Welcome to WebmasterWorld Guest from 126.96.36.199
Deep content is made up of chunks and chunks of shallow content. People often arrive looking for the quick answer, but stay because they're tempted by more comprehensive articles. So it's a gateway. I don't think you can categorise websites neatly into those who use basic facts and those that go deeper, because even the deep ones have some reliance on simple facts to drive some traffic.
If google has got so popular because of referring traffic then in theory having great links for your visitors means they will like your site more as they found something interesting and there is a good chance they will come back to check some more of the sites you reccommend. If it works for google then it should work for other websites too.
So what? AA's Flight Status page for AA nnn is extremely sparse, compared to pages of other flight-tracking sites that show maps, on-time performance data, etc. It shouldn't rank high. There's no "value add."
Instead of having the video play, guess what happened? I went to......the YouTube page. Anyone connecting the dots? It's like my point about how an answer box would keep people from your site where you might just be trying to get more people on a mailing list or you might be showing an ad, etc. So I found this example to be quite astonishing and rather easy to dissect.
somewhere along the line, webmasters got the idea that letting traffic bleed away from your site is a bad thing.
Not having that link imo might actually hurt you in terms of trust with Google.
IMHO, a well-built information website should function as a specialized hub, both providing information and linking to other, relevant offsite resources (said links can be considered a form of information in and of themselves). We started out in this game thinking that linking was a good thing. Wanting traffic from the hub(s) and fear of penalties, changed our thinking but I contend that those concepts are just as relevant today as they ever were.
It's kind of ironic though, weren't Google trying to weed out 'thin content'.
It's kind of ironic though, weren't Google trying to weed out 'thin content', yet this knowlege graph is providing a short/quick answer in a line or two.