Better to trick Google, or work with Google?

[paulseowork]

You guys here always have great comments, so here's my latest musings and questions.

From Google's perspective, Google wants to hook up the best content with users, and thereby hook up the best users to advertisers, and finally hook up the best advertisers with Google, making lots of money.

If Google were 100% awesome/god-like, to get on the first page results for any keyword, what I would really have to do is figure out how to make content that users and advertisers prefer over any other competitor site. All I would have to do is focus on creating the best content, and that's it. An omnipotent Google would immediately recognize the value of my work to users and advertisers and place it at the top.

In reality, people seem to get first page rankings based on SEO practices that, in many cases, have nothing to do with what the user wants. Panda tried to address this... but from the thriving SEO people here and elsewhere, I take it that SEO still works. In fact, simply having to do any SEO indicates that Google is failing miserably at finding the best content for its users and advertisers. They can't tell without SEO/links what is actually good for users and what is not, and even then, they usually get the answer wrong.

I wonder how much social media, Google+ votes, and so on will change that, but continuing...

I'm torn about what strategy to pursue. The current mentality behind get an EMD, 5-10 x 1000 word articles from a decent writer, etc. is basically assembling "good enough" content and then SEO-ing the hell out of it for a ranking.

At a certain point, when Google is smart enough, wouldn't we be better spending our time making absolutely fantastic content, and just doing marginal SEO to put it on the map, so to speak? When will we be at the point where Google is smart enough to evaluate content properly? Or are we already there?

If I make content so good that anyone who sees it will say "that is the best content for that keyword"... is that currently enough to rank?

My uneducated guess is no, we are not there yet. But what do you think? And if we are not there, how close are we?

How much time/money do you spend on content versus SEO? If the balance tips towards SEO, Google is doing a very bad job and can be tricked. If the balance tips towards content, then Google is doing a great job, and we should work with Google all the way.

Thoughts? Thanks.

 

[1yerrot]

First off, +rep for a great topic.

Secondly, I've been thinking about this alot the last week or so. I have a site that I have heavily seo'd(on and off site) and it brings in pretty good money. I have been trying to look past the Panda update though, it hit me on some sites and others not so much, but I take it as a warning that Google WILL get good enough to push the truest and best content to the top some day.

Like you said SEO tactics are still in FULL effect, it's just about finding a new way to skin the cat right now.

My plan is to stick to a few profitable niches (Guerilla just mentioned this recently as well, about him sticking to the same group of niches) and take 2 niches I'm already in and really make sites that have amazing, killer content. It's going to be easy for one niche because I'm passionate about it and have a great domain SEO-wise, the other will be tougher, because I care little about the niche but it's profitable. I found a really catchy (brandable) domain name with two major keywords in it, it's a niche that I have a full site for already, but because of it's profitability I want to make a REAL site, something people will remember if I fell out of the SERPs.

My question is this. We are SEOs, not everything we are passionate about is profitable. At the end of the day this is about PROFIT. We don't do this for hobby. So how do you built BEASTLY content about something you don't really care about?

It's really easy for someone who writes about something they truly have a passion for to say "write for your readers" because having love/passin/deep knowledge for the topic or niche gives you the ability to KNOW what your readers will want for the most part.

And all the LSI outsourcing in the world STILL will not give you a truly congruous and engaging website.

So what's the answer?

Only write about crap you love, without considering the monetary value of it? It's a catch 22...

But I'm going to try my best with a milktoast(in my mind) subject/niche, I literally couldn't sleep for hours last night because I'm trying to think of a way to make the topic "linkbait" worthy and stir up some interested traffic.

 

[paulseowork]

I totally understand where you are coming from. Some of the most profitable niches are in the most boring topics I could care less about.

I've seen some pretty funny professional marketing attempts to make linkbait on deathly dreary topics. I mean, imagine trying to make linkbait about credit cards, mortagages, or health insurance. Yeah...

Maybe we could try to transform into real marketers, not just SEO-ers. Think of all the awesome TV commericals that everyone loves. Or even the internet viral ads like Old Spice guy. We could try to basically turn our website into an awesome yet informative commercial for whatever niche - a complete production, not just a bunch of articles on a blog. If you care about art, programming, or some other media that is good for it, it wouldn't really matter what niche. Your passion would be about the method, not the subject.

Stupid example: maybe you love to sing and have a great voice. Start writing and recording videos of yourself singing advertisements about credit card offers. Make the songs extra-awesome, since that is where your passion is.

I dunno. Just some random brainstorming.

 

[LiamGallagher]

I understand your points here: there was a time when I thought that if I wrote good content, about something I really like, I would attract more readers, and eventually, other users would link my content because it would be so kick ass. Sadly, I discovered this romantic idea about SEO is almost an utopia. I know that good content generates buzz in some way, but let's get real here. What's the percentage of good articles, actually useful articles, that's ranking well for a keyword?.

As a blogger I've come by this situation over and over again. Every other day I would write an article which would take me 2 or more hours to write. At the end, I was very proud of what I did but I realized that almost nobody would like to my content. It might be that it was not good enough to be viral, but in the other side, other shitty, short and non informative posts would rank higher than my post. In the worst of the situations, a damn autoblog would outrank the original post. After panda update this is not a common thing anymore, but it still happens.

I love how Google always say that good content it's enough for ranking in the SERPs. That's a lie, and they know it. They just want us not to cheat nor spam the interwebz to avoid 'unfair' advantages. If you had the intention to write wonderful content and expecting it would rank alone, then your expectations were too high.

I'm not saying you should go spamming and producing shitty sites. We all know that quality content and a solid site are a good combination in the long run. In my opinion is not that you try to cheat Google. Just produce amazing content, and make sure the others notice it does exist. I can't visualize a world where all the SEOs are not getting links in one way or another; after all, that's one part of their job. Google say that buying links is bad but I can't really conceive a successful site without link acquisition. For sure there are a lot of sites that became popular under this scheme (mashable, huffington post, the next web, etc.), but not all of the persons can afford content of such quality.

Just relax, and go easy on Google, but don't let the others to outrank you. White/red/pink/blue/blackhat. Whatever you use, always use common sense. Try to simulate what would happen if your site was as popular as Google says it would be if you wrote quality content.

If you're passionate about the topic, then it's a lot easier to produce good content. Before I used to write all the content in my sites, but now sometimes I outsource a portion of the job. I'm in favor of good, quality and authority sites, but I'm also in favor of outsourced backlinking campaigns, if you know what I mean. Just produce useful content for the visitors and make sure you have enough links to rank.

 

[paulseowork]

Yeah, I know currently SEO still dominates.

I mean if you google how to get a six pack, 6-7 of the top 10 hits are shitty ebook landing pages, 2 more are crappy blogs written by affiliates, and only 1 is actually a real site (webmd).

It sucks having to always walk the line between google and your spammy competitors. I wish we could just be friends with google so that there is one less thing to worry about (on that note I also wish for world peace and a billion dollars...). I get annoyed with google, not for having policies, but for being so two-faced and insincere about them. Oh well.

 

[1yerrot]

. If you had the intention to write wonderful content and expecting it would rank alone, then your expectations were too high.

Unfortunately, many well-meaning newbies have been brainwashed to believe that good content is all it takes and maybe a couple "valuable" link exchanges. I know people who act like I'm a bad person for even suggesting they building their own 1-way links.

If you're passionate about the topic, then it's a lot easier to produce good content. Before I used to write all the content in my sites, but now sometimes I outsource a portion of the job. I'm in favor of good, quality and authority sites, but I'm also in favor of outsourced backlinking campaigns, if you know what I mean. Just produce useful content for the visitors and make sure you have enough links to rank.

I agree, but what about the topics we're NOT passionate at all about? Also, what do you do to define your site as an "authority site"?

 

[Hav3n]

My thoughts?

You can build what you think are two identical sites in the same niche and one will do well and the other will tank.

SEO for the short term.

Reinvest in and improve the 'winners' for the long term.

.02