discussing this very thing, on my own blog. I'm a big proponent of organic traffic, and could really care less if I ever get search engine traffic.
CyndyA
· 1 year ago
Thanks. I've just been frustrated lately by some of the heavy-handed SEO techniques that are rendering the Web unreadable. Mahalo is the most egregious example, but even 7 or 8 links in a 250-word piece are over the top when it comes to readability. I'd much rather see a "related content" link, but if I really like what I see, I'm more likely to subscribe. I'd much rather see new subscribers than hits on older content.
Bradley McSpinn
· 1 year ago
It seems to me, however, that we're plagued by one big problem. Of course, those of us who are on this level of understanding can see both sides of the picture, with the positives and negatives of each. But we're not necessarily the problem (or at least not the whole of it).
The problem comes with those who are new to blogging, SEO and website management. They're going to look around at resources, and use sites such as Mahalo for a guide, because it generates huge traffic (albeit somewhat worthlessly). These same people are the ones who are 5 years behind in understanding traffic patterns and what makes a website tick. They're still embedding audio files that load when their website comes up, and annoying the heck out of us who got tired of that in 1999.
So what's the answer? Of course, there's no one right answer, but articles such as this are a start. The challenge lies in spreading the word far enough that these new publishers will be able to hear it.
This presents a double-edged sword. They're most likely not savvy enough yet to have a list of favorite sites that they check for advice and trends. So instead of being able to disseminate this information to them as we'd like to (organic hits, from them), it's nearly in our best interest to market to them via SEO, so that there's a higher chance of them finding the message.
Somewhere, there has to be a balance. I'm hoping to get some discussion going on this balance, either here or in reply to an open question on my own site. I like what you've had to say, Cyndy. It's pushed me to look other directions.
elliottback
· 1 year ago
Ideally, if you make it easy for your visitors to navigate and find information on your own site, it will turn out the same way when search engines analyze it. However, SEOs prove that's not the case...
CyndyA
· 1 year ago
Elliott, I'm not sure which way you are thinking. Is it that the search engines don't pick things up when you use a more organic approach to SEO?
elliottback
· 1 year ago
What I mean is that search engines / humans are in a constant battle. You can have the prettiest site that doesn't rank, or the best-ranking site that's completely ugly. Eventually Google will have to understand how layout and design affect readability and user preferences, ranking pages by how "good" they are.
Shey
· 1 year ago
Agreed Cyndy, unfortunately there are some who try to "game" SEO and have consequently given it a bad name. I think your suggestions at the end are very useful, reader empathy and common sense very good ideas.
CyndyA
· 1 year ago
Thanks, Shey! I think there's a happy medium that works to help promote a site while not offending readers. If more people shot for that happy middle ground, SEO wouldn't have the bad rap that it's gotten.
Katew
· 1 year ago
Great post. It's funny that Spinn brought up the Midi because seeing pages with massive keyword overload or internal linkage overload always give me that same kind of visceral reaction that Midis automatically playing on a webpage used to give me back in the 90s. Terrible.
Most content producers/editors I know see SEO tactics as a necessary evil and absolutely hate writing to please search engines. Problem is, there are so many people out there using those heavy handed tactics that people who don't use them can be left in the dust. So, if you're responsible for a corporate-owned site, for example, you start to lose the option of not playing that game. I thought Google had some kind of algorithm that was meant to weed out tactics (like over use of keywords) like these or did I imagine that?
Andreas
· 1 year ago
You are absolutely right and I think SEO done the unethical way is already a pain in the ass for everybody. Google will go against the dark side of SEO because this can bring google down as a search engine providing relevant results...
All Comments
The problem comes with those who are new to blogging, SEO and website management. They're going to look around at resources, and use sites such as Mahalo for a guide, because it generates huge traffic (albeit somewhat worthlessly). These same people are the ones who are 5 years behind in understanding traffic patterns and what makes a website tick. They're still embedding audio files that load when their website comes up, and annoying the heck out of us who got tired of that in 1999.
So what's the answer? Of course, there's no one right answer, but articles such as this are a start. The challenge lies in spreading the word far enough that these new publishers will be able to hear it.
This presents a double-edged sword. They're most likely not savvy enough yet to have a list of favorite sites that they check for advice and trends. So instead of being able to disseminate this information to them as we'd like to (organic hits, from them), it's nearly in our best interest to market to them via SEO, so that there's a higher chance of them finding the message.
Somewhere, there has to be a balance. I'm hoping to get some discussion going on this balance, either here or in reply to an open question on my own site. I like what you've had to say, Cyndy. It's pushed me to look other directions.
Most content producers/editors I know see SEO tactics as a necessary evil and absolutely hate writing to please search engines. Problem is, there are so many people out there using those heavy handed tactics that people who don't use them can be left in the dust. So, if you're responsible for a corporate-owned site, for example, you start to lose the option of not playing that game. I thought Google had some kind of algorithm that was meant to weed out tactics (like over use of keywords) like these or did I imagine that?