What is SEO Content?
New York Media, the company that runs NYMag and Vulture, among other publications, recently published a piece on SEO on its technology site, Select All. The site deserves a browse for its gossipy take on tech news and social media, including recent favorites like "What the Hell Is Going on With Azealia Banks and Elon Musk, Even?"
Despite the clickbait title here and elsewhere, Select All's articles are often intriguing, insightful, and fun-to-read--a quality most tech publications, especially SEO publications, fail to achieve.
The recent article on SEO, which is currently the most viewed article on the site, is a worthy example of this style; it's smart and incisive, and fun-to-read. However, the author of the article, Brian Feldman, in writing a sort homage to SEO, mischaracterizes the very practice he presumes to celebrate.
Read: "SEO is Back. Thank God."
It's worth exploring the article both for what Feldman gets right and what he gets wrong, including several ongoing misconceptions about SEO we feel obliged to correct.
What is the Web's Top "Traffic Source"?
Feldman's article attempts to explain content on the web--a huge and diverse selection--by way of Facebook's changing News Feed, which was once, in 2011 according to Feldman, the "firehose of traffic, where one widely shared link could result in astronomical attention."
As a result, Feldman writes, "many websites tried to turn Facebook optimization into a science."
Feldman claims that "the ecology of digital publishing underwent an epochal shift" in 2012 when "Facebook overtook Google as the top traffic source on the web."
Facebook is/was the "top traffic source on the web" in 2012?
This is news to us, and it doesn't seem to be supported entirely by the evidence. For example, a Shareaholic "traffic sources report" from April, 2012 cites Google as the top traffic source on the web, with roughly 49% of the share of total visits compared to Facebook's 6%.
Elsewhere, on Recode, Rani Molla writes that "Facebook first beat out longtime referral champ Google in 2015," a full three years after Feldman's anecdotal time. Yet now, Molla notes, "Google’s increased traffic to publishers is replacing the traffic publishers have lost from Facebook," which jives with Feldman's premise.
Why is this important?
It reveals, simply, how Feldman is writing an anecdotal report on content that helps to prove an anecdotal point: that SEO is back. By citing Facebook's popularity, Feldman intends to make a larger point: Sometime around 2012 the nature of content on the Internet changed. But is this true? If so, what exactly happened to what Feldman calls "SEO content"?
What is "SEO" Content?
In describing Facebook's dominance, Feldman cites a certain type of content, what he describes as "content...optimized for social media."
"The key to a good piece of Facebook-optimized content was that it was emotionally intelligent, often in an exaggerated manner," Feldman writes.
In opposition to this type of "emotionally intelligent content," which tapped into people's "lizard brain that made them react to information after consuming it," was SEO content.
SEO content, Feldman writes, "dispenses with the emotional in favor of the mechanical," and although it is more "stilted and awkward," it is also more "honest and transparent."
To sum it up, Feldman notes that "social content was about manipulating people into clicking, sharing, and posting. SEO is about manipulating robots into treating your content as the best example of sought-after information."
The generalizations here are wild!
By presuming to define content on the Internet in a few sweeping gestures, Feldman vastly overly-simplifies what has been a complex explosion of content since at least 2012--some good, some bad, some emotionally-driven, some technical, and so much more.
For the SEO community, however, the problem with defining such a vast array of content in this way, beyond the generalizations, is that Feldman demeans what the best SEO content can do. The best SEO content can be both "relevant," as Feldman rightly notes, and emotionally-inciting.
As we've noted before on this blog, citing an article in The Harvard Business Review, a great way to "optimize" content is to "think carefully about how your company, product or service is related to a topic or topics that taps into deep-seated human emotions within your target demographic."
Read: "SEO & the Power of Emotions"
Keywords matter, yes. But so do emotions. The best SEO content writers understand this, as do the best SEO minds, like Neil Patel and Rand Fishkin.
Is SEO Back? Where Did it Ever Go?
In the end, Feldman presumes that SEO lost precedence to social content at some certain point. In reality, content optimized for "organic" search has always thrived. Great content has always thrived, in fact, with Google, which is now the undisputed "top traffic source."
SEO content never went anywhere. SEO content is the cornerstone of the Internet. Which is to say: The best content always wins. And the best content is attentive to satisfying search engine requirements and browser's interests.
Call it what you will. "Emotional" content. "Technical" content.
When content ranks high on organic search, it is, by nature, "optimized," and there is no single formula for optimization beyond relevance, which can mean many things. As we noted just last week, for example, relevant content not only satisfies a browser's query; it provides valuable content and, perhaps, an element of surprise.
Read: "Content Marketing 101: How to Write Relevant Content"
Feldman's advice, to "leave the reliance on Facebook as a traffic source behind," is likely true. Creating relevant content for Google (and other search engines) is the best strategy for today--and likely tomorrow. To do so, though, you need to dispense with the generalizations about content.
Content Marketing with Stepman's SEO
If you're looking for an online marketing company that understands how to effectively promote websites with relevant content, we suggest contacting our sponsor, Stepman's SEO: 215-900-9398.
Stepman's SEO combines traditional marketing methods and organic SEO--with an emphasis on natural website optimization--to design thoughtful, inspiring, and effective content marketing campaigns.
Despite the clickbait title here and elsewhere, Select All's articles are often intriguing, insightful, and fun-to-read--a quality most tech publications, especially SEO publications, fail to achieve.
The recent article on SEO, which is currently the most viewed article on the site, is a worthy example of this style; it's smart and incisive, and fun-to-read. However, the author of the article, Brian Feldman, in writing a sort homage to SEO, mischaracterizes the very practice he presumes to celebrate.
Read: "SEO is Back. Thank God."
It's worth exploring the article both for what Feldman gets right and what he gets wrong, including several ongoing misconceptions about SEO we feel obliged to correct.
 |
| Feldman explores "social" content and "SEO" content in his article "SEO is Back. Thank God." |
Feldman's article attempts to explain content on the web--a huge and diverse selection--by way of Facebook's changing News Feed, which was once, in 2011 according to Feldman, the "firehose of traffic, where one widely shared link could result in astronomical attention."
As a result, Feldman writes, "many websites tried to turn Facebook optimization into a science."
Feldman claims that "the ecology of digital publishing underwent an epochal shift" in 2012 when "Facebook overtook Google as the top traffic source on the web."
Facebook is/was the "top traffic source on the web" in 2012?
This is news to us, and it doesn't seem to be supported entirely by the evidence. For example, a Shareaholic "traffic sources report" from April, 2012 cites Google as the top traffic source on the web, with roughly 49% of the share of total visits compared to Facebook's 6%.
Elsewhere, on Recode, Rani Molla writes that "Facebook first beat out longtime referral champ Google in 2015," a full three years after Feldman's anecdotal time. Yet now, Molla notes, "Google’s increased traffic to publishers is replacing the traffic publishers have lost from Facebook," which jives with Feldman's premise.
Why is this important?
It reveals, simply, how Feldman is writing an anecdotal report on content that helps to prove an anecdotal point: that SEO is back. By citing Facebook's popularity, Feldman intends to make a larger point: Sometime around 2012 the nature of content on the Internet changed. But is this true? If so, what exactly happened to what Feldman calls "SEO content"?
What is "SEO" Content?
In describing Facebook's dominance, Feldman cites a certain type of content, what he describes as "content...optimized for social media."
"The key to a good piece of Facebook-optimized content was that it was emotionally intelligent, often in an exaggerated manner," Feldman writes.
In opposition to this type of "emotionally intelligent content," which tapped into people's "lizard brain that made them react to information after consuming it," was SEO content.
SEO content, Feldman writes, "dispenses with the emotional in favor of the mechanical," and although it is more "stilted and awkward," it is also more "honest and transparent."
To sum it up, Feldman notes that "social content was about manipulating people into clicking, sharing, and posting. SEO is about manipulating robots into treating your content as the best example of sought-after information."
The generalizations here are wild!
By presuming to define content on the Internet in a few sweeping gestures, Feldman vastly overly-simplifies what has been a complex explosion of content since at least 2012--some good, some bad, some emotionally-driven, some technical, and so much more.
For the SEO community, however, the problem with defining such a vast array of content in this way, beyond the generalizations, is that Feldman demeans what the best SEO content can do. The best SEO content can be both "relevant," as Feldman rightly notes, and emotionally-inciting.
As we've noted before on this blog, citing an article in The Harvard Business Review, a great way to "optimize" content is to "think carefully about how your company, product or service is related to a topic or topics that taps into deep-seated human emotions within your target demographic."
Read: "SEO & the Power of Emotions"
Keywords matter, yes. But so do emotions. The best SEO content writers understand this, as do the best SEO minds, like Neil Patel and Rand Fishkin.
Is SEO Back? Where Did it Ever Go?
In the end, Feldman presumes that SEO lost precedence to social content at some certain point. In reality, content optimized for "organic" search has always thrived. Great content has always thrived, in fact, with Google, which is now the undisputed "top traffic source."
SEO content never went anywhere. SEO content is the cornerstone of the Internet. Which is to say: The best content always wins. And the best content is attentive to satisfying search engine requirements and browser's interests.
Call it what you will. "Emotional" content. "Technical" content.
When content ranks high on organic search, it is, by nature, "optimized," and there is no single formula for optimization beyond relevance, which can mean many things. As we noted just last week, for example, relevant content not only satisfies a browser's query; it provides valuable content and, perhaps, an element of surprise.
Read: "Content Marketing 101: How to Write Relevant Content"
Feldman's advice, to "leave the reliance on Facebook as a traffic source behind," is likely true. Creating relevant content for Google (and other search engines) is the best strategy for today--and likely tomorrow. To do so, though, you need to dispense with the generalizations about content.
Content Marketing with Stepman's SEO
If you're looking for an online marketing company that understands how to effectively promote websites with relevant content, we suggest contacting our sponsor, Stepman's SEO: 215-900-9398.
Stepman's SEO combines traditional marketing methods and organic SEO--with an emphasis on natural website optimization--to design thoughtful, inspiring, and effective content marketing campaigns.
What is SEO Content?
Reviewed by penulis
on
14.10
Rating:
Reviewed by penulis
on
14.10
Rating:
Post a Comment