Creating Traffic with content questions

[ranga227]

This is a quote from willcode4beer on another post..."Create content that is useful and interesting. When you have interesting stuff on your site, folks will naturally link to it. When it has genuinely useful information, people will just link to it."

If I successfully create content that is useful and interesting, what next? How do I best go about getting people to see my content for the first time?
How often do I need to update fresh content to be effective?
Are video's and picture's a must?
Anything else I may be missing?

Also concerning building links for SEO...
I have read on this, but still find myself having trouble getting this aspect going. I've been told that a link page is probable not the best way to go.
If I do not have a link page then where do I put all of the links that I link with?
Should I try and get one-way links from top rated sites and if so how does one do this?
Anything else that I may be missing?

I am going now to read up here and learn what I can. Infact, I am going to devote at least one hour a day on study here and other places reliable people here suggest. I appreciate any help...

[articlemaster9]

Content is always considered as king and it will be.
After creating you content you can go for social bookmarking of the page to get some instant traffic, Write few article's about the original content of your site/blog and go for article submission.

How often do I need to update fresh content to be effective?

If you can update your site/blog on a regular basis then it will be very helpful or else you can do it twice or thrice every week. Just do it whatever goes better for you.

[keyon]

Originally Posted by articlemaster9

Content is always considered as king and it will be.

Some of the best content I know of on the Web is sitting on five-year-old websites with zero page rank and no incoming links. I'm not sure that content is always king.

Maybe the "build-it-and-they-will-come" approach worked ten years ago - but I think that for most markets/niches today, you'll need a pretty sophisticated link building strategy in place to make any headway.

[succeedemail]

If I successfully create content that is useful and interesting, what next? How do I best go about getting people to see my content for the first time?
How often do I need to update fresh content to be effective?
Are video's and picture's a must?
Anything else I may be missing?

If you want your content to be found you have to use the appropriate SEO techniques, keyword usage, keyword densities, anchor text and more. Of course the ease in which your found also depends on the competition in your particular niche. Link to all of your pages from social networking sites - both large general ones such as Digg, Propeller and Reddit and smaller ones more focused on your specific industry or niche - use article marketing and more to start building traffic.

Also concerning building links for SEO...
I have read on this, but still find myself having trouble getting this aspect going. I've been told that a link page is probable not the best way to go.
If I do not have a link page then where do I put all of the links that I link with?
Should I try and get one-way links from top rated sites and if so how does one do this?
Anything else that I may be missing?

If you have a blog you can create a blogroll listed on your sidebar, you can also do this by adding the links manually to your sidebar if you use a different CMS. Link pages aren't inherently bad, the point is that link exchanges in general have become devalued in the last few years.

One-way links from top rated sites are of course ideal. You need to create content that people will link to naturally because it's good, unique, informative and useful. You can also build up links on your own with article marketing and distribution and various other strategies.

[williamc]

Originally Posted by succeedemail

keyword densities

Just so you know in future, keyword density was disproven years ago.

[succeedemail]

Originally Posted by williamc

Just so you know in future, keyword density was disproven years ago.

Well, as someone who has written over 5,000 pieces of SEO content over the last 2 years, I respectfully disagree.

[williamc]

Originally Posted by succeedemail

Well, as someone who has written over 5,000 pieces of SEO content over the last 2 years, I respectfully disagree.

And as someone who has been doing this for a decade, I would have to disagree with your disagreement.

Oh and not just me...

Bill Slawski; ‘more likely folklore than fact’ (SEO by the Sea - Internet Marketing and SEO Services & Consulting)

Jim Boykin; ‘not a good metric for SEO’ (Jim Boykin’s SEO Blog)

Tad Chef; ‘I stopped “measuring” keyword density years ago’ (SEO 2.0 SEO BLOG)

Matt Ridout; ‘I never calculate the keyword density’ (SEOUnique Blog | SEO and Internet Marketing)

Sexy SEO; ‘Snake Oil SEO’ (SexySEO)

Wiep Knoll; ‘better to focus on keyword presence’ (Link Building Blog - Wiep.net)

Brian Clark; ‘KD a non-factor’ (Copywriting Tips for Online Marketing Success From Copyblogger | Copyblogger)

Brian Turner; ‘Do I use keyword density? No’ (Brian Turner’s Business Blog)

Here is some more reading to look at:

YOUmoz | SEO Myths That Persist: Keyword Density
How Search Really Works: The Keyword Density Myth | Search Engine People | Toronto
SEO myths de-bunked: Myth #8 - Keyword density - Web design that excites people: S.Joy Studios
The Myth of Keyword Density SEMBasics
The biggest keyword myth - SearchEngineChannel

I could go on for hours pasting links here, literally.... But everyone should get the point....

[succeedemail]

Thanks for taking the time to reply so thoroughly. I didn't follow all of those links, but the ones I did I'm in complete agreement with.

You may have assumed that by keyword density I meant keyword stuffing. I didn't. .5-2% keyword density is still keyword density, even when it's achieved through natural terms. Quite frankly, if you're targeting longtail key phrases of 4+ words, the best, quickest, easiest and most surefire way to rank for them is to use them in your content. Whether that's once per 100 words or once per 500 words.

What you may also not have realized is that when I use the term keyword density, I'm also referring to the location keyword placement in content, as well as the appropriate highlighting of keywords within content and on the page itself - browser bar titles, internal links, H1 tags and so forth.

Hope that explains where I'm coming from.

[bobitza]

However, having the keyword on the page IS important, right?

[Feydakin]

Yes, having the keyword on page is certainly important..

Referring to it in any way, shape, or form, as keyword density is not..

[williamc]

Originally Posted by Feydakin

Yes, having the keyword on page is certainly important..

Referring to it in any way, shape, or form, as keyword density is not..

Yep, what steve said.

[succeedemail]

Originally Posted by Feydakin

Yes, having the keyword on page is certainly important..

Referring to it in any way, shape, or form, as keyword density is not..

So it appears in both the articles shown by WilliamC and your own response that really up for argument is semantics and the usage of the specific phrase "keyword density".

If you title your page with a H1 tag using a keyword, and then make an effort to using it in your content at least once, then whether you are calling it .5% keyword density or not, you are achieving keyword density. Yes?

[williamc]

More like keyword placement or prominence.

Originally Posted by succeedemail

So it appears in both the articles shown by WilliamC and your own response that really up for argument is semantics and the usage of the specific phrase "keyword density".

If you title your page with a H1 tag using a keyword, and then make an effort to using it in your content at least once, then whether you are calling it .5% keyword density or not, you are achieving keyword density. Yes?

[crankydave]

Originally Posted by succeedemail

If you title your page with a H1 tag using a keyword, and then make an effort to using it in your content at least once, then whether you are calling it .5% keyword density or not, you are achieving keyword density. Yes?

But that still doesn't make density "matter"... because it doesn't.

If you fill a bucket with rocks and eggs, the "density" of eggs to rocks doesn't matter. What does matter is how you fill the bucket if you want eggs for breakfast.

You can achieve "keword density" by using the kewords solely in meta tags but you'll not be happy with the results.

Dave

[succeedemail]

Whether you call it prominence, placement or not eating rocks for breakfast () keywords should be in your content. I never said you have to shoot for a specific or exact percentage, or that you should keyword stuff, or anything else.

Whether you are trying to or not, when you put keywords on your content, you have a keyword density on your page. I'm not sure what is so hard to understand about that.

Clearly, I still think this is a matter of arguing semantics, but c'est la vie, I digress.

[Feydakin]

Originally Posted by succeedemail

Well, as someone who has written over 5,000 pieces of SEO content over the last 2 years, I respectfully disagree.

Ok, because I am still in a foul mood and feeling rather froggy lately..

You are saying that you have written over 7 well thought out, well researched, meaningful articles on SEO, with no days off "at all", in the last 2 years.. You are either an SEO God with nothing to do but write every day (7x+), or something less than that.. I'm going to wager something less..

So it appears in both the articles shown by WilliamC and your own response that really up for argument is semantics and the usage of the specific phrase "keyword density".

No, not semantics.. When you refer to it as keyword density you have made your primary concern the ratio of keywords to other text more important than proper use of that keyword.. And that is wrong.. Your goal should be proper use, period..

[succeedemail]

Originally Posted by Feydakin

Ok, because I am still in a foul mood and feeling rather froggy lately..

You are saying that you have written over 7 well thought out, well researched, meaningful articles on SEO, with no days off "at all", in the last 2 years.. You are either an SEO God with nothing to do but write every day (7x+), or something less than that.. I'm going to wager something less...

LOL geez what I have done to offend some of you people here...

Actually good sir, I'm a full time freelance content writer. On a good day, I write 20 or more well thought out, well researched, meaningful articles. In between my responses to this forum thread, I've churned out 3 more.

I have the opportunity to write so many, because the clients I work with are extraordinarily pleased with the results and recommend my services to all of their colleagues as well.

I can write so many because for the most part I write about topics I already have a good deal of experience and knowledge with.

I am not an SEO God, and clearly you and many other people on this forum have a larger scope of knowledge when it comes to all things SEO. BUT, what I am, is an experienced and qualified writer with a background in SEO that can write 3-4,000 words in an hour and get paid handsomly to perform the service. (And before you get all froggy on me again and question if I could even do that, I type at between 100-125 words per minute, depending on how energetic/engaged/hungover I may be at the moment. ) Hence my chosen profession.

Cheers.

[Feydakin]

Originally Posted by succeedemail

Actually good sir, I'm a full time freelance content writer.

The good content writers I know can take several days to "churn" out a single, top shelf, article..

On a good day, I write 20 or more well thought out, well researched, meaningful articles.

Links??

In between my responses to this forum thread, I've churned out 3 more.

I think churn is used properly here..

I have the opportunity to write so many, because the clients I work with are extraordinarily pleased with the results and recommend my services to all of their colleagues as well.

I bet you are 'economical' too..

I can write so many because for the most part I write about topics I already have a good deal of experience and knowledge with.

So I'm guessing that you are doing a lot of rewrites of previously released material to get that many articles in such a short amount of time..

LOL geez what I have done to offend some of you people here...

Actually, its 'ho geez' not lol geez.. But only Dave will get that joke..

Its not that you offended any of us.. But as someone who has written so much about SEO in the past 2 years I would expect that you would get and understand some of the most basic terms and tactics.. Primarily in this thread, that keyword density is a non factor and trying to call it a factor is misleading.. At best..

[succeedemail]

Originally Posted by Feydakin

The good content writers I know can take several days to "churn" out a single, top shelf, article..

Then they aren't good content writers.

Originally Posted by Feydakin

Links??

No, that's ok. I would be happy to copy and paste into a Word document several hundred positive feedback blurbs I've garnered over the last year from happy clients receiving content I produced for them at one particular freelance site. Shoot me your email address in a private message and you'll get the Word .doc in 2 minutes.

Originally Posted by Feydakin

I think churn is used properly here..

Where I come from, people that are fast at doing things and do them well are respected as being better at that thing. People that run miles in four minutes are churning out their miles. Guess what? They are the ones that are the best runners in the world, not the dopes on the treadmill wheezing after a half mile on a 15 minute pace.

Originally Posted by Feydakin

I bet you are 'economical' too..

Efficient.

Originally Posted by Feydakin

So I'm guessing that you are doing a lot of rewrites of previously released material to get that many articles in such a short amount of time..

No.

Originally Posted by Feydakin

Its not that you offended any of us.. But as someone who has written so much about SEO in the past 2 years I would expect that you would get and understand some of the most basic terms and tactics.. Primarily in this thread, that keyword density is a non factor and trying to call it a factor is misleading.. At best..

I don't write about SEO, I incorporate basic SEO tactics, chosen long tail keywords, keyword placement, etc., into what I write.

I henceforth swear to never mention the word density again in front of such privileged web forum posters as thou. Not the density of your skull or the density of your midsection. No, from here on out, I'll never use density again.

[crankydave]

I've no reason to doubt your skills succeedemail. As a matter of fact, if you'll PM me your rates I'm interested in contracting you.

Based upon what you've said, I'd like a SEO related article that's original, well thought out and well researched, and I'll want it an an hour.

If we can agree to terms, I'll post the exact subject in this thread. I'm certain it's one you're familiar with. I'll publish the article and give you what ever credit you wish for having written it.

Dave

[succeedemail]

Originally Posted by crankydave

I've no reason to doubt your skills succeedemail. As a matter of fact, if you'll PM me your rates I'm interested in contracting you.

Based upon what you've said, I'd like a SEO related article that's original, well thought out and well researched, and I'll want it an an hour.

If we can agree to terms, I'll post the exact subject in this thread. I'm certain it's one you're familiar with. I'll publish the article and give you what ever credit you wish for having written it.

Dave

Done. Give me the topic and the details of what you want included in the article at 6:30 PM Eastern, you can post it on the forum as well so the details and the time line are visible to all. I'll have the article up in a flash. I have to finish up with a few things and grab a bite beforehand. I'll PM you now.

[crankydave]

Originally Posted by succeedemail

Done. Give me the topic and the details of what you want included in the article at 6:30 PM Eastern, you can post it on the forum as well so the details and the time line are visible to all. I'll have the article up in a flash. I have to finish up with a few things and grab a bite beforehand. I'll PM you now.

Cool... I don't have a problem with giving you the subject now since I'll be out of my office at the time that's best for you.

What's included is up to you... I'm not a professional writer.

Subject: Why keyword density is important for SEO

Dave

[succeedemail]

LMAO!

I won't be free until 6:30 anyways, so I'll get to work then and you'll have it before 7:30. Honor system will have to suffice on the timeline.

[Feydakin]

Originally Posted by succeedemail

Then they aren't good content writers.

Lol... What are your rates??

[williamc]

Originally Posted by Feydakin

Actually, its 'ho geez' not lol geez.. But only Dave will get that joke..

I am pretty sure I do as well

Originally Posted by Feydakin

Lol... What are your rates??

Apparently $10 judging by what he has on his site.

Originally Posted by crankydave

Subject: Why keyword density is important for SEO

Hells bells Dave, that was a perfectly good mouthful of coffee!!

[succeedemail]

6:21 PM, starting.

7:01 PM, finished & sending.

[williamc]

This should be interesting, and I will, for one, be interested in seeing what you came up with. If it's actually good, even though Dave gave you an impossible assignment, because density has been disproven, I will be a customer right afterwards.

[crankydave]

My apologies for the delay. Was making dinner for family and didn't get back before now.

Going to post the article on my blog in its entirety with no commentary. I'll post a link in a bit.

Dave

[crankydave]

Okay, here you go...

Crushing the Myth: Why You Need Keyword Density

Title was that of the author.

Dave

[williamc]

Bah, you changed "few comments" to "no comments". You don't have anything to say on the article?

[crankydave]

Originally Posted by williamc

Bah, you changed "few comments" to "no comments". You don't have anything to say on the article?

Yes I changed my reply/post. I wanted to make sure to post the article I received in its entirety and let folks make their own decisions as to it without my "opinions" interferring with their initial opinion.

I have plenty say.

Dave

[Feydakin]

My thoughts??

For $10 or $12 or whatever, it makes for decent content filler.. But it's certainly not a "well researched" article on why keyword density is good for SEO.. It reads as a personal rant more or less.. Something any of us could bang out in a few minutes.. But again, not top shelf content that I would normally pay a couple hundred dollars for to someone that does some real research with citations and quotes..

This is exactly the type of article we buy in bulk on Digital Point for content stuffing blogs simply for the keyword stuffing and generating constant content.. When I write a real article for one of my sites they are researched, vetted by other pros, rewritten, contain quotes and citations, and get printed in real print magazines.. This ain't that..

But again, for $10, it does what it set out to be.. Keyword stuffed generic content that I don't have to write and can spend my time doing other things, and that isn't necessarily a bad thing..

[williamc]

I posted my initial thought on the blog itself.

[crankydave]

I'll start with cudos.

Cudos for "putting up" rather than "shutting up". That initself has merit AFAIC.

Now the article...

I asked for...

Subject: Why keyword density is important for SEO

I got the exact opposite. Had I wanted an article on why keword density is a myth that's what I would have asked for.

It's original, I'll certainly give you that. But it's not well researched and by using phrases like "Big G" while gratuitously inserting what I'd call "big words" it strikes me as an attempt to "force" content rather than just writing naturally. As if one might be having a conversation. Can't say that's not what I expected.

One paragraph I'd like to quote in particular...

So instead of worrying about exact keyword densities that hold the magic cure-all for ranking highly in Google or any other search engine, you should focus on ensuring natural inclusion. Talk about your topic naturally and the keywords you want to align yourself with in the SERPS will find their place.

Had you done exactly this, I'd have most likely been engaged, and enjoyed reading it more than I actually did.

I'm not suggesting that you're not a talented writer. It didn't meet the "build up" you yourself provided and I expected because of that.

It's not bad. Not at all. But it doesn't meet my expectations when you post...

Actually good sir, I'm a full time freelance content writer. On a good day, I write 20 or more well thought out, well researched, meaningful articles.

<my bolding>

and...

...what I am, is an experienced and qualified writer with a background in SEO that can write 3-4,000 words in an hour and get paid handsomly to perform the service

Now, as far as the subject of the discussion goes, the article really does reinforce what has been said... keyword density really doesn't matter.

Don't you think?

Dave

[succeedemail]

Fair enough all.

Steve, what you are talking about certainly isn't content writing, which is what I do, and what I said I do. I also don't think that article was keyword stuffed, as I did exactly what I said I would do in the article, which is include things as they come up.

Dave, actually, I think it goes back to what I was saying before I wrote the article, which is this is an argument IMO about semantics. Going back to all the links Will posted and I agreed with from the get-go, I certainly never supported "keyword density" in the sense that the phrase is appropriately defined... so I apologize for using the phrase "keyword density" incorrectly.

Clearly, my mistake on the term, and sorry for the content not being up to snuff. My style of writing gets the job done for the people who request it, but I suppose it's not for everyone.

All - sorry for the hubbub and commotion with the thread this afternoon.

[williamc]

Don't be sorry. If there is no debate, then some people leave without being able to see all the possible arguements and often can not accurately learn anything from the discussion.

[Modified]

Originally Posted by succeedemail

Clearly, my mistake on the term, and sorry for the content not being up to snuff. My style of writing gets the job done for the people who request it, but I suppose it's not for everyone.

Yup, we all clearly don't subscribe to the same set of standards, which is why I would not have said this so hastily

Originally Posted by succeedemail

Then they aren't good content writers.

especially as I'm one of those that take may time to write good content. For me it's more important that the facts are right rather than how quick it can be done, which obviously means I'm not a content writer for hire and not a 'good' content writer by your standards, but a 'good content' writer by my standards.

[Feydakin]

Originally Posted by succeedemail

Fair enough all.

Steve, what you are talking about certainly isn't content writing, which is what I do, and what I said I do.

And this brings us back to different ideas of what words mean.. I call what you do filler material.. But not real content..

There is nothing wrong with what you do, like I said, I pay for this type of material all the time for certain types of websites.. Its just a difference in levels..

[crankydave]

No real need to be sorry Jake.

Look... Having not read any of your work nor having spoke to any of your clients, all I had to go on was what you posted in this thread. If you ask any competent SEO, when you step up to the plate and point to the bleachers (gotta love Babe Ruth analogies) you better knock it out of the park.

As Will pointed out, I did more or less give you an impossible subject. That was by design. Having trained/tested/evaluated bench jewelers for quite a few years, how they approach and handle such tasks tells me a lot... especially the ones who pointed towards the bleachers.

You're a stand up guy. And so the rest reading this thread know, he returned the agreed upon fee which isn't exactly fair IMO. The article was delivered, I received it, and I published it. For that you are entitled to your fee AFAIC.

Tell you what, PM or email me the subjects you feel most comfortable with. The ones where you feel you do your best work when you have time.

Dave

[Tubby]

succeedemail. I think you are so brave, upfront, and honest. Excellent stuff.

In the past I have ghost writen. . . Occasionally I wrote speeches for retired Celebrities on the 'talk' circuit. . I can write 'Stuff' on walls and ceilings if I do not find paper or a typewriter. I sometimes look at the toilet paper in quiet secluded moments and find myself scanning the tiny room for a writing implement. . .

If I were asked to write a researched and informed articles on a topic, I would simply ask for the 'informed research' . I would have asked Dave for a 'fact sheet'.

I often asked for a fact sheets. I Need details like - 'Born 1962, Liverpool England, Mothers name Alice. dogs name spot' .With these, I can write to make you smile or to make you sad - and stay true to the basic facts . . . Born in 1962. retired before 2009 - Simply means you quit work before 50 or more truthfully you could not maintain the pace, You flaked it. This leaves me writing for a pathetic has been . . . Fits the facts. . . Facts; born 1962.

Facts; you can not write an SEO article without them - I would have prefered Dave had offered you three simple facts that he himself had researched or confirmed . . Then given you the gift of freedom to write what you felt like. without contradicting the facts, by simply handing you these three little gems to work and play with.

My recomendation is, next time get a fact sheet. Or suffer the embarrasement of not getting your writing judged - Merely getting your facts judged

excellent stuff succeedemail. .

P.S. Take the fee!

[williamc]

Originally Posted by crankydave

Tell you what, PM or email me the subjects you feel most comfortable with. The ones where you feel you do your best work when you have time.

Same goes for me. I deal with many types of sites and am always needing page filler. You had the nerve to put up rather than shut up as Dave pointed out, that counts.

[Terry Van Horne]

SucceedEmail, Kudos! Considering the volume... the quality of writing is well above what you'd get offshore at a comaparable price. Seriously dude... take a look around at your competition and what they charge.

I'm with Dave, I like the conversational appraoch for the type of content you did for him but admit your style is excellent if you're writing apparel or consumer product descritptions. IMO, that's a different kind of copywriting. I've only seen work by a few who did it well.

As to keyword density... just another cookie cutter SEO technique that was loved until someone pulled the curtain back and saw it for the myth it was... and always had been.

[williamc]

SucceedEmail: You have a PM with work in it.

[jaca]

Was the questions really answered that the original poster asked? This whole post really seemed to go off the 'rails'. Looks to me like someone gets work through a dare on this posting and I don't think that was the intention of the post - was it?? Forgive me if I am cynical but....

[williamc]

Originally Posted by jaca

Was the questions really answered that the original poster asked? This whole post really seemed to go off the 'rails'. Looks to me like someone gets work through a dare on this posting and I don't think that was the intention of the post - was it?? Forgive me if I am cynical but....

More to the point is the fact that the original poster was nothing more than a spammer and was banned. The thread ended up serving a real purpose in the end anyway, someone learned something, and someone profits without trying to, which is more than 60% of the posts here end with.

[jaca]

If the original poster was a spammer then why put this post in the newsletter?

I do see he posted on other forums.

Maybe someone learned something - but read through the posts as far as who really benefits here (no offense Succeedemail - more power to you).

[Feydakin]

I don't know how it ended up in the newsletter jaca, but I Think the thread serves a bigger purpose than possibly getting succeedemail a little work.. It 'might' serve as a great example of how the community will police itself and challenge people to stand behind their thoughts and ideas.. The discussion remained reasonably civil and we all got something out of it I think..

[succeedemail]

Thanks for the kind words Tubby and Terry, I appreciate it.

Will and Dave, sending PMs now.

Jaca - no offense taken, and I wasn't trying to find work for myself, but forums like this can definitely be a place to network, learn and share in all situations.