SEO Best Practices Of The Future (And The Future Is Now!)

Some of you may be familiar with SEOmoz's The Daily SEO Blog. A lot of their content is a bit too "nerdy" for me, but if they drop down to a somewhat easier-to-understand level I usually learn some amazing stuff.

Their latest post talks about how Google's Panda Update changed SEO forever. Below you will find what I consider the most relevant paragraphs for us Wizzley authors - 300 words out of 2,200. Afterwards, go check out the entire article through the above link.

IMHO, this really puts the whole quality debate into a great perspective:

___________________________ 

Content quality matters a lot. So a lot of time, in the SEO world, people will say, "Well, you have to have good, unique, useful content." Not enough. Sorry. It's just not enough.

There are too many people making too much amazing stuff on the Internet for good and unique and grammatically correct and spelled properly and describes the topic adequately to be enough when it comes to content.

If you say, "Oh, I have 50,000 pages about 50,000 different motorcycle parts and I am just going to go to Mechanical Turk or I am going to go outsource, and I want a 100 word, two paragraphs about each one of them, just describe what this part is." You think to yourself, "Hey, I have good unique content."

No, you have content that is going to be penalized by Panda. That is exactly what Panda is designed to do. It is designed to say this is content that someone wrote for SEO purposes just to have good unique content on the page, not content that makes everyone who sees it want to share it and say wow. Right?

I get to a page about a motorcycle part and I am like, "God, not only is this well written, it's kind of funny. It's humorous. It includes some anecdotes. It's got some history of this part. It has great photos. Man, I don't care at all about motorcycle parts, and yet, this is just a darn good page. What a great page. If I were interested, I'd be tweeting about this, I'd share it. I'd send it to my uncle who buys motorcycles. I would love this page."

That's what you have to optimize for. It is a totally different thing than optimizing for...did I use the keyword at least three times? Did I put it in the title tag? Is it included in there? Is the rest of the content relevant to the keywords? Panda changes this. Changes it quite a bit. 

______________________________

I definitely recommend that you go to the post page and watch the video. Rand Fishkin explains all the above in the greater context, and  it's probably easier to understand than if you just read the video transcript.

I agree with everything you say Achim, about what makes quality content.

The trick is to be able to write well about what people are searching for and make it NOT look like the page has been optimized for keywords.

I think the message has always be the same: write unique and useful content. But now the Google algo will also be able to better separate the wheat from the chaff. 

Bad news for article spinners. 

I also think that we still need to involve keyword research and optimization. Perhaps a more moderate application, though. What used to be low to medium keyword density might soon be considered "high", and possibly get downgraded by the search engines.

I would stay away from multiple key terms in page titles (separated by a "|"), and I would definitely recommend looking for well-written module titles first and keyword placement second.

Things like...

Titel: Fuzzy Bunny Slippers

Description: Fuzzy bunny slippers are the cutest bunny slippers on the market. Everyone should wear fuzzy bunny slippers! Find the best prices on fuzzy bunny slippers...

Intro title: Fuzzy Bunny Slippers For Real Men

Intro text: Fuzzy bunny slippers are a lot of fun...

Module titels: all containing the phrase "fuzzy bunny slippers"

...may soon be considered spam.

Seems the whole point is back to some of the same advice I've heard over and over (and how I accidentally started IM): write about what you know and about what you love.

I understand that Google is ranking blog posts even more highly than before. Makes sense if they are looking for real people offering real opinions/advice/information.

chefkeem: 25. Jun 2011, 13:26

---

Titel: Fuzzy Bunny Slippers

Description: Fuzzy bunny slippers are the cutest bunny slippers on the market. Everyone should wear fuzzy bunny slippers! Find the best prices on fuzzy bunny slippers...

Intro title: Fuzzy Bunny Slippers For Real Men

Intro text: Fuzzy bunny slippers are a lot of fun...

Module titels: all containing the phrase "fuzzy bunny slippers"

...may soon be considered spam.

Darn, and here I was just learning to write that way!

This is really interesting, thanks for sharing it.  I read it yesterday, and came back today to watch the video.  It makes me wonder about a few things:

- Stumble Upon. Some of my pages get stumbled out a lot - and I may get several hundred hits in a day all from Stumble upon, but they have low time on site and high bounce rate, bringing down my average for the page.  So, is stumble upon a good thing?

- I have been including a hot-link to the page in the opening paragraph on a keyword (the link goes to the page you are on).  I learned to do this last year (pre-panda).  I wonder if it is now a negative.

Thoughts?

Carma - we never promoted this kind of keyword stuffing. LOL

Rhonda - I'm not sure, but I would think that Google differentiates re: traffic origin. Bounces from a social network shouldn't weigh as much as bounces from all different domains. Maybe someone else has an opinion on this?

I've never heard of any advantages in "hot-linking", as you describe it. I'd rather make my first link out to a great resource site.

Pukeko: 25. Jun 2011, 19:34

---

This is really interesting, thanks for sharing it.  I read it yesterday, and came back today to watch the video.  It makes me wonder about a few things:

- Stumble Upon. Some of my pages get stumbled out a lot - and I may get several hundred hits in a day all from Stumble upon, but they have low time on site and high bounce rate, bringing down my average for the page.  So, is stumble upon a good thing?

- I have been including a hot-link to the page in the opening paragraph on a keyword (the link goes to the page you are on).  I learned to do this last year (pre-panda).  I wonder if it is now a negative.

Thoughts?

Are you saying that you link back to the page you are on?  I do not see why that would be helpful for any reason other than being some kind of technique to make the page stats look better.  If so, it is an empty type of link.  Why not link to something related to your page instead?

As to StumbleUpon, I would not worry about any traffic you are getting as long as it is not from a link exchange type of program.  However, I would focus my links to the page more on blog posts, other articles, and sites that will refer real people that are really interested in your topic, more than social bookmarking sites.  While they are not bad, they are not going to drive buying traffic to your article.

chefkeem: 25. Jun 2011, 13:26

---

Things like...

Titel: Fuzzy Bunny Slippers

Description: Fuzzy bunny slippers are the cutest bunny slippers on the market. Everyone should wear fuzzy bunny slippers! Find the best prices on fuzzy bunny slippers...

Intro title: Fuzzy Bunny Slippers For Real Men

Intro text: Fuzzy bunny slippers are a lot of fun...

Module titels: all containing the phrase "fuzzy bunny slippers"

...may soon be considered spam.

This is real keyword stuffing which has never been a good thing.  However, don't in the next breath, give up using keywords in your article.  Keywords are still going to get you found on search engines, and I disagree with chefkeem on the title with the |.  I use that a lot and it has not hurt me.  What you don't want to do is overuse it in a way that is keyword stuffing.  There is a fine line between promotion and spam.

Rather than mentioning your exact keyword 58 times, clever search engines are very well capable of recognizing semantically related words. It is much more natural to use some form of variation of your chosen target keyword or phrase.

So, if chefkeem has his "fuzzy bunny slippers" a handful of times in the right places it is more than sufficient, especially if he also uses "fluffy rabbit slippers" or "plush animal slippers" in the context of his article. This is even more so relevant when a given keyword could be ambiguous.

nightowl: 26. Jun 2011, 01:15

---

Rather than mentioning your exact keyword 58 times, clever search engines are very well capable of recognizing semantically related words. It is much more natural to use some form of variation of your chosen target keyword or phrase.

So, if chefkeem has his "fuzzy bunny slippers" a handful of times in the right places it is more than sufficient, especially if he also uses "fluffy rabbit slippers" or "plush animal slippers" in the context of his article. This is even more so relevant when a given keyword could be ambiguous.

 

Absolutely, and much more of a writing skill.  A good writer should learn to do this online as a habit.

@lakeerieartists  Thanks for your comments.  When the idea was presented to me, it really made sense.  Now, reading your comment, it really doesn't make any sense at all.  Since I won't be doing it anymore, it really answers my question :)  

The whole point about doing proper keyword research is that not only will you find the best keywords that will narrow your niche, th research will also show you what people are searching for, they will also show you variations of that keyword that you can use.

This will ensure that you dont stuff your keywords and will help you with "write prompts" to help you write quality content.

I understand what is being said here - but I do worry that someone new may see this as encouragement to just go ahead and write. You may get quality and unique content, but unless you research those keywords, then getting traffic will be a lot harder.

AJ: 27. Jun 2011, 16:02

---

The whole point about doing proper keyword research is that not only will you find the best keywords that will narrow your niche, th research will also show you what people are searching for, they will also show you variations of that keyword that you can use.

This will ensure that you dont stuff your keywords and will help you with "write prompts" to help you write quality content.

I understand what is being said here - but I do worry that someone new may see this as encouragement to just go ahead and write. You may get quality and unique content, but unless you research those keywords, then getting traffic will be a lot harder.

 

Yes, no one should think "oh boy, now I can just write without using keyword research and SEO techniques!"

What Google doesn't want is spam, and outright copy and paste, and blatantly spun articles.  What you still need to do to get found is have highly searched keywords in your article title, url, and text to get found, and backlinks.  That can all be done while submitting quality well written content.

I agree with AJ's statement that keyword research is partly about seeing what phrases people use to find your chosen topic.  My highest trafficked lenses are in the 250 - 300 a week range (less than a lot of people's, I realize). For me, any lens that is getting substantial traffic has sort of a portfolio of keyword phrases -- it's getting traffic from quite a few phrases, and they're not all obscure.  In most cases, there was some deliberate attempt to see what phrases were used.  But some were put up long ago, and I broke some "rules" that I didn't know were rules.  My top lens (at the moment) talks about teaching desert and forest ecosystems.  If I had done it later, I would have known that lenses generally perform better if they're narrower, and might have tried to write the content as two separate pages. However, in the case of that lens... It gets traffic from people teaching about the desert; it gets traffic from people teaching about the forest.  

I think the ideal process would depend on different things: how commercial the topic is, whether a person does a lot of link building, even how much content is on the page.  A content-heavy lens will sometimes start picking up long-tail traffic right away -- and then Google does have ways of knowing whether people find what they want on a page, share it etc. 

KarenTBTEN I often focus on a group of related keyword phrases as well. The competition for them is often less and your text reads better and more naturally. It's good to go after a diverse group. You never know when a new group of readers will find you as well!

Don’t’ forget offsite optimization as well. Even if your content is brilliant, it can be hidden below many other pages in SERP. To get a "kick effect" you have to promote it hard, at least in the beginning. Once a natural linking occurred, you are a winner.

Don't overuse the greatest keywords ever. If you use the greatest keywords ever, the greatest keywords ever will not read naturally as the greatest keywords ever should. Your reader won't read about the greatest keywords ever because too many occurances of the grestest keywords ever will make the greatest keywords ever overtake your page and despite the greatest keywords ever your reader will leave.

Oh, and the search engine will figure out that the greatest keywords ever in your article are garbage and stuffed.

Try the title, once or twice in the body, and in the closing. That's more than enough.

Landocheese, just what IS it that you understand about the greatest keywords ever that you are trying to tell us about the greatest keywords ever?

It's all good, I write from the heart and for the love of my craft.  This is good news, lets make Wizzleys the best we can make it.  I vow to write unique and quality articles.  

Thanks for the information