Trends in publishing
-
In the last 3 years there happened a lot in online publishing. New magazines like lifehack, upworthy, viral nova revolutionized the publishing business.
Not only got these website within up to 2 years 5 Million unique+ visitors, they also changed the art of writing in the internet. Viralnova and Upworth through headlines, lifehack through media. Even the monetization changed and Upworthy realized a new trend, that simple ad-showing business will die and ads have to be more sutil (sponsored posts).
Even old media like the huffingtonpost started spamming and recurating content, instead of focusing on old-school journalism.
Unfortunately there are many sad parts: If I research a topic I only find main stream articles that don't go into deepth anymore. The physics nerd that publishes amazing and analytical content got replaced by the newest gawker article.
And sites with (from my point of view) trash content like about.com and webmd.com are still big in business. I saw them dying already 2 years ago but it never happened. The content of this huge websites is basically the same. And their backlinks come mainly from PR and an existing brand. Nobody would like out to an about.com article if it wouldn't be about.com .
Newcomers have a tough job: SEO for 2014+ seems to me consisting out of getting covered in one of these big magazines. Do you agree?
Will this trend continue? What adjustments did you make for your own business? I started to adapt headlines slightly and hired a designer who just creates illustrations related our articles. I also noticed that you cannot build sites about small niche topics anymore, everything has to go big. More categories, more mainstream. What are your thoughts?
-
Well that is that trend but it's just like back then when they said niche sites are dead and everyone should build "authority sites" - it's the same thing, just with faster and more aggressive marketing/content team.
So yeah, the trend will continue as social gets more popular until it gets really, really overboard and social sites will just launch another algorithm to clear out the lower quality ones. Either way, getting links from them = win. Imagine all the new users you can sign up from the referral traffic alone. The links you will get from being featured again is a bonus.
Good luck!
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
-
What do You Think the Biggest Search Trends will Be in 2020?
Just interested to hear everyone's thoughts. Personally I think that, even though voice search is already pretty big - it's about to get much, much larger and this may even entirely change the infrastructure of the web. What are your thoughts for changes in search 2020?
Algorithm Updates | | effectdigital2 -
A page will not be indexed if published without linking from anywhere?
Hi all, I have noticed one page from our competitors' website which has been hardly linked from one internal page. I just would like to know if the page not linked anywhere get indexed by Google or not? Will it be found by Google? What if a page not linked internally but go some backlinks from other websites? Thanks
Algorithm Updates | | vtmoz0 -
Is it bad from an SEO perspective that cached AMP pages are hosted on domains other than the original publisher's?
Hello Moz, I am thinking about starting to utilize AMP for some of my website. I've been researching this AMP situation for the better part of a year and I am still unclear on a few things. What I am primarily concerned with in terms of AMP and SEO is whether or not the original publisher gets credit for the traffic to a cached AMP page that is hosted elsewhere. I can see the possible issues with this from an SEO perspective and I am pretty sure I have read about how SEOs are unhappy about this particular aspect of AMP in other places. On the AMP project FAQ page you can find this, but there is very little explanation: "Do publishers receive credit for the traffic from a measurement perspective?
Algorithm Updates | | Brian_Dowd
Yes, an AMP file is the same as the rest of your site – this space is the publisher’s canvas." So, let's say you have an AMP page on your website example.com:
example.com/amp_document.html And a cached copy is served with a URL format similar to this: https://google.com/amp/example.com/amp_document.html Then how does the original publisher get the credit for the traffic? Is it because there is a canonical tag from the AMP version to the original HTML version? Also, while I am at it, how does an AMP page actually get into Google's AMP Cache (or any other cache)? Does Google crawl the original HTML page, find the AMP version and then just decide to cache it from there? Are there any other issues with this that I should be aware of? Thanks0 -
Software to indicate search volumes/trends
Is there any software that exists to help provide an indication of the search volumes or trends behind keywords? Currently we use google trends for a YOY and WOW view for some select KW's but the reality is are search volumes are effected by 1,000's of KW's and trying to get an accurate view of overall trends and theme with our product sector is difficult. I'm interested to find out if there is software which is an alternative to google trends or if there is 3rd party software available that lets us process google trends data in bulk?
Algorithm Updates | | SEO-SMB0 -
If Google Trends Doubles?
If google shows a search trend doubling in a time frame, does that mean the amount of searches doubled? As in: 2006 was ranked at a 50 on trends and the 100 is 2013 and in 2013 10,000 searches were made, does that mean around 5,000 searches were made in 2006?
Algorithm Updates | | JoshBowers20120 -
Google Trends Graph and KW Planner Monthly Searches?
I'm trying to show people the trends of certain keywords/topics over a period of years Keyword Planner gives some actual numbers but only for 12 months. Trends will show "Numbers represent search interest relative to the highest point on the chart. If at most 10% of searches for the given region and time frame were for "pizza," we'd consider this 100. This doesn't convey absolute search volume." Which I don't really understand, other than if the graph goes up it means more interest but has to do with the amount of people searching, location, etc which can get tricky? I'd like to put together a short report explaining certain topics and how interest in them has increased over the last 5+ years. I'm hoping someone else here has had some experience with this and has some advice or links with more information?
Algorithm Updates | | JoshBowers20120 -
Two months - No Articles or Post Published in our blog. Moz shows less organic traffic.
Two months - No Articles or Post Published in our blog. Moz shows less organic traffic. i know i could not write - i was sick. organic search and keyword also. total pageviews dropped. DA increased by +3 and then -1 in last update. What should i do.
Algorithm Updates | | Esaky0 -
Interesting SERP trend I'm observing
I know Google has been favoring brands a big names lately, but I'm seeing something a bit more alarming Our company offers custom embroidered patches, and through keyword and search research I have discovered that almost all searches for "embroidered patches" are by people who need embroidered patches and are looking to purchase them, or learn more about the process of purchasing them. The SERPs for this term used to be all embroidered patch companies such as ours. In the past month: We've been outranked by a page on Amazon that's fairly irrelevant. An equally irrelevant ebay page has emerged The Wikipedia page for "embroidered patch" is now number seven. This has pushed three other embroidered patch companies off the first page (not that I'm complaining because it wasn't our company . . . yet). My question is, has anyone else noticed something similar happening, where large sites are gaining ground, in spite of the fact that they have low relevance to the search term?
Algorithm Updates | | UnderRugSwept0
