Fresh Content Still As important?
-
We have an internal debate, that perhaps y'all can help us resolve.
In the past "freshness" of content has been important, correct? (Google's QDF for example) In the past (to present) when we build a site with the intent to SEO the site, we build the core pages with the expectation that we will be adding more site pages as the project progresses, thus settling the "fresh content" factor.
But it has been proposed to us, from a client, that completely building the site out with all the pages you hope to rank, getting the upfront bang for your buck. The expectation is that the traffic soars right-off.
Now the client says that he has been doing this for years and has not been affected by any alog changes. (although we have not seen proof of this from him)
So our question is this: Is it better to provide a website full of fresh content at the beginning of the project, for a jumpstart on traffic, then leave the site alone ( for the most part)
or
Is it better to have core pages of fresh content at the start, and build out new pages from their, so the website remains fresh every month?
And can you prove your argument? (we need cold hard facts to be convinced
-
EGOL, a big time member on these forums posted years ago that there will be a day when the only thing that a search engine truly judges a website on is Keywords and content. Now I'm not entirely sure I'm completely on board with that (I'm about 95%), but I do agree that content, especially after the recent SE updates, has shifted back into power.
My father owns a business, we make educational materials for people with mild to severe autism. He is very successful, and he personally doesn't have the time or energy to spend in writing a daily blog, and unfortunately doesn't trust anybody to ghost write for him.
So we came up with an alternative. A combo of original content mixed with educational reports, interesting studies, and every now and then some strange funny story from theOnion. We would post at least one original piece a week, if we could 2, and then everything else from there. I made a few Bullying Infographics for his business to post and share on social media. Now, it wasn't always keyword heavy content, but as long as it was content worth sharing, it did get us a lot of links.
At the end of the day, if I have to make a decision on how Google is doing something, I try to remind myself Google is in the business of making money. They do that by providing the best, accurate, human, natural, semantic, organic, pefect-beacue-I-am-a-snowflake, result. Google, in my opinion, will take how current the website is, into account.
Content is King.
-
This is our thought as well. A continuous feed of fresh content is a better approach than a one off. This is how we've been doing it, but we're really interested in knowing if others have tried this other approach, with any lasting sustainability in traffic or ranking. ( we kind of doubt it, but would love to see proof that it works)
-
The QDF is aimed at hot/current topics right ? So while it might be important for a news site or a celebrity gossip site I don't think it will be relevant for every site.
You have mentioned that the client has proposed to build the site with "all the pages you hope to rank for", which means the topic is restrictive and there is a limit to what you can write about the subject. But then to launch the site with this approach you need to get all the content ready and that might take some time.
A much more sensible approach would be to launch the site with a reasonable amount of content and then add the rest of the content when possible. This way you can start with the link building, social sharing process early.
I don't think just because you launch a site with lots of fresh content it will give you a jump start in traffic, but I'm interested to see if anyone had success with this method.
-
Fresh content is definitely important and while you may get the boost at the start you'll quickly loose it if you're not putting up new content.
Got a burning SEO question?
Subscribe to Moz Pro to gain full access to Q&A, answer questions, and ask your own.
Browse Questions
Explore more categories
-
Moz Tools
Chat with the community about the Moz tools.
-
SEO Tactics
Discuss the SEO process with fellow marketers
-
Community
Discuss industry events, jobs, and news!
-
Digital Marketing
Chat about tactics outside of SEO
-
Research & Trends
Dive into research and trends in the search industry.
-
Support
Connect on product support and feature requests.
Related Questions
-
Is the meta referrer tag still used
Is the meta meta referrer tag still used and is it affective. I have an issue with traffic going from one of my sites to a client site and our referral is going into their direct traffic (in Googel Analytics) instead of being seen as a referral from our site. I saw that people were using the meta referral tag, but I can't find any MOZ info about it other than a blog article from 2015.
Reporting & Analytics | | dpsoftware1 -
SEO Effect of inserting No indexed Contents in normal Pages (Nextgen Gallery)
Hello Dear Community, I'm running a photography website and have a question about the indexability of "No indexed Content" inserted on indexable pages. Background : I read everywhere that best practice is to "no index" all useless pages with few content, what I did with Yoast plugin : I no indexed all my nextgen galleries and "ngg_tags" since they create single pages for every photo, tags or slideshow. I did the same for all my porfolio-posts, price lists, testimonials and so on... Nevertheless, I inserted these galleries and portfolios on SEO optimized page for my target keywords. + Nextgen plugin automatically adds these images in the page sitemap. My idea is to have only my Seo optimized page showing in Google and not the others. Problem: I've been checking the results in Google Search Console, filtering by images : I discovered that most of the images featured in these Masonry galleries are not showing in google, and actually almost all the images indexed are the Wordpress from media gallery. I double checked with Screaming Frog, and the software doesn"t see images on these pages. My question is: Is the low indexablilty of these contents are related to the No indexation of the original contents ??? Does somebody has experienced the same issue that these contents doesn't show on Google ? in advance many thanks for your help
Reporting & Analytics | | TristanAventure0 -
Excluding Cookieless Static Content Sub-domain from GA/GTM
For the purposes of this question our ecommerce site url is www.ecommerce.com Our TLD is ecommerce.com We have, following advice from Yslow, Pagespeed and others, moved our static content to a subdomain - static.ecommerce.com We have Google Analytics and Enhance Ecommerce installed, fired from GTM. The cookieDomain setting in GTM is 'auto' At present cookies are being attached to our static resources. What changes do I need to make to to prevent this happening? Many thanks Julian
Reporting & Analytics | | jdeb0 -
Community Discussion - Do you think increasing word count helps content rank better?
In the online marketing community, there is a widespread belief that long-form content ranks better. In today's YouMoz post, Ryan Purthill shares how his research indicated 1,125 to be a magic number of sorts: The closer a post got to this word count, the better it ranked. Diminishing returns, however, were seen once a post exceeded 1,125 words. Does this jibe with your own data and experiences? Do you think increasing word count helps content rank better in general? What about for specific industries and types of content? Let's discuss!
Reporting & Analytics | | Christy-Correll6 -
Ecommerce, Product Content & Google Metrics
Hi I know Google has many different variations of what they consider to be thin content. I wondered if anyone has an idea of the best metric to determine what content you need to improve on your site? I work on a large e-commerce site so there are a thousands of product pages - all with product descriptions similar [but not duplicate] to competitors. I guess in terms of quantity, these pages don't have huge amounts of written content, so I'm wondering what Google classes as 'thin' on a product page: 1. Does Google just expect a conversion to deem that product page useful? And if not, what's the best metric to identify what works vs. what doesn't on product pages in Google's eyes. 2. If adding lots of product pages on mass is bad and will decrease overall authority? The content isn't duplicate, but may be fairly similar to other sites selling the same thing. I'm trying to get our reviews added directly to product pages rather than in a pop up to improve the unique content and I'm starting to write guides, FAQ's and I'll work towards getting video started - however, I'm the only SEO & we don't have much resource so this all takes time. If anyone else has any advice on steps to take that would be great 🙂
Reporting & Analytics | | BeckyKey0 -
Is it possible to import data from an old Google Analytics profile to a new Google Analytics profile?
We have encountered a situation where a client's old SEO firm is refusing to grant us Admin access to our client's existing GA account. For security purposes (so the other SEO firm doesn't delete the existing GA profile) we have started a new Google Analytics profile. Again we do have access to the data in the old account. Is it possible to migrate this old data over (if we just have user access)? Thanks for the help
Reporting & Analytics | | RosemaryB0 -
Is Google still differentiating TLD?
I need to find an article or something with factual findings that shows Google no longer gives extra value to .com, .net, .us, edu. etc. or proving that is still does.
Reporting & Analytics | | PPI0 -
Duplicate content and ways to deal with it.
Problem I queried back a year for the portal and we can see below that the SEO juice is split between the upper and lowercase. You can see the issue in the attached images. http://i.imgur.com/OXnPp.png Solutions: 1) Quick: Change the link on the pages above to be lowercase 2) Use canonical link tag http://www.seomoz.org/blog/canonical-url-tag-the-most-important-advancement-in-seo-practices-since-sitemaps The tag is part of the HTML header on a web page, the same section you'd find the Title attribute and Meta Description tag. In fact, this tag isn't new, but like nofollow, simply uses a new rel parameter. For example: http://www.darden.virginia.edu/MBA" /> ''This would tell Yahoo!, Live & Google that the page in question should be treated as though it were a copy of the URL http://www.darden.virginia.edu/MBA and that all of the link & content metrics the engines apply should technically flow back to that URL.'' 3) See if there is any Google Analytics filters at the site level I can apply. I will check into this and get back to you. What do you all think?????? OXnPp voJdp.png OXnPp.png
Reporting & Analytics | | Darden0