Loading...
Loading

Latest Hosting Posts


Rating:(0 votes cast)
Google's "Good Writing" Content Filter
2005-07-19 by  Joel Walsh
shareShare |submitSubmit |rssRSS|printPrint|CommentsComments

Loading...
loading

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.
    DiggDigg 
    RedditReddit 
    shareShare
    news Buffer
    Author
    Article submission - January 6th, 2010
    this article makes me so excitedthanks
    Esoteric Articles - January 10th, 2010
    Great article, do you have any informationc concerning h1 tags? I have read elsewhere thatjust putting bold tags on text is better than using heading tags. Seemed false, but I still wish to know more.
    SEO Services - January 11th, 2010
    This has lots of great information. I’m going to keep coming back for more details on a fascinating subject written so that everyone can understand it. Thank you for sharing a lot of valuable information and please write again on this subject soon! See us for SEO Services
    social bookmarking - January 12th, 2010
    this is great stuff
    pune mumbai taxi services - April 8th, 2010
    nice posting..........its always great reading such posts, this post is good in regards of both knowledge as well as information.
    Internet Marketing Service - April 20th, 2010
    Dave Davies is one of the best SEO expert out there. The Beanstalk Search Engine Positioning, Inc Company website ranks in 2nd position in google search for the keyword "SEO Service". It says all
    kavin - May 17th, 2010
    Hai Kabir BediThank You For Sharing ......... nice infoSEO Services india
    Business Listings - June 2nd, 2010
    I am giving 100 out of 100 marks...
    Detective services in mumbai - September 1st, 2010
    It is good to see your clarity on this important subject can be easily observed.
    Free Job Postings - October 4th, 2010
    This topic is extremely brilliant....Thanks for a wonderful article... I really enjoyable!!! most important medium of communication across
    SEO Services india - November 10th, 2010
    Thanks for your support and informative post.
    seo blog tutorial - February 17th, 2011
    I agree with you with backlink factor point 2! location of the link :) that's why ezinearticles gave nofollow in in body text backlink ! though, some peoples doesn't realize! I.e ezinearticles SUcks! ;) anyway there is something that you forget about quality backlink ! quality backlink factors is not only about location there's something more ! and if you already figure it out you'll get first pages less than one weeks! ;) and no need thousand of backlink, scraper, xrumer and bla.bla.. just couples of BL, I think 2 or 3 is more than enough! to get first pages less than one weeks! though its to valuable to spread on comment! IMHO
    Alias Jackson - February 21st, 2012

    Good Suggetion…it is useful for ways we can use competitive intelligence and monitoring the competition.We have an article that is similar that What to Look For When Spying on a Competitor- The rise of Internet has made spying all too easier. If you know your way around it, there’s little you can’t find out about pretty much anybody. After some research, we have compiled a list of perfectly legal tools you can use to spy on your competitors.1Domain Tools 2-SpyFu.com 3-Google Alerts 4-Google Trends 5-Google Sets 6-Alexa 7-Seeking Alpha Transcripts .

    CAPTCHA
    This question is for testing whether you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.