SEO Copywriter Blog 2010
Latest entry 22 November 2010
Google change the way they display ads
I've noticed over recent months that Goggle have got more and more sneaky about the way they display their paid ads. Go back a while and it was clear that the paid for ads, at the side and at the top of the natural results were just that - ads.
The ones at the top, in particular, had a surrounding box which was in a different shade.
Gradually, however, they've been blurring the distinctions between paid ads and natural listings.
The problem for them is that people would far rather click on the natural results rather than the paid for one, usually by a factor of around four to one. After all, these are the results which are likely to be the best ones, rather than ones which have had to pay to supposedly tell you they're the best.
Now, however, the distinction has almost disappeared. No longer is there a pinkish aura around the paid ads at the top of the page. No longer is there a recognisable gap between them and the natural listings.
Now, there is absolutely nothing, at first glance, to distinguish the paid ads at the top from the natural listings. Just a tiny, pale grey word 'ads' at the side of the topmost one and a shortened description. To the casual user, these don't look like paid ads, which is, of course, Google's intention.
Those of us who fought to get our sites, and those of our clients, near the top of the rankings, did so, for the most part, by genuinely providing sites that searchers would want to visit. That is, ones with the information, products or services they wanted. As long as they were good enough, small companies could compete with large ones. Now, at a stroke, we've been effectively demoted several places by those who are prepared to give more money to Google than others. So the winners aren't the best, but those with the deepest pockets.
Google have (had?) a motto: 'don't be evil'. More and more it's looking a cynical marketing ploy.
Latest entry 25 September 2010
What will Google Instant mean for SEO copywriting? (continued)
Following on from the previous entry about Google Instant and how popular it's likely to prove, I've been assessing the likely effect on other sites. In particular my own.
And the answer is...so far, not a lot.
Looking at my traffic for the past week or two, it has gone up slightly. But that may be down to the fact that I did quite a bit of work on the site about three weeks ago.
Has Google Instant made a difference? Well, currently, the keywords which bring me most traffic include: "freelance copywriter", "freelance copywriting", "copywriter London" and "copywriting London".
With Google Instant turned on, I appear to be in a good position with these keywords. Type "copywriter" and even before you do the first letter of the next word, one of the half dozen options in "copywriter London". Get as far as "copywriter L..." and bingo, there I am at number one. It's exactly the same with "Copywriting London". You get as far as the "L" and there I am at the top.
It's not quite so instant with "freelance copywriter". While still one of the half dozen suggestions when the first letter of the second word is typed, you have to get all the way to "freelance cop...." before I come up in my usual place of third or fourth. (I was disappointed to see that there were no suggestions for a freelance cop - as in cop for hire, but never mind.)
But what of Google Instant from a user's point of view? Well, it all depends. If you start with a word like "copywriter" you will mostly get actual copywriters on the first page (and kudos to them for having got there). But for most business searches, you're going to need to be more precise.
For instance, if you're searching for "London copywriter", you aren't going to get very far with plain "London". The same goes for "London decorator" or "London counsellor". In fact most people are going to be looking for something more precise still - such as "NW London decorator" or "North London counsellor".
And even with something like copywriting, which can be done remotely, a lot of clients prefer the fact that you're close to them geographically, have experience in their field, or specialise in the kind of service they're looking for, such as ads, brochures or direct response. And their search terms are going to reflect that.
The other factor, of course, is whether Google Instant is more of a distraction than anything. I, for one, find it hard to type and pay attention to results which keep changing. So I don't think it would make much difference to my searches.
I also rather like the fact that having made my search and pressed "return", I have a full first page of ten results to scan down and choose from. (Interestingly, research shows that while the top spots are obviously best, the last couple of places on the first page actually tend to be a little better in terms of click-throughs than the middle ones.) And with Google Instant, you physically can't see all the first page, as you would have to scroll down to see all ten (assuming you haven't chosen a very small text display size).
The only thing that would make me stop typing halfway through a search might be if I was searching for a particular site that I knew existed, but wasn't sure of the URL. If I started typing and up pops the desired site before I've finished hitting the keys, then - assuming it caught my eye - I would no doubt stop typing and click on the site. But how much time would it really save? Not a lot.
So overall, as I suspected, I don't think it's going to make a great deal of difference. It won't be the death knell of SEO as some have said. But nor will it make a great deal of difference to it.
Latest entry 10 September 2010
Google Instant - what will it mean for SEO copywriting?
Google are bringing out a new advance for their search engine - Google Instant. At present, when you start to enter a search term, Google Autocomplete will try and pre-empt what you're thinking by suggesting terms as you type.
What's new with Google Instant is that it will actually start to display results as you're typing. Not surprisingly, some neutral commentators are hailing it as a wondrous advance. But some SEO experts are predicting doom and gloom and even the end of meaningful SEO. Others are saying it represents a real opportunity for SEO.
Now, SEO copywriting is a fair chunk of what I do nowadays as a freelance copywriter. So I have a stake in this. My opinion is somewhere between the two. I don't think it's the death knell of SEO copywriting. But I don't think it's the start of a golden age either.
What I am intrigued about at this stage is how it will work. To be honest, if I was a consumer, I think I would find it a distraction. What is the time difference between typing say one word of a search phrase and three? Two or three seconds max? Yet while I'm in the middle of my typing - and thought process - all these results are appearing and changing before my eyes. It's likely to be both distracting and off-putting. I think I would rather spend an extra couple of seconds finishing my enquiry and pressing the return key, frankly. That way, I believe I'm most likely to get the results I want.
I think it might be one of those advances, rather like those super compact mobile phones from a few years back, that proves more of a nuisance than it's worth. "Look," shouted the mobile companies, "we've invented a super-compact mobile!" But the keys were too small and close together to work well, and the whole thing was altogether too fiddly. Which is why they never really caught on. The moral being: just because you can, doesn't mean you should.
And I think Google Instant might be the same. Assuming there's an 'off' option, expect many people to opt to do without it.
In my next post, once Google Instant comes on stream, I'll look at the likely implications of it for SEO copywriting. Assuming it does prove popular, of course.
Latest entry 11 August 2010
The cost of not using a professional copywriter
Time after time, I see and hear of companies spending thousands on a new website design. And nothing or next to nothing on the content.
The design is the shell; the content is the meat. Without proper content, you're just left with a beautiful but empty shell.
Often, a company will simply write the copy themselves, believing they will save money.
However, this means that whoever writes the copy will not be able to spend that time concentrating on their core responsibilities and using their main talents.
It also almost certainly means that the copy will be badly optimised. Because of this, almost no-one will find the website. What will that cost in terms of potential lost sales?
So the company then pays an SEO outfit month-in month-out to start promoting their site. Or starts a Google Adwords campaign - expensive and only partially effective.
Until finally some potential customers reach the site. Only to be put off by badly-written copy.
It all adds up to a very, very expensive saving.
Latest entry 30 June 2010
SEOmoz survey
Every two years, SEOmoz carries out a survey of top search engine optimisation professionals to find out what, in their opinion, are the most important factors in a sites' ranking popularity.
Google and other search engines have over two hundred (some say over three hundred) factors which they build in to their algorithm to determine just where a page will rank for any given search.
It's long been known that the most important factors are the content of a site and the number and quality of links back to it. Their latest survey of 72 search professionals confirms this.
What are the main findings?
- Keyword use in the title tag, particularly towards the beginning. If you can get it in your domain name even better. (Sadly all the obvious terms like 'freelance copywriter' and so on had all been taken by the time I got my site and was looking for a name.)
- Substantial, unique content on the page. This was very important. Freshness of page addition was important too. Links pointing to other pages on the same website were seen as quite important.
- Keyword-specific anchor text from outside sites. So if I'm writing free articles for republishing, for instance, my links back may look like this: Freelance copywriter in London
- As for the links themselves, a good number, a good variety and a good page rank (i.e. themselves with plenty of links) were very important. Also the relevance of the sites linking back to you.
- A well-designed, easily navigable site was seen as important.
- Social media was not seen as important (yet?)
- Geographical factors were of some importance. For instance, a .co.uk site is likely to not rank highly for a US search.
Conclusion? While links are very important, as always, choice of and correct use of keywords is absolutely vital. If you're not using a professional SEO copywriter (as opposed to someone who just adds content) you're likely shooting yourself in the foot.
Latest entry 8 May 2010
Google results updated
I've just updated my Google results for copy optimised sites page
A few results have slipped slightly, but many more have actually increased their rankings. Which is especially pleasing given that competition is rising all the time.
Once again, it shows that SEO copywriting can make a big difference to your rankings, traffic levels and resultant new customers. To find out more, just contact me
Latest entry 21 April 2010
Should I copy optimise for Bing and Yahoo as well as Google?
This is an interesting question which I sometimes get asked. The short answer is to copy optimise for Google and the rest will follow naturally.
Google has around 90% of the UK search market, so is by far the most important. There are differences between the Google algorithm and that of the other main search engines, but in general, if you concentrate on getting the keywords and the copy right, regularly updating the content, and getting some relevant links back, you're going to be pretty good to go with all the search engines.
Latest entry April 2010
Google results updated
I've just updated my Google results for copy optimised sites page
SEO copywriting can make a big difference to your rankings - and by extension traffic and customer conversions. Why not find out more - just contact me
March 2010
The importance of first page rankings
It's generally accepted that most people just look at the first page of results when searching for something. What's less well known is that this trend is becoming more pronounced. According to a Prospect survey not so long ago, the number of users looking no further than the first page of results was 62% - up from 48% for years previously. Only 10% clicked on listings from beyond the third page, down from 19% for years before.
So either results are becoming more accurate in terms of giving people what they want, or we're becoming more impatient; probably a bit of both.
Either way, using the right freelance copywriter for SEO copywriting your website has never been more important.
January 2010
Recent Google results
Well, I guess I was tempting fate with my previous entry. The number one spot was only for a few days. I now seem to have settled around the two to three position for both terms - slightly better for 'freelance copywriter', slightly worse for 'freelance copywriting'. Other keywords have held up well and even improved their position.
I've also updated my Google results for copy optimised sites page
Again, on an overall positioning, one or two have slipped slightly, most have held their places, and more than a few have actually improved their rankings, which is pleasing.
It just goes to show that getting the content right is the single most important factor in determining its search engine rankings. So if you'd like your site to do well in the search engines, just contact me