There is a great deal of discussion about search engine optimization and trying to "crack the code" of the algorithms which evaluate websites and blogs for prominence and positioning in search engine results. There has also been an increasing amount of time and expenditure invested in writing "style formats", inbound links, attaining "expert status," staying "on top," exploiting or 'gaming' social networks and bookmarking in order to stack the SEO decks favorably. Bottom Line: Everyone seems to be writing for search engines instead of readers -- sadly, this has deterred unconventional writing styles, spontaneity, and a great deal of the magic that comes from brilliant wordsmithing.
Sadder still, is the fact that algorithms are continually being changed by those services (Google, et cetera) which employ them to rank and rate content, and that they are structured somewhat recursively, so that they are programmed, in part, based upon the input of search terms and the formatting of the material being spidered and robotically searched.
Trying to find the Philosopher's Stone or Holy Grail to unlock the key to the search engines is akin to developing a vaccination against an ever-mutating virus. The algorithms are always changing, and rankings are radically affected.
An excerpt of a brief article follows (just by way of example) to illustrate this point. This material is available courtesy of TechRepublic:
---------------
Can Google survive its blind faith in the algorithm?
October 31, 2011, 9:02 PM PDT
Takeaway: It’s been a tough year for Google search. It’s had a difficult time targeting content farms and has accidentally removed good content.
Google’s search engine is a triumph of technology. There’s no denying that.
It was the capstone that completed the initial structure of the Internet. But, the Internet is now in the midst of a dramatic remodel and it’s unclear whether Google search will get the refresh it needs to make it more appealing than ever or if it will be one of the things that gets painted over. [whole article]
---------------
I believe that this is not possible. Each search engine has its own bias (toward its own brand and links to itself), its own 'twist' to the basic keyword-based algorithms, and its own validating sources. When algorithms change, search engine ranking change, too.
I propose two rational approaches to addressing this issue, and they will require the collaboration of searchers and writers:
1) Searchers need to get a list of search engines, and run the same search on several of them. Well-positioned articles common to the majority of those search results probably (probabilistically) are the most relevant and useful;
2) Writers need to start writing interesting, stylized, less-compromised material to confound the algorithms and to please growing, loyal readerships. As a writer, you should invest more heavily in branding your own name and column or publication than in technical SEO. Branding philosophy and technology produce longer-lasting results, and represent a better return on time and resources. For some ironic fun, run a Google search on Lists+Of +Search+ Engines - since your results will vary from mine (we are filtered, like bourbon or coffee), see what you get.
A fine listing of major Search Engines can be found at: http://searchenginewatch.com/article/2048976/Major-Search-Engines-and-Directories. I am a fan of SearchEngineWatch -- you can learn a great deal about what those folks behind the curtains are thinking, as well as find some great informational access channels that you will miss by simply looking for Google's top ten search results.
Ultimately, you'll only know good writing after you've read the writer's work -- and the challenge is finding those articles by those writers. There's just no substitute for hard work and practical intelligence.
And in the words of an iconic American philosopher, "That's all I've got to say about that."
Douglas E Castle
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.