Send the link below via email or IMCopy
Present to your audienceStart remote presentation
- Invited audience members will follow you as you navigate and present
- People invited to a presentation do not need a Prezi account
- This link expires 10 minutes after you close the presentation
- A maximum of 30 users can follow your presentation
- Learn more about this feature in our knowledge base article
Everything you always wanted to know about SEO*
Transcript of Everything you always wanted to know about SEO*
guardian.co.uk *But were afraid to Google 10,000 1,000 Page rank
Time to load
Age of domain
Other search engines
Tests? 200 Google's Technology Overview Bing, 13th October 2010 Google, 10 November 2010 Swedish authorities issue warrant for Assange Google Technology Overview So how exactly does a search engine work? Crawling Optimising a brand new site Optimising the news Naughty SEO Indexing Ranking What am I? Can anyone tell? Is it worth visiting me? What else can I do? Keyword research
Common sense Landing pages
Site structure Quality content
UGC PR for links
DATA “Last time I checked you were a newspaper, not some cross platform aggregator. Good writing is good writing; don't chase the web clicks at the expense of shitty headlines”
Guardian commenter Spondit “If there is a really good headline created for the paper should we compromise and keep it for web too? I guess there's a trade off in that having some really creative headlines scattered across the site ups its overall image."
A good web sub, February 2011 So you're saying it is more important that a headline attracts search engines than it accurately reflects the article, regardless of the fact the googler may feel somewhat let down - not to mention your regular readers who come via the home page?"
Guardian commenter Orthus “Analysts say Mail Online’s traffic growth has been fueled by particularly adept use of the art of crafting headlines so that the Web page on which they appear secures a high ranking from Google. Google’s methodology was written by engineers rather than poets, so a straightforward approach to such search engine optimization of headlines generally works best.”
New York Times, December 2010 The SEO imperative is a purely economic one and derives its force from statistics, which stands opposed to the idea of writing a tasteful and funny headline. What is vulgar and predictable is also what is popular, in purely statistical terms, so economic necessity is in effect dictating the scope of headlines, I believe at the expense of artistic integrity. The Guardian, on its own, has enough dedicated viewers and viewers who are aware of its standing, that any news item with a headline that is not SEO heavy will take it into top rung of searches anyway, say the top 20. But an SEO heavy headline, even if it is considered vulgar or crass, will always bump up the article on the google search, so the temptation is always there by the business end of the Guardian website, to take the short-term view and go for maximum hits.
Guardian commenter LondonEye SEO's image problem It is only concerned with high traffic
It inevitably leads to tabloid journalism
It is inherently short-termist
It is killing the art of the headline
It aims to mislead the reader
It thinks humans suck and robots are cool
It involves gaming algorithms
It is somehow in control of us SEO myths The internet is not made of paper
We should treat different media differently
SEO can enhance journalism
The internet is a perfectly good source of stories
An archive is a wonderful thing
Clarity does not preclude style
Puns are not always good
Style and wit encourage interest
All of our content has a right to be found
If content can be found it can be shared
Using a search engine is normal
Search traffic is valuable What I believe Most horror stories occur when people make false assumptions about SEO or absolve themselves of responsibility
Inane, ugly repetition
Irrelevant or unnecessary kickers
Lack of imagination We have content
Our site structure is sound*
We have authority
SEO is the devil What is black hat SEO? It involves artificially improving search rankings
It is not illegal
It may contravene webmaster guidelines
It involves misleading humans or robots
It probably relies on automation
It is a short-term strategy
It involves the exploitation of loopholes Some black hat techniques Link farms (spamdexing)
Buying links (nofollow)
Invisible text, metatags
Encouraging spam and using it as copy
SERPs sniffing You're gonna get in trouble... Optimising an article Identifying the term Don't touch body copy
Use search term in as many furniture fields as possible as close to the beginning of the field as possible
Headlines and link text are the most important fields and must be able to stand up out of context
There's no point optimising to a search term that isn't in the body copy
Related terms in furniture are useful but not as powerful as repetition of the main term
Keyword stuffing and long headlines are bad for everyone
Make your headline stand out from the crowd Is this a rolling story or part of a spread?
How are we ranking in Google already?
Is a related term trending?
Is there a more specific, more winnable term?
Is there a precedent for this event?
Is there an element of the term we can test?
What is everyone else doing?
Is this a very competitive field?
What type of content is it?
Does it answer a question? When SEO attacks What's different? The perfect search engine would be like the mind of God. Sergey Brin ... with this scary bloke