I can’t help but think this is a silly discussion, like an argument about whether or not Lois Lane could really have Superman’s baby, but I’m diving in anyway to wrap my head around it and, in the process, take you with me.
He could, but what’s the point?
Over at Media Post, David Berkowitz (of 360i, not Attica prison) writes about a Web where links don’t matter in SEO. You can read that article here, if you don’t mind a half an hour of the third degree to get the content (Media Post hasn’t ascribed to the concept of registration-free content, yet).
No thanks. If I have to feel like I’m in a job interview, I’ll pass.
Berkowitz writes:
Content is SO 2006, as far as search engine optimization goes.
Everywhere I turn, the SEO discussions center on linking and link development…
Instead of just extolling the value of links, I started to wonder what would happen if links weren’t so highly valued. Imagine if, in this “Twilight Zone” exercise, you woke up one day to find that the major search engines no longer used inbound links as a way to rank Web sites or other types of online content. The effect would be calamitous, on par with the Department of Treasury one day saying that greenbacks would no longer be valued as currency.
Currency? Who does he think he is? Alan Greenspan?
Welcome to the Twilight Zone. I link, therefore I am.
From the first line its difficult to tell if Berkowitz is downgrading the role of content or criticizing the SEO world for not focusing on content enough. The concept that inbound links are a sort of online currency is a fascinating one, but as a content creator, my knee-jerk reaction to naysaying the role of stellar content is, hopefully, forgivable.
That first line was troubling enough, but in his summarization of “Content” and its sudden importance in the absence of valuable links was a lid-flipper:
Content would really become king. Keyword density, the imperfect science of including just enough of the most important keywords on any given page without spamming the search engines, becomes more important than ever.
Berkowitz should just go ahead give up his little fantasy. Content is more tan just words on the page. As the Internet changes, so does the definition of content. The future of content is more than just links and text. It’s also images, videos, RSS, blogs and comments, trackbacks, social media, moving parts. We all just might as well get used to the fact that the Internet as we know it no longer exists.
Now here, we have a fundamental conflict in regards the concept of content, what it is, its purpose, and understanding what readers/viewers/listeners seek as opposed to what marketers (who ensure the bills are paid) want them to seek.
Didn’t I just say that?
Berkowitz is a strategist. I am a writer. And the two of them, writers and strategists, in the real world, must work together. We could get into a philosophical discussion of backgrounds and approaches to content (I’m the indignant artist, pursuing a Master of Fine Arts in Writing, hoping all of us can join hands in a haze of patchouli and sing the praises of perfect prose), but that’s a discussion for later.
Hmmm…. Al Gore vs. Bill Clinton? Karl Rove vs. Michelangelo? That’s quite nice.
Back to reality ….
The real truth here is: one doesn’t exist without the other.
What good is content if nobody can find it? What’s the purpose of linking if there is nothing in which to link? Content drives linking and linking drives content, the two of them working in perfect symbiosis.
Finally, something I can make some sense of. The fact is, links are themselves content. How you link, who you link to, why you’re linking, where you’re linking from, did you get paid to link? All of these are relevant factors in the algorithmic world of search engine content judging. The search engines – at least today – care about links. They care about link relevance, link popularity, link quality, anchor text as linking and, yes, even link baiting. If the search engines care, webmasters – whether writers, strategists or hobbyists – should care.
And all that’s great until the crafty weasels (strategists excluded) out there muddy the pure waters of relevance with keyword stuffing, link spam, et cetera. Suddenly we’re reminded why the brick-and-mortar world needs law, and why the Web needs Google as a police agent as much as organizer. Penalties are instituted, and concepts like link quality are born. Suddenly it matters who links to your content, and why.
Ummm, I don’t think I’d go so far as to liken Google to a law enforcement agency. And I’m quite sure those who are squawking about PPC click fraud would agree.
So this is where SEObook’s Aaron Wall pipes up:
But links are openly gamed today and there are an increasing number of affordable marketing techniques that allow virtually any site to garner hundreds or thousands of quality links.
One day Google might come up with better ways to determine what to trust, but if they do, it is going to be based on who humans trust more, and who amongst those trusted sources does the best job of providing editorial value and noise filtering on their site.
Of course their gamed. Any good thing is going to taken and used for evil – or just plain bad – purposes. Happens in the offline world too.
Shorter, Google’s going to have to get better at understanding intrinsic end-user desire. They’re working on this, according to some patents and recent forays into personalized search. When that happens – when digital robots suddenly understand your innermost thoughts – the power of the link is not destroyed, but it is weakened.
Well, now, Google execs aren’t mind readers, and they never will be. They will not be able to get into the end-user’s mind to understand intrinsic desire. This is a bit more difficult than it seems. The best they can do is establish some guidelines, which they have so far been fairly successful at doing. However, a few more ground rules could be in order.
And what do you think is left when that artificial intelligence revolution takes hold?
AI revolution? He’s been watching too many sci-fi flicks.
Content, content, content, forever content, driving the masses online to find it and share it with each other. Everything else, the noise that prevents those masses from finding what they want, either disappears or is pushed to the periphery of the page, the frame of the content. And then, quoting Berkowitz, “Copywriters’ salaries skyrocket.”
Or at least, such is the hope of the content creator.
Bottom line: Content will forever be king. Links are one part of the content formula. It has been said that if content is king then linking is queen. That makes a lot of sense. Still, the future of content is that its definition will expand. Linking’s importance may diminish some, but it will always be a part of the formula even as other elements like videos, RSS, social media, etc. grow in importance.
