Search Engine Ranking Improvements through Bad Blogging hurts!

Blogging Improves SEO

Article written by Brett Miller

Internet Search Engines are by far the most popular method of researching information.  Unfortunately, discovering in depth information is becoming harder. Information produced by experts is becoming convoluted (in the Search Engine results) with opinion based blog postings.  The reason this is occurring is that search engines reward websites that produce volumes of content around any given topic.  Companies and Websites must churn out information (regardless of quality) to rank well for their industry terms.  This reward system hurts internet users (consumers of information) and weakens the search engine results in general.

Blog Accuracy, Uniqueness, Sensibility or lack thereof

Blogging is a great concept, but the reward of higher rankings regardless of a post’s accuracy, efficacy, uniqueness, or sensibility runs counter to the intent of the search. In truth it’s all about where the key words and phrases appear … and how often.  GoogleYahooand Bing all try to uncover fresh information in a search, but they can’t tell if it’s primarily information or just the same information worded in a slightly different (or less useful) way.  There are even automated tools that simply mix up the words and sentences of an article so that they can be reposted and appear like new content, thus improving the sites rankings … “Content Regurgitation”.

Example: Recently I decided to try to improve the search engine ranking for my software development company.  I probably reviewed 200 different websites to discover the best methods (and I still might not have the answers).  This information could have been consolidated into 10 postings. Here are some generalized findings, based on my research:

  • There is a tremendous amount of repetitive content within websites and blogs, making it more difficult to find detailed useful information
  • Some information is inaccurate or out of date
  • Some sites give no information at all. They just throw around keywords to improve their own SEO, without ever offering solid information.
  • Everyone feels they are true experts. However, most SEO authors do not appear at the top of their search rankings.  (Crazy, right?)
  • There is no easy way to validate the accuracy of information.
  • The most useful content might be in position #732.

In many cases the layman’s writings often appear higher in the rankings than that of the experts.  The qualifications of the author and/or the real value of the information presented have nothing to do with the rankings found in search engines.

Quality of Information on the internet is slowly deteriorating

My thinking is that the practice of rewarding the sheer “volume of content” rather than the “quality of content” is flawed.  Content should be evaluated based on its informational merit and the writer’s credentials … and somehow be quantified within Search Engine Results so a level of applicability can be determined.  It should in all cases be categorically separated from social and/or opinion pieces.  “Quality of information” should be rewarded with improved rankings, but only when it is actually helpful and authoritative (rather than the current word/phrase search parameters).

Concepts like voting on blog postings are currently being utilized within individual sites.  But a universal system needs to be established that will apply equally to all indexed websites.  Search engines need real data analysis capabilities rather than simple word search tools.

The best method is clear.  Information that satisfies user interest should rise to the top.  Consumers need real information … not just “Digital Graffiti”.

Do me a huge favor (please) and click:

8 Responses to “Search Engine Ranking Improvements through Bad Blogging hurts!”

  1. I agree, but it is a little hard to restructure the search engine categories according to what is important information, because everyone has their own opinion on what constitutes ‘revelancy’ and ‘priority’. Oh, if we could just find a way for the computer to read our minds… (but that stirs up a whole other hornet’s nest, yes?)

  2. Hugely valid points made in thsi post. Funnily enough, I was reading Matt Cutt’s blog today and he asked for Big Ideas you want to see Google implement in 2011.

    One suggestion was to categorise search results, which I thought was clever. If SERPs were broken into “Shopping, “Reference”, “Opinion” etc we’d have a much better idea of what we were clicking through for.

    I have no idea how this could be done, that’s Google’s problem, but it certainly addresses the problems you outline here. Also makes the SEO’s job a bit more…fun(!)

  3. Nice post, and thanks for the comments back on my blog. Definitely all valid points and as I have long thought, the web is just a playground into which progressively more improvement and research implementation is required. Collective stupidity and laziness is clearly growing at the expense of refined and academic excellence. I still don’t think we realise what beast we have unleashed!

  4. yes! you hit the nail on the head. I am so sick of seeing these BS websites ranking high in the SERPs, and they have no worthwhile content. I know it will get better eventually, but hurry up google :)

    I thought the google toolbar once had a set of buttons that you could click to vote up or vote down a particular page, depending on the value you found. I know they have sidewiki, but that has to be enabled and the user has to take the time to figure out how to use it.

    imcoming links are one thing, but the average user doesn’t have a website or the time to create a link to a page that they find is good.

    maybe if I drank a beer for everytime I found a worthless webpage…

  5. Everyone will search for information in groups not in search engines. More user driven and created they with filter the data better

Leave a Reply

*

Contact Us

Client Feedback

"Your software developers are superb and represents your company well in so many ways, they are lightning fast at grasping the concepts that were needed to pull this off." - Client

"It's clear from your developer's searching questions and intelligent suggestions that they really understand the nuances of our custom software project. They aren't afraid to make suggestions for better ways to do things. I can certainly tell that they want to 'own' this dev project." - Client