Google is like Pinocchio; they both want to seem more human.
That’s what Google wants you to do. Because that’s what your human audience wants too.
Become an expert on something and share well written content about that something.
But people (and Google) care about more than the naked content of a piece; we also care about its presentation. Is it easy to skim for quick grokking? Is it easy to categorize? Is it easy to find on your site? And so on.
Imagine this article without headlines. No paragraphs. No images.
Images are worth some amount of words. Right? Especially if we mark them up well with alt attributes and avoid web-image mistakes. If nothing else, an image might make your page look better and/or encourage readers to linger longer.
Good headlines help human and robot readers quickly understand what’s in a document. Sub-headlines break up long sections of otherwise more-boring-looking text with contextual cues about what follows.
Link to relevant related content on your own site with good anchor text. Good intralinking strategy will help Google and readers learn more about you/your topic.
And if you’re serious about ranking well for important keywords, your first foot forward is good keyword research. Yes. Keyword research. Those last two keyword research articles are almost a decade old. Don’t bother reading them. They’re there to underscore that “Stay relevant.” note.
…Some say video is the future of SEO. Don’t worry, there’s plenty you can do to optimize video SEO, too.
Dan Dreifort consults on UX and SEO for small large businesses, large small businesses, and non-profits. He doesn’t love working with large large businesses because he likes to quickly affect change. Is it ironic that those with the deepest pockets are often the slowest? Maybe. Final note: Do as I say, not as I do; there are way too many links in this blog post!
Is it too much of a pain in the ass/expense to keep adding timely content to your website or blog? Or do you already do that and you’re looking for a way to up your SEO game without trying too much? I know it was just half a year ago, while showing you how to automate Google My Business posts that I said I wouldn’t go into more detail about GMB posts, but when I find myself typing an email to a client, and I think I’ll type the same thing again later, I’ve been trying to turn those into blog posts.
Google My Business posts are a good, easy way to give Google a signal that you’re alive and well. While there’s little empirical evidence suggesting GMB posts do or do not directly affect SEO, (difficult to measure,) Google encourages them, and we want to keep Google happy, so…
What are Google My Business posts?
GMB posts are short missives (no minimum length, maximum 1,500 characters, or approximately 250 words) published directly to Google Search and Maps. By creating GMB posts, you can place your timely text, video, or photo content in front of potential clients when they find your business listing on Google.
Posts can be about events, offers or specials, product updates, news or announcements. Many service related businesses (like law firms with no events/specials/products) will have to get a little creative while sticking to the latter. #FakeNews?
What makes a great GMB post?
Google has plenty to say on that. So just read their take, instead of what some guy on the internet says. That guy has this to add: Don’t get too caught up in great posts. I think giving a regular, crappy signal is better than giving a sporadic showing of greatness with long lulls of nothingness.
…Says the guy who’s never done a GMB post of his own. I do them for clients. I don’t plan to get clients from GMB. That said, I do engage with a couple new clients every year. Let’s hookup? Thanks for reading.
Astute searchers have increasingly noted Google SERPs adding images next to regular organic listings, especially in mobile search. Here are a couple examples:
I want an image next to my Google results, too!
Business image thumbnails like these are one example of what Google calls SERP enhancements. It’s important to remember that Google will do what they want to do. Nothing will guarantee an image with your listing, but you can do a few things to nudge Google toward that goal.
1. Check your Google My Business listing
Add several good images to your GMB listing, and don’t forget to add a profile photo and logo. Google sometimes uses data and assets from biz listings to enhance other, related listings. Give them something good to work with.
2. Use link tags and Open Graph meta tags to suggest a thumbnail image
Meta tags let you share information about your page with other sites. Link tags allow you to define interrelationships between assets. Various social networks use this markup to auto-set images when you share a URL, and maybe Google will use it as a signal for what image to slot next to your organic SERP listing. You can do it with either or both of these snippets:
Google Custom Search allows you to adapt and configure Google for searching your own site, and the image thumbnail syntax for it is concise. Does Google use it or ignore it for regular SERPs? We don’t know. But it’s easy, so it’s another option. There are two different markup options:
Or put a PageMap DataObject in the area. …Don’t know what the latter is? Just do the meta tag!
4. Use structured data to get an image next to your listing
This section should have been the lead, but it’s more dense, and I didn’t want to scare you off. Structured data, specifically, using bits of microdata or tags defined by schema.org, is arguably the best way to help Google understand your intentions. So why not tell them about image-enhanced SERP options with it? I’m not going to go into excruciating detail about syntax and best practices here. It’s easy to find plenty of resources about microdata best practices and schema implementation if you use a little Google-fu.
I will highlight these points:
Google likes it in JSON-LD, but Microdata or RDFa will work for big-G, in a pinch.
Name images sensibly. (img1.jpg = nonsense. [something-descriptive].jpg = sensible)
Size images appropriately. Don’t upload huge images (dimensions or file size) unless you have a good reason. Definitely take dimensions into consideration when you’re specifying a potential SERP thumbnail enhancement. E.g. don’t make them smaller than 160p x 90p or larger than 1920×1080. Oh, and don’t use images with weird (long or tall) aspect ratios. Stick close to square, or typical TV/film aspect ratios of the past and present, at least when you’re thinking about SERP thumbnails.
Make Google’s indexing job easier, and they’ll (likely) make your SEO life easier, eventually.
None of the above methods are guaranteed to work, but they’re about as good as it gets. If Google doesn’t love your site for some reason, you might not get an image next to your listings. Oh, and if you do get your image next to some SERP listings but not others, don’t be surprised; that’s exactly what will happen, if you’re lucky.
Instead, I’ll help you figure out how to pre-schedule several posts at once.
Wouldn’t it be nice if Google My Business allowed us to schedule future posts? Yeah. That would be nice, Dan. Until that happens, you have a few options.
In no particular order:
Yext allows users to schedule GMB posts.I have never used Yext. I don’t know exactly how much it costs, but I’ve heard rumors of $500/yr and up. I don’t know which of their plans include GMB automation, and they don’t list pricing for any of them, so, you’ll have to contact them for more info.
WP Google My Business Auto Publish is 100% free. $0. I recommend you change the default plugin settings so that it does not publish all posts to GMB automatically. …Unless that’s something you want. (Lazy?)
Post to Google My Business is by an outfit called Tycoon Media, but that old-school-ritz name isn’t the only reason I think this one is not free. Something on their website mentioned needing their $80/yr plan to support “Post scheduling”.
I might use the gregariously named ‘WP Google My Business Auto Publish’ in the near future but I’d take a couple hours to customize and finagle things so that any GMB-WordPress post would NOT be visible on the WordPress website/blog. I just can’t wrap my head around a good, dual-purpose blog post/Google My Biz post. …They seem like two entirely different things to me, and I would squeeze that delineation out of the plugin.
Schedule Google My Business Posts Now
Anyhow, there you have it. Several decent-ish options to automate and schedule Google My Business posts. And if you’re not going to take the time to login to GMB once a week to publish a post, you should pick one.
In case you’re wondering, Hootsuite doesn’t help here. They’ve known for more than a year that Hootsuite users want GMB post automation. Hootsuite doesn’t seem to care.
Why you should still avoid embedding text in images
Googlebot crawls your site. It finds images. Does it have the ability to opine on the contents of any image? No. And yes. Googlebot is just a crawler. Does Google scan books and make the contents available digitally? Yes. But Google is a lot of things. Just because Google Maps can give you directions to grandma’s house doesn’t mean Googlebot can. (I’m not necessarily saying it can’t, FWIW!)
I don’t know how to super-elegantly make this analogy, but Google can do a lot of things, however, that doesn’t mean that Googlebot does all of them. Another example might be Google Deep Dream. Just because Google can use AI to make weird pieces of psychedelic art from your pictures, doesn’t mean that Googlebot does that to every image on your site. (In fact, Google does that to none of your images, unless you tell it to.)
So yes, Google can look at an image and figure out what other images it’s like. Google can tell you what words are in there. Google can tell you meta information about those words. But can you, or anybody reputable tell me that Google definitely is doing that for all images on all sites by default?
Until that happens, err on the side of common sense.
‘I’m still going to put text in my images’.
Fine. Me too. But we can at least be smart about it.
When I realized in that previous blog post (about an iDrive security breach) that text in an image would be the most effective way to convey information to my very small, very specific audience, I did it. But I didn’t stop there. I also added my new text augmentation of those images to one of the available meta-data fields. Witness what control-u shows:
The text content I added to those images doesn’t appear as selectable/parsable text anywhere on the page, but it’s in the code, so Google will see it. I’ve no doubt this meta data isn’t as important as regular on-page text, but it’s far better than nothing.
What’s more, using “alt” and “description” meta data fields falls under usability best practices for visitors with vision impairment. Screen readers can read meta data. Good meta data vastly improves the user experience for blind people. So, if you don’t care about good SEO, maybe you care about good UX.
Dan Dreifort consults on search and usability. He sometimes blogs about SEO 101 bits, like this. …Mostly so he can just send people a link rather than typing things out repeatedly. Lazy? Maybe.
I’ve been using Advanced Web Ranking (not to be confused with Advanced Web Ranking Cloud) for eight years. Read riveting tales from 2010 wherein I try to find a replacement for WebPosition, eventually deciding on AWR. Things were simpler then; there weren’t many players in the ranking software space, and almost everything was desktop-based.
Fast forward to 2018. When AWR started shitting the bed a month ago, I was faced with more than three dozen contenders for my search engine querying and reporting needs, almost all of them cloud-based or SaaS. I could have ferreted out even more vendor options, I’m sure, but when I added the 40th vendor/software suite to my spreadsheet of rank tracker candidates, I stopped. (Full list at end of this post.) Daunting. “If you can’t find what you want from 40 vendors, there’s something wrong with you.” I said that out loud.
So, what exactly did I want? That’s an important question. My criteria are similar to those of many, but might very well be different from yours. Keep that in mind as you read on. Oh, and if you don’t have any interest in SEO software, you should probably stop reading and have fun with some of the non-SEO posts on this site, or go contemplate a tree, or something.
If you’re still here, let’s dig in for rank checking software comparison.
What I did NOT want
I already have great sources for keyword research, backlinks, competitor analysis, website violations/improvements, and some other important SEO metrics. Sometimes I subscribe to a service for a month and do what I need to do. Sometimes I lean on one of my colleagues who already has a subscription to one or more vendors. Several of the SEO software vendors I considered are full-service suites of sorts, and therefore often priced themselves out of the SEO ranking software market.
At most, I do keyword research and backlink audits quarterly for existing clients so it doesn’t make sense for me to pay for it every month. If you’re looking for a 360-degree SEO suite, this rank tracker comparison might not be for you.
Historical Ranking Data Import
Although I’m not importing data for all projects when I migrate, I’m importing historical ranking data for most of them. (A couple clients wanted to archive old data and start fresh.) Some vendors like RankTrackr (not to be confused with SEO PowerSuite’s Rank Tracker) and Tiny Ranker don’t have a way to migrate SEO ranking data from your old projects to their platform. With them, you’ve no choice but to start with a fresh slate in reports. Other companies say they’ll import data for a fee, including SERPBook and SEMRush.
Caveat: Your data might not be in the format they want. Look before you leap.
Ability to Pause/Stop SEO Projects
Sometimes clients leave for a few months. (See my post from a week ago about why SEO clients leave.) Sometimes you’ll have cause to pause a project for years. It doesn’t happen often, but about half of rank trackers surveyed don’t allow you to pause. Or they offer janky workarounds: “Just delete the keywords and save them on your computer. When you’re ready to start again, add the keywords again!”
Who won’t let you pause an SEO project? SE Ranking, RankTrackr, Tiny Ranker, RankRanger, and others. SERPFox is one of a few non-pausers to offer what I consider sub-optimal workarounds, but SERPFox at least preserves your data, somehow.
I’m accustomed to being able to upload several HTML reports for each client. While there are several candidates who offer access to an API so you can cobble together your own reports, I don’t want to do that. I’m also not interested in reporting software that only generates static PDF reports and/or ugly CSV spreadsheets. These are comparatively horrible ways to display report data. Rank Ranger, SE Ranking, RankTrackr, and others all fall short here.
Vendor Support Hours
Chances are, after you’re all setup with your new rank tracker, you’ll seldom need support. But take it from somebody who’s needed a lot of support from Advanced Web Ranking over the past month: you’ll care about support when you need it. AWR is in Romania, I’m in California. AWR is at the support desk when I’m asleep, and vice versa. I open a ticket on Monday. I receive a response on Tuesday, to which I reply. Wednesday I get their reply, and so on. The weekend comes, and the snail’s pace of support slows to a stop. …And that’s when they bother to respond in a timely manner.
Support availability matters sometimes. Do yourself a favor and weigh candidates support hours in your process. Spoiler: I ended up picking two vendors. One of them offers perfect support hours for me, the other one, not so much. The latter is half a world away, which is unfortunately not uncommon with the ranking software bros.
Don’t let companies fool you; updating your keywords’ rankings every day, or every hour isn’t adding value for you. Well, if you’re playing at the most vaulted, vaunted levels of SEO, I suppose you could argue that point, a little, but if your clients need detailed reporting more than once a month, you should find different clients. Spend more of your time DOing SEO, and less time measuring it. Anyhow, several vendors offer different plans/options for different scanning/querying frequencies. I don’t want hourly or daily scans because I’d be paying for unused fluff. Some services, like SEO Rank Monitor, SEMrush, and others only offer daily tracking.
Obviously, you sometimes won’t want to wait a week or longer for keyword rank data. SerpBook and Rankinity get around that thusly. SerpBook gives you a bunch of monthly credits for on-the-fly, ad hoc rank checking, e.g. for research, in addition to your regularly-scheduled data, and the latter is a granularly-priced pay-as-you-go service, so…
Well, this is as good a time as any to talk about pricing and cost.
It’s so hard to compare different products’ pricing models. …No two vendors define their pricing the same way. It’s almost totally incongruous.
Comparing SEO Reporting Software Pricing – Not easy.
On January 31st, as I was deep in this ranking software comparison, I guest lectured part of a class on Digital Media and Analytics within Columbia University’s Strategic Communications Program. My spiel (“Serendipity: Two UX ROI Stories”) was last on the docket, so I got to enjoy the first hour of Ethan McCarty‘s class.
While much of the class discourse (analytics/meaningful data/correlation vs causality/etc.) resonated with my experiences, I was particularly moved by Ethan’s reflection on his experience choosing and comparing web metrics software suites.
“Buying any kind of SaaS (such as SEO software) is kind of like buying a mattress,” said McCarty. “They all might have a similar feature sets, but each vendor names things differently, accentuates their own strong points and usually does a pretty good job of obfuscating their weaknesses. They are also all sold on different pricing schemes which makes comparison shopping grueling even if you’re a diligent spreadsheet-keeper. You may as well buckle and get the one you find most comfortable to use,” he said, speaking of both SaaS solutions and mattresses, natch.
Mattresses, am I right? It was comforting to find a sense of simpatico. We are not alone. This sucks for almost every discerning consumer, it would seem. I had to ask most vendors several followup questions to try to figure out how they actually priced their services.
How do we define rank-tracking pricing units?
“Keywords” are the near-universal pricing unit in the ranking space. But different vendors define that word conflictingly enough to make apples-to-apples pricing comparisons almost impossible. That’s why it’s in quotes there! I kid you not, the number of “keywords” I have varies by MORE than a factor of ten, depending on the vendor. It’s nuts! What’s worse, getting straight answers regarding a vendor’s definition of “keyword” is akin to pulling your own teeth. Not fun.
We’re dealing with several variables, depending on the vendor:
Keywords (kw) – number of different keywords in the project
Search Engines (SE) – # of different search engines to be queried
Depth (d) – number of SERPs of data you want to gather (ranged from 1 to 30)
Projects (p) – number of, in my case, clients
Frequency (f) – how often do you want to query for data?
Sites (ws) – number of websites you want data for (e.g. your site/s + ‘competitors’)
Vendor SE Ranking defines a keyword as one keyword in a project regardless of the number of SE. Well, you can add up to five SE, and that kw still counts as one “keyword” in their pricing model. I didn’t catch how deep (d) their data delves into the SERPs, but they offer different pricing for three frequencies, ranking from one day to one week.
Some vendors, like AWR Cloud, SerpBook, and others count Google-US, Bing-US, and Yahoo-US as a single SE unit. But they count other SE and location-based SE as individual units. But AWR Cloud only goes a few pages deep for a “keyword” while SERPbook digs to 10 SERPs and still calls it a “keyword”.
Some rank checkers count a keyword as a single SERP. So if you want to check ranks 1-40 (four SERPs) for a keyword in a single search engine, that’s four “keywords”.
Rankinity, as hinted earlier, charges per kw-se combo, with pricing for each pair delivering 10 SERPs.
Some charge only once for a keyword-se combo, regardless of the number of projects in which it appears while others will count each project-keyword-se instance as a separate “keyword”.
Some rank trackers, like SerpBook essentially charge extra for competitor rankings. (“keywords”=kw*SE*s) while other rank trackers will gather ranking data for several sites/urls, for the same keyword, without counting it as extra “keywords”.
Those are just a few examples. The myriad definitions of the “keyword” pricing unit are beyond my tired brains’ abilities to concisely summarize. Sorry! The takeaway is: Make sure you know what their “keyword” is, and how it differs from other vendors you’re considering.
Plan Pricing Break Points – Important Future Thought
Some companies, like SEMRush and Web CEO limit how many projects you can have. Add your 6th project and you have to jump from the former’s $99 “pro” plan to the $199 “guru” plan, (or the latter’s identically modeled “Startup” and “Corporate” plans,) even if you weren’t close to the other price-resource-unit limits of your subscribed service level.
Other rankers charge more to add additional “users”. …I’m telling you, it’s complicated.
Which Search Ranker / Reporting Solution did I choose?
As I hinted before, I originally picked two. Rankinityand SerpBook. But then I learned SerpBook counts each competitor as an individual set of keywords, and that priced them out of the top spot, and maybe even out of honorable mention. BUT they’re still a great option if you don’t want to track much (or any) competitor data. Alas, they’re not a good match for me, because I like to keep an eye on the competition. …I often find it actionable.
Using Rankinity to check once a month is a great value, and I’m still waiting for them to finish importing my data. They said it’ll be a few more days.
But I’m optimistic. …And I’m willing to pay a little extra for the elbow grease that might be required to massage my data into place.
The Proof is in the Pudding
That’s an old proverb dating back to the 1300s meaning: You can only say something is worthwhile after you’ve tested it. As of this writing, I tested what I thought was a top finisher enough to know they’re not a great match for me. I’m still in bed with Rankinity, and after digging into the honorable mentions, below, I’m left with RankWatch in second place.
Because I want to go with two vendors simultaneously, and one of my first picks didn’t pan out, I spent more time digging into RankWatch, WebCEO, SE Ranking, and SEO Rank Monitor to find a replacement. As of this editing (a month after publication) I still haven’t signed with RankWatch, but I will, soon. If they don’t pan out, I’ll update yet again.
Thanks for reading. While I can’t answer specific questions about specific rank-checking candidates, I’m happy to opine on more general bits. Please use the comments section, or if you’re feeling shy, send me an email or something. The rest of this blog post is me kvetching about AWR, and the aforementioned list of competitors. Good luck!
Regarding Advanced Web Ranking
I’ve been unable to run reports without zany errors for over a month now. AWR wasted countless hours of my time denying the problem was theirs. They blamed my proxy provider. So I switched to a different batch of proxies. Nope. AWR still blamed my proxy provider. So I switched to another proxy vendor and dedicated proxies. No dice. AWR said those proxies too were to blame for my continued problems. So I switched to a different batch of IPs. Same problem. (Shoutout to Trusted Proxies. They helped me troubleshoot and were always quick to respond.)
I gathered and presented evidence to the contrary over and over again but Advanced Web Ranking denied any responsibility. At one point, they went nine days without responding to an email or trouble ticket, of which I sent MANY.
So, needless to say, I’d already decided to move on by the time they picked up conversation again. Then a few short days later, on January 31st, AWR apologized and they sent a mea culpa. They’re unable to fix the problem. (Even though competing desktop rank tracker “Rank Tracker” doesn’t suffer from the same problem. …I tested.)
I pre-paid for a couple years of AWR and they gave me a full refund. While the last bit of road to the end was unnecessarily bumpy, at least they ended the relationship with class.
List of SEO Rank Trackers Compared Herein
Note re: crappy data: When I started this task, I didn’t know I’d write this blog post, so I didn’t preserve my data at first. If I determined a candidate was far from the mark, I just deleted their row from the spreadsheet. When I’d whittled down to a couple dozen, I realized I should stop doing that! (#destructive) However, I’m not made of time, so later, as I determined a vendor wasn’t a good match for me, I stopped gathering data for that vendor. The more I whittled the list down, I kept adding more criteria. So, when I mention a list of vendors lacking a particular trait in the criteria sections above, it definitely doesn’t imply all other vendors DO support it.
Here are the twenty-four I compared:
Advanced Web Ranking Cloud
SEO Rank Monitor
Dan Dreifort consults on UX and SEO. He’s trying to find more people with whom to make music in San Diego. Dan also likes food and film. He just ate some ice cream and he’s seen five of the nine 2018 Best Picture nominees, so far. His vote goes to Aronofsky’s un-nominated “mother!” – Best allegorical thriller, EVAR!
I’ve blogged twice before about firing SEO/UX clients, but there are other reasons practitioner and client separate.
What are some reasons to part ways?
The best reason: “Dan, you helped us sell all the inventory. We’re done. Thanks!” (Only happened once: Hawaii housing development)
One of the most annoying reasons: “Some guy in a suit came into our office and shook my hand. They’re cheaper, so we went with them.” (Has happened twice, both clients came back.)
A middle of the road reason: “We’re growing so fast, our goals are ambitious. You’ve helped us, but we’re necessarily somewhat inefficient and crazy-swamped organizationally, so we’re going with a 360-degree, all-inclusive agency who can handle everything under one umbrella.” (Has now happened a few times, including today.)
…It’s not like I can’t help this last subset of organizations in the next step of their SEO/UX journey, (I’ve driven ambitious budgets to success-city before,) but sometimes it makes sense to move on to the next step. There’s a decent chance their new agency will kick ass or at least continue to add value. But there are no guarantees; I’ve seen these moves fail miserably, too.
The good thing about today: I’ve moaned about this client for years. (Ask them, they’ll tell you.) As a thought experiment, I took a 2-month sabbatical from them this past summer. But I stuck with it and helped them grow. Anyhow, I’m thrilled that we’re both moving on. After a fruitful 4+ year engagement, this is a good parting. #Healthy
Hell, just a few hours ago I sent a note to one of my referring agencies telling them fficient SEO & UX is at capacity and not accepting new clients for a while. …Maybe I’ll revisit that thought in a month or two.
2. Step two: Google is slowly scrubbing its former SEO guru Matt Cutts from its pages. Until John Mueller gets a new video on that page, here’s the video that used to be there. Watch it. If you don’t want to watch that first 8-minute video from Cutts, here’s his 3-minute version. Sure, Cutts himself admits (sheepishly) to not using a meta description on all of his personal blog posts, but that doesn’t mean you should be lazy, too.
3. Step three: Some guy on the internet (me) has this to add:
Be mindful of your keywords while crafting titles and descriptions. Use a verbatim or synonym keyword instance or two when appropriate, but don’t keyword-stuff and don’t use keywords unrelated to the content. On larger sites, many of your titles and descrips will NOT contain keywords.
Meta descriptions are ideally between 120 and 156 characters (not words!) including spaces. They can be longer (but should not be shorter) from time to time as long as the “important” stuff occurs in the beginning. Use regular old sentences most of the time in a description.
Titles should be 30 to 65 characters (not words!) including spaces. They can be longer (but should not be shorter) from time to time as long as the “important” stuff occurs in the beginning. Try to get closer to the top end of characters. Use Title/Headline Case for Titles.
Why do we care about titles and descriptions?
Remember, titles and descriptions have two audiences:
Googlebot/SEO: We want Google to rank us well. Google pays attention to titles and descriptions.
Humans/UX: We see titles and descriptions in the SERP, where great language will influence us to click on the listing.
While I’m not suggesting you directly instruct people to click on your listing; you should write something engaging, using your keyword concepts when appropriate. …without telling them to “click”.
“Learn” – “discover” – “find out how…” – are okay, but writing something interesting w/out a CTA is okay, too. If you’re not a fan of click-baity titles, (I loathe them,) avoid that
Regardless, don’t neglect these important opportunities to communicate with your human and robot audiences.
Your Company Name in Titles / Descriptions?
Unless your site doesn’t rank well for your brand name, you should almost never use the client/website name in descriptions or titles, because it would be a redundant waste of precious SEO space. As much as you should omit the website/client name from almost all titles/descriptions, if a page is about a person or a thing, you should probably mention the person or thing in the description. The only other reason to stuff your brand in every title: the brand manual mandates it. (Consider rewriting the manual!)
Should I auto-append anything to my titles, site-wide?
As long as you don’t go overboard and don’t get lazy because of it, sure. Why not? Keep it short and classy. Or don’t do it. …This is more of an opinion than a well vetted SEO fact. Good luck.
P.S. New logo for my consulting biz is above. I’m going to do a post on the logo process some day. …This postscript is mostly to force me to write it up.
Dan Dreifort consults on search and usability. To the dismay of his wife and cats, he makes sounds with iCurd.com, synthBand.com, and gurtrudeStein.com.
So, your SEO maven hooked you up with optimized landing pages, but they’re relatively orphaned. (Nobody’s linking to them much, not even you, from your own site.) Should you link to them from your other site pages, like from your blog? Yes. …And no.
Intralinking Case Study (Hypothetical)
Keyword: blue widget
SEO Landing page: …/blue-widget/
Obviously, you mention “blue widget” on other pages too. (If you don’t, get on that. You’ll never rank for a keyword if you only mention it on one page; Google can quickly suss that you’re trying to game the system by optimizing a single page for a keyword.)
Are you selling widgets? Presumably, you have one or more “blue widget” product pages, too, whether or not you’ve opted to make them text-rich pages. (Content is king. Your product pages should be troves of information, but unfortunately some brand identities don’t allow for that.)
So you blog.
You should blog. Be an expert in your field, publicly, often.
You mention blue widgets in a blog. …Hell, you write a blog post about blue widgets. You’ve used several variations on your core “blue widget” keyword in that blog. How can you best use those keyword iterations as link anchor text to other content on your site?
Head to Google.com
Type this in the Google search field:
site:[yoursite.com] [the keyword you’re trying to boost]
…Swapping for your domain and your keyword for the [bits in brackets].
If your blue widget SEO landing page is new, it probably won’t be toward the top of that list yet. You should then definitely link to that blue widget landing page to get it some traction. But what if your landing page is #4 on the list, and a few of your product pages take the top three spots?
Keep it Natural
Sometimes, link to the blue widget landing page. Sometimes link to one of the product pages. We want to tell Google that our whole stinking site (or at least considerable chunks of it) are good pages for them to consider for blue widget Google search results.
So, I should link to several of my pages from my blog?
Maybe a couple. Sometimes just one. Often, not at all, unless you have a good reason to. Blogs shouldn’t be salesy or pitchy. Blogs are for engaging, not selling.
With rare exceptions, I highly recommend against linking to a singleresource multiple times from a single page. But similarly, don’t pack your blog post full of links to every related product and page.
It’s ham-fisted. If your content is overstuffed with links, people can quickly see that over-stuffing; they’ll likely feel like they’re being “advertised at” so to speak. …Google’s even more keen at that assessment; Google knows when you’re stuffing all of your content with links. Keep it natural. (Somewhere between zero links and ‘too many’ links, on average—that’s your goal.)
Anchor Text Variation
Mix it up. Don’t always use “blue widget” verbatim to anchor the link to your other “blue widget” content. “Our blue-tinted widgets…” is fine anchor text. Do you use a synonym for “widget”? (whatever your ‘widget’ is!) Using that synonym as part of anchor text is a great idea! Not everybody searches the same way, and the more ways you’re able to describe your products, the better.
Linking to third party URLs?
Yes. If your brand manual allows it, definitely link to relevant third party content sometimes, or even often. Just don’t link to your direct competitors. No need to help them!
Most of my clients’ blogs do NOT intralink to their own content from their blogs, but they do link to interesting content on other sites from their blogs. That’s best practices, if you can afford it.
Be aware of your keywords when you’re blogging.
Note that most of your blog posts don’t need to link to your own content, but if you’re a brand-strong blog, (i.e. an inbred blog, or otherwise unwilling to link to other sites from your blog,) and that works for you, (lucky,) you can err on the side of always linking to your own supporting content.
site:yoursite your keyword – is the syntax to find out what pages Google likes already. Don’t fight Google, just nudge them.
Don’t always link to the same page; pick a few to regularly reinforce.
Mix up the anchor text, too, if it makes sense.
Linking to other sites is fine. But consider adding “nofollow” to sites you don’t want to help.
Dan Dreifort consults on SEO and UX. He also likes making noise with other musicians.
A is for Algorithm
Yes, this starts us off on a weird foot, but you have to start with “A” and Google’s algorithmic whims rule the roost. Ignore seemingly silly phrases like “Penguin update” & “Panda update” at your SEO’s peril. …We’ll stick some of SEO’s other technical bits in this category, too. CMS platforms, hosting, microdata, valid code, etc. They, and many other elements, play a part in the Google algorithm.
B is for Backlinks
A website can’t thrive in a vacuum. Googlebot is a web crawler. Crawlers follow links. If nobody’s linking to you, Google knows. Similarly, when many authoritative sites link to yours, Google knows. Oh, and Google cares! Social Networking and other engagement fits nicely here, too. It’s all about the connections. …Well the B-section is all about connections. But shouldn’t that fall under “C“? No. Don’t get confused.
C is for Content Content is king. Let’s type it again. Content is king. (That first link is better, though.) A client once wanted me to optimize their site without changing or adding any text. That relationship didn’t last long. Fresh, interesting, relevant content–unless you’re lucky enough to find a weird niche–SEO can’t thrive without it. Keyword research falls under this “C” umbrella, too. You can’t have good SEO content without appropriate keywords.
SEO ABCs Epilogue
There is no D in the ABCs of SEO
D is for Design
Haute designers usually loathe SEO best practices because SEO cares little about bleeding edge design, and design best practices often spit in the face of SEO efforts. Sometimes, emphasis on design goes hand-in-hand with the sentiment that “lots of text doesn’t look good.” That’s not un-true; optimized content usually isn’t sexy. …But it helps us rank better.
I wrote this post today because I whipped up a small section thereof in response to a first look at a client’s new site mockup. It’s pretty, and they’re paying a lot for it, from a big name. …Which is why I fear they’ll make my SEO work harder in the near future. No matter. SEO gets harder every year with or without their “help” 😉 I advise. We carry on.
It’s a dance. Pick your priorities and get good advice. Start with the ABCs of search engine optimization.
Dan Dreifort consults on UX and SEO. He accepts no more than six new clients per year. His client waiting list is mercifully short right now, but for some reason, he doesn’t make it really easy to contact him.