Content IS king after all !!

content makes you kingImagine you make a search with your favorite search engine about "keyword phrase 1" and you visit the first result (1st URL) but you return immediately to the search results - using search engine terms you bounce back. You now click on the 2nd URL and you never return to the search results. Lets say the same exact thing happens with 1000 other users searching for "keyword phrase 1";   What should that search engine conclude ? The 2nd URL is more fit to be on the 1st position for "keyword phrase 1". The 1st URL might not even be fit in for displaying in the first page of the search results of that search !!

Where do link exchanges fit in your link building campaign?

Giorgos' recent post on link exchanges using LinkEx generated a few questions about the value of link exchanges. I thought it might be interesting to revisit some signs of quality links and then discuss where link exchanges might make sense when acquiring links.

Let me first say link exchanges are far from my preferred source of links. Google has made it pretty clear they don't care for these kind of changes and while that doesn't mean all link exchanges are bad, mass reciprocal linking is generally frowned upon as a useful seo tactic. I've never engaged in link exchange networks and have no plans on doing so in the near future. Still there can be times when it makes sense to reciprocate a link and there can be times when a direct trade of links is perfectly natural. Think trackbacks for an example of a natural reciprocal link.

Webmaster Tools: Find high traffic keywords

Are you looking for more traffic ? Are you in niche that has lots of traffic but you don't know what phrases to focus on ?

I have already introduced the benefits of the new and improved webmaster's tools and about how useful they can be to a site owner in a previous post.

The new google webmaster's tools contain a report that can be very handy: Top Search Queries

What matters for google rankings (SERPs)

google webmaster toolsEvery webmaster (at least that I know of) wants to know how the search engines see and evaluate their websites ... especially how Google sees them. Google webmaster tools was created with this concern in mind.

Anyone who has used them knows how important tools those are; You can see information Google collects about your websites, see what matters for their index and it includes also tools that you can use to help Google "see" (crawl) your sites easier.

The tools were recently updated (1 1/2 month ago I realized the changes) and they contain even more useful stuff for anyone that owns a site ... I am going to give a brief description of the most important things one can find when visiting the tools ...

Tips on how to write for the web

First of all one must understand that writing for Internet is not the same as writing for a printed article.

This means that if we write something and we want this to be found by persons while looking through search engines such as Google, Yahoo or others, these texts must be optimized for the search engines (SE from now on).

To write an article, optimized for SE, is not the same thing as writing an article for a newspaper or a magazine, as in these cases they will be read directly by intelligent and thinking beings. But an article written for SE must be prepared taking into account that spiders (robots that read texts) cannot read images, nor understand funny, ironic or logical expressions, or others stuff that the reader will understand. In addition to this and what is most important the SE will display the page in a response to a search ONLY if they found it relevant for this search and this is why it should be written in a different manner, but always giving importance to those terms by which we want to be found.

Fake Links: Nofollow is Just the Beginning

We all know how important links are; the lifeblood of just about any SEO campaign. The more links point to a particular URL, the more important that page is assumed to be. Links!Like any rule of thumb, that's an over-simplification, but it's true enough that if you only know a few things about search engine optimization, that needs to be one of them.

Further, the anchor text of these links is assumed to describe what a page is generally about; if you want to rank for a particular phrase in a competitive landscape, you need help from off-page optimization. Out of about 150 million results, Adobe's Acrobat Reader ranks #1 for "click here" even though the text is nowhere on the page.

From Humble Beginnings

The relationship attribute of a hyperlink ( a element ) was given a new, and by now widely recognized value, nofollow, in January 2005. This new rel="nofollow" code in a link tells the major search engines not to count the link it's applied to in their ranking algorithms. Google introduced this new value to help bloggers deal with comment spam; by removing any SEO benefit from links on unmoderated sites, to make them less attractive targets.

Wikipedia upped the ante, applying nofollow to all outgoing links from their site, except to a handful of wikia sister projects and internal pages. WikipediaA high traffic, free encyclopedia that ranks well became a great spam target. Blog spam expanded into wiki spam.

Earlier this year, Google announced that it would like help identifying sites that sell links without using nofollow or some means of hiding the links from GoogleBot. Recent events show they're serious. Naturally, it didn't take long for webmasters to start using nofollow for any number of reasons; there are a few sprinkled into this post to illustrate the point. Can you tell which ones?

Rise of I-Follow or DoFollow

All of the major blogging platforms adopted nofollow in their comment links quickly. How could a change like this not see resistance? A movement calling itself "I-Follow" has sprung up, urging bloggers to remove the attribute from their comment links, and reward visitors who contribute something of value.

Spam, even google can't keep up with it ?

Just stumbled on the official google webmasters blog. I have been there before, quite a few times as a result of searching (as was this time). What struct me this time on this particular post was that OBVIOUS spam comments from March 14th 2007 have not been removed, even though later comments from the same author (probably SPAM also) have been removed ?!


Subscribe to RSS - google