4 ms·
Know that SEO in general is the act of second-guessing several algorithmic black boxes. I'd argue that, besides some fairly simple guidelines, SEO is a bunch of
by mceachen 16y ago
Know that SEO in general is the act of second-guessing several algorithmic black boxes. I'd argue that, besides some fairly simple guidelines, SEO is a bunch of blind guys in a dark room walking around with short sticks, excitedly blogging when they think they've hit something.
I'd second the suggestions of reading through Matt Cutts' blog as well as SEOmoz, but here are some consistently referenced tips that I think are defensible.
1) Robots can't parse your images. Render your text with @font-face, not as a JPG.
2) Make sure your URL, your <title>, and your <h1> and <h2> have keywords that are relevant to the material on the page.
3) Register with Google and Bing's webmaster tools, and make sure the keywords they think your sites are relevant for are reasonable. Use Google Analytics to see what organic keywords are sending you traffic. Measure what you want to improve.
4) Generate original content.
5) Get backlinks. Good linkage from HN/reddit/delicious/twitter/whatever can generate multiple orders of magnitude more traffic than long-tail search traffic.
- nsfmc 16y agoSo, can somebody tell me why this isn't true? Or what about this misses the point?
- pbhjpbhj 16y agoI'd say apart from (1) he has it down for the basics; see http://www.seomoz.org/article/search-ranking-factors http://www.seomoz.org/article/search-ranking-factors for some confirmations. Why not (1). Well yes (1) too really but: Google use a "game" to get people to describe images and if there's text it can be OCR'ed. Google are quite good at OCR. I doubt they pass all headline images through OCR but I can imagine they might do subject comparison between text and replacement images (eg in pages using Fahrner Image Replacement) to sample whether the text Google is reading matches the images the user sees. With (2) avoid stuffing. (4) & (5) <- this is all it takes!