News Story Suggests Hiring Writers to Improve Google Rank

[mrengine]

Reaching the top of Google's search rankings requires a new strategy.

The old formula went something like this: Find the words people most often use when searching for your type of business and then frequently incorporate those keywords and their derivatives in building your website.

Now, not only is that method defunct, it can kill your business. Google has spent the last few years updating its algorithms to punish once-prominent sites that came to rely on those now outdated methods. Preferential treatment goes to pages that Google deems content rich with original and informative material presented in an attractive way.

Source: [cnbc.com...]

[EditorialGuy]

I guess it's time to call myself "Chief Content Officer" so I can join the C-level crowd.

[RedBar]

pages that Google deems content rich with original and informative material presented in an attractive way.

So just what will happen to all those keyword stuffed page? Nothing's my bet!

[brotherhood of LAN]

I just skimmed the article, it reads like 2008 on these forums.

[Planet13]

Oddly enough, the article reads like the "Old formula" that they say is not ranking...

[n0tSEO]

Well, using keywords in blog posts does NOT kill a business.

Unless the post is made of spun content and keywords that no human being would ever read: writing "we sell cheap dishwashers at our Austin based retailer" is good, but "we sell cheap dishwashers austin" is NOT.

As for good writing that users love, no doubt that's a good thing. Websites exist for people to communicate, after all.

[samwest]

Websites exist for people to communicate, after all.

and search engines exist to make money. They care little of "good writing". At least from what I've found above the fold.

[martinibuster]

Guest posting. HuffPost is mentioned. HuffPost posts a lot of content by people "building their brand." Do they pay these "content marketers" to write for them?

[EditorialGuy]

HuffPost posts a lot of content by people "building their brand." Do they pay these "content marketers" to write for them?

No (at least, not usually). The implied quid pro quo is "We get a story, and you get your name out there."

[tbear]

and search engines exist to make money

Well, I thought they existed to supply search.....
But, you are right, now they just want money.

[aristotle]

HuffPost posts a lot of content by people "building their brand." Do they pay these "content marketers" to write for them?
No (at least, not usually). The implied quid pro quo is "We get a story, and you get your name out there."

Besides getting "your name out there", you can also get a ton of traffic to your site. I've never tried to do it myself, but a couple of years ago someone else put an article on HuffPost that had a link to an article on one of my sites. I discovered it when I saw a huge surge of traffic in my logs, more than 600 visits within an hour on a site that normally only gets about 600 visits total all day. That HuffPost article was also republished on at least a dozen other news sites and I got some more worthwhile traffic from those too. Even now, two years later, I still get a few visits a day from that article. I also think that all those new links to the page on my site gave it a Google rankings boost that still persists and brings in more organic traffic than it would have gotten.

[wheel]

I wouldn't say 600 visits is a ton of traffic. Yes, it's a big increase for a little site, but on decent sized site, it's nothing.

In fact, that reinforces a point I've made before. Getting national media exposure seems to do almost nothing directly. I get national media exposure all the time - prolly a dozen times a year, and it gets me links. Business wise, it does virtually nothing.

I know of only one exception. Years ago I worked with someone else in my field, and they got on the front page of Yahoo news. That got them something like 3 'conversions/leads' a second for a few days. They were 9 months digging out of that. But other than that, my general feeling is that exposure in national media is worth one thing only - a link.

[seoskunk]

Lots of journalists need jobs good luck to them self promoting

[aristotle]

Well "King of Links" I was trying to answer a question about why some people might want to publish articles at HuffPost. That particular article which linked to my site was published by someone else, not by me. I publish all my articles on my own sites, and have never tried to get "national exposure", which in fact I don't even want.

As for the traffic, 600 in one hour is better than 0 in one hour, which is what I would have gotten if the article hadn't been published. And the total for the next week was actually several thousand, and as I mentioned, even now I still get a trickle from that article everyday. But of course, as you said, that's basically nothing at all for some sites.

[martinibuster]

Getting national media exposure seems to do almost nothing directly.

I agree. Hey ergophobe, this one's for you: A good example is a presentation I attended where the entire presentation was about obtaining links from a national magazine (by leveraging college connections) and then the needle not moving for the client. The presenter walked off without explaining that some "big" links by themselves don't pop. Personally I don't believe the presenter realized this otherwise they would have launched into a detailed discussion of what I discuss in the next paragraph.

Here is the deal. Some links are for pop. Some links are for getting more links. I call them Prestige Links. Prestige Links are leveraged for more links in your outreach. Prestige Links establish your authority. So if you get a link from a national magazine, don't just stick that in your spreadsheet, bill the client and walk away like that conference presenter did. That's a stepping stone to a thousand MORE links.

600 visitors per hour is awesome. Wheel must have missed that distinction. Most importantly, here is the lesson: Some links are prestige links that build your authority and are used to build more links. Some links are just links.

Getting back to HuffPost Marketing, I worry if a new category of Object Lesson is being created by SEOs to add to the wood pile of things we no longer do.

[netmeg]

Yea I've got some prominent links on sections of state.gov sites (plus a lot of smaller municipal sites) They don't bring much traffic, and back when PR was a thing, they didn't even bring much of that. But I'm pretty sure they give me some authority, because they're hard to get.

[martinibuster]

Mmmm... .gov links...

[Planet13]

+1 to prestige links.

Back when I was actively trying to get links, it was a lot easier to convince someone to link to me if I could mention to them that this or that professor from this or that university had already linked to the same page.

[iammeiamfree]

"Guest posting. HuffPost is mentioned. HuffPost posts a lot of content by people "building their brand." Do they pay these "content marketers" to write for them? "

Hmm sounds like google doing the guest posting or atleast one of their buddies. Article is about how great google is. The place to find "content rich [sites] with original and informative material".

"Google is rewarding the people that are truly putting money, efforts, dollars and energy into good content," said Scott Rayden, chief revenue officer of online marketing firm 3Q Digital in San Francisco"

Money and dollars hey. Give me strength.

"Writing is a central part of Jamie Walker's job. Her San Francisco-based start-up SweatGuru".

Hmm San Fran (twice in the same article).

The old formula went something like this:

Hang with the already popular and vetted and big daddy will take care of you. Personally I would prefer to have my own wife and am not sharing with any pimps.

edit;:
Woops did I say twice. No there is much more. LinkedIn is in S.F. as is lynda.com and preety much all the rest. There is a site mentioned from New york but that has 65 employees at start up and is working with some popular companies deserving (another) mention such as American Express, Wal-Mart, Coca-Cola and even Google.