I sat in a room recently where people discussed an seo ‘exam’.
Flow charts, diagrams, excell sheets, server protocols, maths tests, LDA, LSI, tools to do this and that, search engine patents….. for sure, if there was an seo exam that included those things I probably wouldn’t even bother turning up because i would have failed it. I’d have probably just built links to my site while the exam was on to get a head start.
You see I have always thought that seo was about:
- looking at Google rankings all night long,
- keyword research
- observations about ranking performance of your own pages and that of others (though not in a controlled environment)
- putting relevant, co-ocurring words you want to rank for on pages
- putting words in links to pages you want to rank for
- understanding what you put in your title, that’s what you are going to rank best for
- getting links from other websites pointing to yours
- getting real quality links that will last from sites that are pretty trustworthy
- publishing lots and lots of content (did I say lots? I meant tons)
- focusing on the long tail of search!!!
- understanding it will take time to beat all this competition
i always expected to get a site demoted by:
- getting too many links with the same anchor text pointing to a page
- keyword stuffing a page
- trying to manipulate google too much on a site
- creating a “frustrating user experience”
- chasing the algorithm too much
- getting links I shouldn’t have
- buying links
Not that any of the above is automatically penalised all the time.
I was always of the mind I don’t need to understand the maths to get a view on the human idea behind what a Google engineer might want to do. I don’t know the maths behind somebody punching me in the face either but I can observe the cause and effect, note the implications and weigh up the pros and cons of it.
The biggest challenge these days are to get really trusted sites (or online entities/brands) to link to you, but the rewards are worth it. To do it, you probably should be investing in some sort of marketable content, or compelling benefits for the linking party (that’s not just paying for links somebody else can pay more for).
I was so curious about about the science of seo I studied what I could but it left me a little cold.
I think building links, creating lots of decent content and learning how to monitise that content better (whilst not breaking any major TOS of Google) would have been a more worthwhile use of my time. Getting better and faster at doing all that would be nice too.
What’s your views on all this seo science, or Pseudoscience as I have mentioned, you see in the seo industry these days?
Pseudoscience is a claim, belief, or practice posing as science, but which does not constitute or adhere to an appropriate scientific methodology…
I know marketers who do seo, artists who do seo, scientists who do seo. I know addicts who do seo.
I know there is a ton of different ways of doing seo, which work, what do you put your faith in?