SEO Is Deeper Than What You Read

There is an outstanding thread by Tedster, Ted Ulle, at WebmasterWorld. The topic is on too many newbie SEOs taking the SEO advice given on forums, blogs, news sites and here at face value. He is concerned that a new SEO will read something and not understand the true meaning of what is really being said.

Let me quote a piece of his concern:

Recent years have seen a flood of interest in SEO. Unfortunately, a lot of recent entries into SEO have no sense of perspective and no idea of how to evaluate advice that they read or hear. And still they write blog articles ;( There's a lot of regurgitated second and third hand learning being spread today - and it's even being sold to clients.

SEO began in the 90s, back before the acronym itself was even created. Most of the pioneers were early affiliate marketers who personally reverse-engineered the search engine algorithms of the day. What they learned was privately shared, until it stopped working so well. At that point, the tidbits began to bleed into the wider pool of knowledge.

Why do I bring up this old time stuff? The same pattern still holds. And taking anyone's SEO advice at face value is a dangerous practice. Anyone who is not doing their own testing and measurement is at a disadvantage. They may be buying into advice that's outdated by many years - and some of it may even come from back in the 90s!

Truth be told, I am a culprit of spreading information that is not explained in detail each time I write it. Personally, I don't have patience, I don't have patience listening or reading something that needs to be explained in detail. I tend to get things quickly, at least I think I do, so listening to someone go on and on to make sure everyone is on the same page - well, it drives me nuts. So since that is my personality, I often don't have the patience to explain things that I already know. It isn't the best characteristic of myself, but we all have flaws, and this is one of mine.

Those who read this site every day, know this flaw in my writing and know how to read beyond what I write. If I make a comment that most people would likely break out into more detail and I don't, my reader knows why. I try my best to write concisely and get to the point without repeating myself, unlike what I am doing here. But sometimes without reviewing stuff and explaining it in detail, some new people to the industry that read my stuff won't get it fully and take it at face value.

I would say 50% of my posts, specifically when I offer SEO specific advice, don't go into enough detail for new SEOs to fully understand what to practice. That is a fault I have and you need to know that.

I have a recent example and I hope this person doesn't get upset with me using him as an example, but the content is out there in the public and thus complies with my blogging code of ethics.

Here is the tweets sent to me a few days ago:

Most experienced SEOs know that social media typically doesn't have a direct impact on your link building. It typically does not directly impact your Google rankings. What it does do it get people to become aware of your web site and the awareness may drive more links and the more links may drive better rankings in Google. So if I ever say that social media helps your Google rankings, that is what I may mean. I may skip over the details as to why and understanding why is important.

I am not the only SEO blogger who is guilty of taking this short cuts, so keep it in mind. And honestly, it is much worse in the forums. Then what you have is what Tedster described, new SEOs preaching half truths to other new SEOs and their clients and we got a problem. I apologize, but it is a bad habit I doubt will ever change. So please keep this in mind when reading what I write.

Forum discussion at WebmasterWorld.