Is Creating a Lot of Content A Bad SEO Strategy?
-
In Danny Dover's book, Search Engine Optimization Secrets, he talks about how every page on your site should be at least a little linkworthy, or it is just sucking link juice from the rest of the site and not contributing any.
Does this mean that creating a lot of content, (like a daily news article on your site that summarizes industry news or something similar) is not a good SEO strategy?
Should you limit the amount of content pages on your site unless it can attract links or hits on one of your target keywords?
Thanks!
-
Thanks for your thoughts, Alan. Much appreciated.
I agree that "quality" is the key.
-
I think it all comes down to the quality of the content, the ease of readability, and the ability to not diverge too far from the primary topic.
I personally find pages that are endless content, such as blog indexes that load entire articles on the page, to be quite annoying. In that scenario, helping SEO is outweighed by harming user experience. And if the sub-topics wander too far, it can dilute the primary topical focus of the page.
So with proper planning, and user experience considerations, sure, it can be done. Heck, there's a common belief that short blog articles are better than long ones. Yet some of my best, most read, most linked-to blog articles have gone on seemingly forever.
On the flip side, my "Anatomy of an SEO Audit" articles were each strong enough on their own that it was best to split it out into four pieces. Not only did it make readability a bit more reasonable, it gave me three additional "new content" opportunities, and I got to link across all of them by the 4th article, Yet two more valid SEO factors to consider.
-
Alan,
I am interested in your comment. I agree with the "supporting pages" idea and employ that on many parts of my websites. The main page attacks a primary keyword and the supporting pages attack secondary keywords. The anchor text links between the pages might help the rankings.
However, I am also finding success with another method...
Place all of the content on one page to create a very long and impressive document. The length (and word diversity) causes that page to pull a lot of long-tail traffic. Also, the size of these documents might make a favorable impression on other webmasters who are looking for an authoritative document to link to. Maybe Google also favorably considers the length and subtopic diversity of these documents?
Another variation would be to treat the article like the index page of a blog that has the full text of each blog post displayed. Each of the subtopics is a subheading on that page and the <h>tag used for the subheading is linktext to a secondary page with full text and images displayed.</h>
Any thoughts on those?
-
I'd offer a slightly different perspective.
If you create lots of content that supports a higher level page, many of those supporting pages might very well not ever garner any external links. Yet they very well could offer tremendous value in boosting the primary page's value from an internal linking perspective as well as an inbound link perspective.
For example - if you want to be known as THE AUTHORITY on all things related to widgets, you'd be wise to have many second and even third tier content pages within your site structure. The vast majority, if not all of the inbound links would point to the higher level pages exactly BECAUSE you've got all that depth.
-
- Creating a lot of bad content is a bad strategy.
- Creating a lot of good content is a good strategy.
(Assuming it's done in balance with your capacity.)
Content is the king but a kingdom needs other roles to run smoothly so I would not completely sacrifice other SEO activities just to satisfy monthly content needs.
One example of content being a problem is when too many pages discuss the same topic and fragment your inbound links, diluting the effect. This would only be good if that was only way to get as many diverse inbound links.
-
Should you limit the amount of content pages on your site unless it can attract links or hits on one of your target keywords?
In general, the answer to this is YES, don't put up pages that are not going to attract links or search traffic. The exception would be pages on topics such as "ordering information"... "privacy policy".... etc.
Why put up a page if it will be useless?
Does this mean that creating a lot of content, (like a daily news article on your site that summarizes industry news or something similar) is not a good SEO strategy?
If you run a content site the best way to bring in "new money" is to publish new content. However, you might be careful about creating pages about "news". Those pages might be "new content" but they become "old content" quickly.
If you are going to have a site that places an emphasis on news and does a good job of it then publishing news is a good idea. However, if you have any other goal then a focus on "evergreen" content might be a better strategy.
Browse Questions
Explore more categories
-
Moz Tools
Chat with the community about the Moz tools.
-
SEO Tactics
Discuss the SEO process with fellow marketers
-
Community
Discuss industry events, jobs, and news!
-
Digital Marketing
Chat about tactics outside of SEO
-
Research & Trends
Dive into research and trends in the search industry.
-
Support
Connect on product support and feature requests.
Related Questions
-
Cornerstone Content?
Yoast keeps pestering me about Cornerstone Content. Is it really a ranking factor? Ryan
Content Development | | drdougweiss0 -
Community Discussion - Pitches from content marketers versus publicists: any difference?
Howdy, Moz community! Hope you're all having a fine Friday so far! Tuesday on the blog we featured Samuel Scott's superpowered "Advanced Guide to Online Publicity Campaigns." One interesting tidbit stood out to me as I was reading; the author states: On online marketing websites and blogs, I see pitching often being discussed by "content marketers" as a way to gain shares of and links to one thing or another. They should stop. I receive e-mailed pitches from PR executives and "content marketers" all the time — and I can tell within three seconds which one I'm getting. How? Here is the difference between the two. "Content marketers" pitch me: 1.) To share or link to some random article, and they do so often when
Content Development | | FeliciaCrawford
2.) I have no connection to or interest in the topic at all Publicists pitch me: 1.) To write about an idea because
2.) They already know that I have a connection to or interest in that topic I ignore or delete the pitches from "content marketers." Following the pitches from publishers, I may choose to include their source, study, or idea in some future piece in the publications to which I contribute. Most "link earning" methods are poor imitations of traditional publicity practices. Pitch in a way that will genuinely interest the people who you are contacting. Do not pitch thinly-veiled attempts to get links and shares for you or your clients. I definitely get these emails fairly regularly, but I've never given thought to just what it is that makes me respond positively to some and decline others. So here's my discussion question for the week: What's the distinction for you? Have you noticed that, in your own pitches, you've had a better reception to a certain strategy? Does the "publicist" angle work better in your experience, or have you had plenty of luck with the "content marketer"-type pitch? What do you actually find yourself responding to, in these situations?9 -
Reviving a (very) old blog - is it worth shifting the content onto a new blog?
I look after a few ecommerce sites, one of them doesn't currently have a blog, we are setting up a wordpress blog now for the site. Going way back in time the site did have a blog which was on a separate Typepad domain. What I'm wondering is whether it is worth redirecting this whole blog to the new blog section of the site and copying some of the content over to the new blog as historical posts? I don't think it will be possible to redirect each individual post to a new one so it will just be a straight redirect of the old blog domain to the new one with the same (most of anyway) content. Do you think it is worth doing this for the value of this content which is relevant but dated (many of the links are now expired)? Doing this will take some time to do so it's not 'free' content we'd be getting We have a lot of new content planned out so we won't be short of content, just would be nice to have some historical content on there too Thanks
Content Development | | PeterLeatherland0 -
SEO advice needed regarding Bookmark Sites
Hi all We have recently employed a SEO company. They have written some blogs and promoted the blogs on up to 20 bookmark sites. On each bookmark site the text is the same. Will Google class this as duplicate content? Is this a good idea? Any advise would be appreciated, thanks.
Content Development | | Palmbourne0 -
Is this a worthwhile SEO tactic?
Many 'list' articles break down so that number one is on page one, and you are asked to click 'Next' to see number two. Number two is on page two, etc. For example: http://www.prevention.com/health/health-concerns/12-replacements-high-cholesterol-foods Is this done simply to keep bounce rate down? Is it something I should try, or is it frowned upon in any way? Will it help bounce rate? If it's a good practice, how would I do this in a Wordpress blog post? Thanks!
Content Development | | getwilder20 -
How to Handle SEO for Daily and Weekly Market Updates
I have a market news and education site focused on the bond market. Each day we have an end of day market wrapup piece. We also have several weekly pieces as well as pieces that come out once a month. My question is how should I handle these from an SEO standpoint? When someone searches for "bond market update" for example I want my latest piece to show up in the results. Similarly when someone searches for "savings bond interest rate forecast" I would also like the report for that month to be the one that they find. Here are two examples of what I am talking about: http://www.learnbonds.com/us-savings-bond-forecast-3272012/ and http://www.learnbonds.com/bond-market-recap-41712/ Any assistance would be appreciated. Thanks Dave
Content Development | | fxtrader19790 -
Duplicate content - 6 websites, 1 IP. Is the #1 site knocked down too?
Yes I know, running multiple websites on 1 IP isn't smart. 6 Websites with duplicate content on 1 IP is even worse. It's a technical issue we can't solve quickly. Thing is, our #1 website, which has the highest DA and PR, was the first website with all this content. All other websites we're running were launched a few months, and some a few years, later. All content was copied from the #1 website. I'd say the other websites would get knocked down by Google, because they duplicated the content. Google should see that our #1 website was the first that uploaded this content. Therefore our #1 website should rank normally. Questions is: What does Google think of duplicate content when all websites are on 1 IP? Is, or will our #1 website get punished as well?
Content Development | | Webprint0 -
New Content
I am looking to add new content to pages that I currently have on my website. The content on these pages was taken from another provider and my idea is to rewrite the content to make it unique. Because it is duplicate content, these pages don't get much traffic. Should I add the new content to brand new urls or just change the content on these (already indexed urls). The issue has seen these pages contain duplicate content. If the content simply changes, will it recognise these pages as having unique content?
Content Development | | MattBB121