5 ms·

I hate cooking sites that put a novel in front of the recipe. I get that you’re trying to tell a story about how you found it or some history to it. I landed on

I hate cooking sites that put a novel in front of the recipe. I get that you’re trying to tell a story about how you found it or some history to it. I landed on your site from Google because i know what I want to make and I’m ready to make it.

deleted 5y ago
[deleted]
crazygringo 5y ago
But you only landed on the site from Google because of the story. You don't realize it, but the stories are all written because Google ranks a recipe higher if if has more content like that. Don't blame the authors. Blame search engines. Fortunately, it's incredibly easy to scroll down to the recipe itself.
batch12 5y ago
I have heard this is done because of copyright issues with recipes alone. Dunno if it is true or not. Anyway, my app dev bucket list includes a git recipe hybrid so folks can fork (heh) your recipies.
lgats 5y ago
recipes can't be copyrighted, so the novel serves as content for the site to be unique (from Googlebot perspective) and target keywords so you find it in google in the first place.
g_p 5y ago
I wonder why this is - is it as simple as SEO? (I can't see how unrelated keywords would help with your SEO really, if anything they might hinder it by triggering spam filters) Another comment here suggests it could be around copyright. Does adding unrelated jargon to the page give you any meaningful extra protection of the mere ingredients list and instructions though? It strikes me adding a life story might protect the life story, but not the actual (seemingly unprotectable) recipe. Or is there another reason? I'm intrigued as it seems to be a standard playbook, yet one which presumably costs money and time in writing unique content that's relevant enough to avoid users bouncing...
- gccs 5y ago
  Google optimizes for time on site. You have to read through paragraphs of garbage = more time on site = ranks higher. Its all about showing the user the maximum amount of garbage they will tolerate without clicking back.
deleted 5y ago
[deleted]
gaws 5y ago
Be careful, friend. There is an entire contingent of food bloggers and cooks who will make it their mission to cancel you on Twitter. Don't believe me? Look what happened Recipeasly[1][2][3] [1]: https://www.washingtonpost.com/food/2021/03/02/recipeasly-food-bloggers-controversy/ https://www.washingtonpost.com/food/2021/03/02/recipeasly-fo... [2]: https://www.theguardian.com/media/2021/mar/01/food-website-that-fixed-blogger-recipes-removed-after-backlash https://www.theguardian.com/media/2021/mar/01/food-website-t... [3]: https://twitter.com/search?q=Recipeasly https://twitter.com/search?q=Recipeasly
- batch12 5y ago
  People give twitter mobs too much power.
  - gaws 5y ago
    For companies, it's all about optics.
- MengerSponge 5y ago
  They've managed to get my recipe manager/meal planner's app taken down, but the website still runs great. It's witchcraft, really. Tine wrote a hell of a parser! https://www.copymethat.com/ https://www.copymethat.com/

deleted 5y ago

[deleted]

crazygringo 5y ago

But you only landed on the site from Google because of the story. You don't realize it, but the stories are all written because Google ranks a recipe higher if if has more content like that. Don't blame the authors. Blame search engines. Fortunately, it's incredibly easy to scroll down to the recipe itself.

batch12 5y ago

I have heard this is done because of copyright issues with recipes alone. Dunno if it is true or not. Anyway, my app dev bucket list includes a git recipe hybrid so folks can fork (heh) your recipies.

lgats 5y ago

recipes can't be copyrighted, so the novel serves as content for the site to be unique (from Googlebot perspective) and target keywords so you find it in google in the first place.

g_p 5y ago

I wonder why this is - is it as simple as SEO? (I can't see how unrelated keywords would help with your SEO really, if anything they might hinder it by triggering spam filters) Another comment here suggests it could be around copyright. Does adding unrelated jargon to the page give you any meaningful extra protection of the mere ingredients list and instructions though? It strikes me adding a life story might protect the life story, but not the actual (seemingly unprotectable) recipe. Or is there another reason? I'm intrigued as it seems to be a standard playbook, yet one which presumably costs money and time in writing unique content that's relevant enough to avoid users bouncing...

gccs 5y ago
Google optimizes for time on site. You have to read through paragraphs of garbage = more time on site = ranks higher. Its all about showing the user the maximum amount of garbage they will tolerate without clicking back.

deleted 5y ago

[deleted]

gaws 5y ago

Be careful, friend. There is an entire contingent of food bloggers and cooks who will make it their mission to cancel you on Twitter. Don't believe me? Look what happened Recipeasly[1][2][3] [1]: https://www.washingtonpost.com/food/2021/03/02/recipeasly-food-bloggers-controversy/ https://www.washingtonpost.com/food/2021/03/02/recipeasly-fo... [2]: https://www.theguardian.com/media/2021/mar/01/food-website-that-fixed-blogger-recipes-removed-after-backlash https://www.theguardian.com/media/2021/mar/01/food-website-t... [3]: https://twitter.com/search?q=Recipeasly https://twitter.com/search?q=Recipeasly

batch12 5y ago
People give twitter mobs too much power.
- gaws 5y ago
  For companies, it's all about optics.
MengerSponge 5y ago
They've managed to get my recipe manager/meal planner's app taken down, but the website still runs great. It's witchcraft, really. Tine wrote a hell of a parser! https://www.copymethat.com/ https://www.copymethat.com/