Does frequency of updates and freshness of website pages increase search engine rankings? (Video)
Font size:
Does frequency of updates and freshness of website pages increase search engine rankings? (Video)
| "Some people are |
| under the impression that blogs are good for SEO only if they're updated frequently. How |
| much does frequency play in to PageRank for blogs and other dynamic sites? Isn't the content |
| more important than the simple number of posts per day, or per week?" |
| The answer is yes,content is much more important. So if you're thinking about for people, then |
| frequency might be a nice thing to have. If you show up on a blog everyday and its never |
| been updated, and you're a person, then maybe you don't show up every single day, maybe |
| you show up once a week. So people have noted that the more often you post, the more you |
| have fresh content, to the degree where sometimes, some megablogs will have like a new post every |
| few hours, just so that any time you show up during the day, you'll have something new |
| to read. That's fantastic for users. Users like to see something different, not just |
| the same static content whenever they show up. But whenever you're thinking about search |
| engines, it's much, much, much more important to think about the quality of you're content. |
| For example on my blog I don't post everyday. Sometimes I don't post every week. But I try |
| to make sure that each post has something useful about it, or some kernel that's going |
| to be helpful to people, that's funny, that's interesting. If you need to take three weeks |
| to do some research, and then that research results in a really good blogpost, whether |
| it be about the iPhone, or the Android market, or how well does gmail do web spam or...whatever |
| it is... How much does Gmail detect spam compared to other webmail providers? Whatever it is, |
| those original pieces of content often attract alot more attention than those sort of follow-on |
| blogposts where you're talking about, "Oh, I'm the one hundreth person who wrote about |
| an iPhone that got leaked, and I don't really have any new or interesting different insights."...or |
| something like that. It's a lot more interesting to take a little bit more time. Think about |
| sites like Techdirt. Mike Masnick doesn't just follow the headlines and write about |
| everything just to write about something. He's told me that he waits until he has some |
| insight, some unique angle, some of value to add, some perspective that people haven't |
| really noticed on a particular story. And I think if as long as you're doing that on |
| your blog, or on your website, it's going to be a lot more useful, it's going to attract |
| a lot more links, and it's going to do much better in search engines. So don't just pay |
| attention to, "I have to have a certain frequency of update per day", unless you're really trying |
| to make a play to get a lot of users, and you're really caring about how people are |
| gonna be coming back to you're site, as far as return visitors. If you're thinking about |
| search engines, what's much more important is the quality of the content, rather than |
| the frequency with which it's posted. |
Add to:
Facebook |
del.icio.us |
Digg
Buzz this |
Bookmark |
Stumble Upon
Windows Live |
Technorati |
Reddit |
Squidoo |
Furl |
Newsvine |
Myspace
Facebook |
del.icio.us |
Digg
Buzz this |
Bookmark |
Stumble Upon
Windows Live |
Technorati |
Reddit |
Squidoo |
Furl |
Newsvine |
Myspace
Email to a friend
Print version
Plain text