The “secrets” may surprise you.
Nick Wilson of Performancing has put together a great post that truly breaks down the methodology involved with search engine optimization in a world controlled by Google’s relevancy algorithms. Whether he knows it or not, Nick’s thoughts on this topic last year provided some validation for the ideas behind starting Copyblogger in the first place, but here he ties it all together perfectly.
Reader Comments (9)
When I first started my business blog my local UK web experts were dubious about being able to climb the SE with just a blog.
51 days later and I now have the following rankings:
Yahoo (UK & IE)
Copywriting Oxford = 2
Copywriting Milton Keynes = 6
Blogging Oxford = 8
Blogging Milton Keynes = 1
Blogging copywriting = 4
Google (UK sites)
Blogging copywriting Oxford = 1
Blogging copywriting Milton Keynes = 3
Blogging copywriting SEO = 1
Business blogging SEO = 1
All through just posting 500 words every week with relevant content.
Nick posts a nice, interesting article, but after reading it, it’s hard not to walk away thinking Nick fundamentally misunderstands what SEO is and how it is conducted.
While I’ll admit his comments on networking provide an interesting angle on SEO, it’s more than a little naive to suggest that SEO is mostly copywriting and links and think you are saying anything new. Good, ethical, effective SEO has almost always been about content development and link acquisition.
To suggest though that all SEO is is content building and linking though is simplistic, almost to the point of ridiculous. Yes, content and links are critical aspects of SEO, but so are the business, technical and architectural components of SEO.
If you’re targeting the wrong markets, or if your site has poor architecture or navigation, all the content and architecture in the world is not going to help you.
Jason, I agree with what you’re saying about targeting, and that’s why keyword research is important not just for SEO, but for business planning and copywriting as well.
But I don’t believe that Nick thinks he’s saying anything that people like you don’t already know. What he’s trying to point out is that there’s no magic to SEO — it all comes down to proper market research, and content execution. Many people don’t have a clue, and think there are some arcane SEO tricks out there, when the truth is it boils down to hard work.
And wouldn’t you agree that blogs are uniquely favored in search engines due to both architecture and updating? I think to argue otherwise flies in the face of proven results.
Let’s hear more from the SEO people. As someone who used to screw around with optimization stuff back in the 90s, I can tell you that from what I’ve seen, good blog content that draws links is at least 75-90% of the ranking battle.
Interesting article but Nick’s inability to use the basics of the English language hampers the valid points he makes.
Heh, Davis… be nice. 🙂
I like the way Nick writes. I can hear that Brit voice of his in my head, and that’s what effective communication is all about.
Jason is right on it about the article.
Nicks article is a good post but misses the mark.
I agree with Brian, is assessment of content is what I have seen works the best
I am nice!
My point was certainly not that he is British (I am too)! It was that someone who doesn’t have a grasp of basic grammar is not going to be taken seriously when telling people how to write!
Hello, another Brit here. I think maybe the terms that were worked on may not have been the most competitive. I can’t imagine things like “Blogging Milton Keynes” would warrant many searches. I do believe it still is an effective method and combined with other techniques such as articles pointing at your site, you would climb.
If he could repeat the exercise with just “blogging” on its own and rank top I’d be convinced.
Jason is right on it about the article.
Nicks article is a good post but misses the mark.
I agree with Brian, is assessment of content is what I have seen works the best
This article's comments are closed.