Checklist: Writing for Google

Very nice article, and absolutely essential stuff to know after Google Panda. I think human content is the most important type at the moment, especially after reading about Google’s over-optimization penalty which is coming soon.

deleted………

Oh look.. more pure garbage articles with low to zero content being churned out by CAP.

“content must be human”
“In fact, by trying to speak to the search engine with too many keywords, bold letters and underlines, you might actually lose traffic”
@JillO 237864 wrote:

Just wanted to share an incredible article & guide

Lols. I don’t think so.

“Our SEO and Social Media experts can help you to climb the SERPS and get more traffic! Discuss the latest news and developments in SEO.”

fwiw I think you should stop getting non-SEOs to write articles about SEO CAP – it just makes you look retarded.

Thats a cheerful response. one SEO experts opinion is not the best for the next one. YOu can write one up and have it shown I am positive!

@OBR 238086 wrote:

Oh look.. more pure garbage articles with low to zero content being churned out by CAP.

“content must be human”
“In fact, by trying to speak to the search engine with too many keywords, bold letters and underlines, you might actually lose traffic”

Lols. I don’t think so.

“Our SEO and Social Media experts can help you to climb the SERPS and get more traffic! Discuss the latest news and developments in SEO.”

fwiw I think you should stop getting non-SEOs to write articles about SEO CAP – it just makes you look retarded.

I have to applaud you for your willingness to be so honest & I appreciate the feedback. I guess I’m just confused… what is your rebuttal to “Content Must Be Human”? Truthfully, if your content does contain too many keywords, bold letters and underlines, the engines can pick up that it may be spam and it can actually have an adverse effect. Curious to see your side of this.

Trust me… our goal is NOT to put out “garbage.” We want to help affiliates and share effective info. If you have any feedback as to what articles we can roll out that would be more useful, bring it on ” title=”” class=”bbcode_smiley” />

My rebuttal to “content must be human” is that the sentence doesn’t even make sense. fail copywriting.
I would have perhaps phrased it as ” content should be written for humans in the first instance, and with search engines and conversion in mind.” – which actually makes sense.

If your copywriters [let’s be honest – they ain’t SEOs by a long shot] decide to make sweeping statements such as “ if your content does contain too many keywords, bold letters and underlines, the engines can pick up that it may be spam and it can actually have an adverse effect” –

where’s the proof / evidence / reference for this? Citations? studies? statistical proof?

SEO is a science – and should be treated as such.

Leave the SEO writing to the SEOs imo, they have a holistic first hand view of the IM landscape, something your copywriters can never dream of. You can’t get someone else to go on a date for you… It’s artificial and fake… And so is this crap.

my 0.10c

I thought it was a nice read. Everyone has their own methods that work for them, with their style of site and links etc.

Personally I like to underline, bold and italicize words and phrases etc – and sure this can look spammy to search bots if it is overdone, but I think its important to find balance.. so if you are accentuating keywords/phrases like that its probably a good idea to also bold other phrases and words that aren’t your keywords, which also helps to make the page have style and personality. Without any diversification you might not survive a human review.

Sure the article is clearly not written by a guru level seo expert, that much is clear – but I think overall its good information.

The way I read and understood the “human content” bit wasn’t about the content being “human” or something weird, only a mentally challenged fool would read it that way imo – but I think they point the writer was trying to convey is that it shouldn’t be content spun on a 100% unique setting, with the keyphrase appearing 100 x in a block of 500 words that doesn’t make sense, from what I understand google does have some algorithmic triggers in regards to readability. And I think the point about that method not being viable these days is valid, those sites used to own it pretty good, now google is a bit more evolved, clearly.

Personally though I dont feel that restricting the page to 2 or 3 instances of a keyword is really needed – I have some pages with 5% or 8% keyword density that rank just fine.. but on the flip side I also have pages that rank for phrases that dont even appear on the page. I think inlinks and relevancy is really important here.

I am still, however, a firm believer that links are king, and sometimes content. Great content can make the world of difference of course, but I’ve recently seen an experiment done by a friend who ranked a page with only lorem ipsum filler text to #1 in google for a keyword with 2500+ monthly searches (exact) – just to prove a point.. the power of links over content. And that’s after panda btw.

In the end, though, google is an ever changing animal, and there will always be ways to exploit it and capitalize.