A search on Google for “seo is dead” returns more than 12,000 results.
Apparently, a lot of folks want SEO to die. Or perhaps they simply enjoy sounding off on its demise. Or maybe they’re mistaking “death” for “change”.
Die? No. Change? Yes
For any SEO that has been around for more than a few years, change in search is nothing new. Some changes have more impact than others, but change is a constant.
Those that claim SEO is dead should brush up on the history of SEO. What exactly has brought us to this point in the evolution of data retrieval (a.k.a. “search”)? Don’t get me wrong- I don’t feel that experience is essential to being a good SEO. But it sure as hell doesn’t hurt. If you’re going to give a eulogy, you’ve got to know about the life that’s been lived.
Ask your SEO about “Florida”. If they say, “yeah, I have family in Orlando!”, they haven’t studied the changes of SEO. You say “Florida” to an experienced SEO and you will likely see a hand go to the forehead, a “bitter beer” face and couple curse words.
Google’s Florida update was change. Big change.
Did SEO die? Nope.
The Theoretical Goal of Search
The idea is to take your query (what you searched for) and return the best possible results. Simple right?
Complicated mathematical algorithms retrieve information, run a series of tests on the data entered, and then organize, order, and format the results for you to choose from (and give you SERPS = Search Engine Result Pages). The ordering is based on a number of factors, most of which are often debated.
What is not debated is that those factors can, do, and will change.
A Quick Look at Change
In the past (when I started in 1997) the King of the Hill was Alta Vista. You could stuff your page titles, page copy, and meta tags with keywords and see strong results. It was a terrible end-user experience, but it was universal, and expectations where low.
Then, engines began to weed out keyword stuffing, began to discount meta tags in the algorithms. The SERPS started to re-order. Google incorporated links as a primary ranking factor. They filtered and weighted those links. They slapped you if you had the wrong kinds of links, or links from the wrong places. They changed the way they interpreted the links, or passed “link equity” from link to link.
Those were huge changes. And many, many other changes have occurred. Several recent developments have brought about even more change and, yup, you guessed it, more claims that SEO is dead.
Decision Engines
Microsoft’s Bing, which is a search engine with which touts itself as a “decision engine”, displays a list of results based upon the query, and a list of “related searches” which you can check out. I’m not anti-Microsoft, but Bing as a decision engine leaves a lot to be desired. Shouldn’t a decision engine answer questions? Try asking Bing a question, and see what you get. Be careful- you’re probably going to confuse it. What kind of decision engine is that? None, really.
Hunch, however, is a decision engine. Apparently, they opted to not call it such after Microsoft’s Bing marketing campaign roll-out. It is, however, definitely a decision engine- you don’t search, you ask a question. Some argue that these types of engines will kill SEO, replacing “traditional search”. Enter query keywords, decipher results.
I think this is just another change in the landscape. And it’s one that I honestly don’t see having a big impact for some time. Want to see what I mean? Try Hunch. It’s cool. But it wouldn’t be my first choice for locating information (yet).
Algorithmic Change
Algorithmic changes happen all the time. If you monitor results closely you can almost see the search engineers turning the knobs. However, a recent change, an example of algorithmic change, has some significant impact.
Some SEOs used certain tactics to influence the filtration of link equity through a website, making some links much more valuable than others. By eliminating link equity from passing to some less important pages, you could, in theory, boost link equity to the more important pages. Some call it “Page Rank Sculpting” others “Siloing” and still others “Pure Hogwash”.
One of the tools helping achieve this kind of link equity is called the “no-follow” tag. You can add a teeny bit of code to a link to prevent Google from passing link equity to that particular page. Mike McDonald from WebProNews describes it as:
PageRank sculpting is the practice whereby you add no-follow attributes to less important links in order to emphasize links you deem more important. We used an analogy of a bucket withe holes in it. The holes represented your outbound links. Your website’s PageRank (link juice) flowed thru the holes. The fewer holes you had, higher the percentage of your link juice went thru the remaining holes (links). That’s PageRank Sculpting in a nutshell. Dividing your link authority by a smaller number of links in order to maximize the authority you pass on.
Google recently created a bit of buzz by stating the way in which Google dealt with no-follow had changed. I don’t mean to get into a technical debate about no-follow, page rank, or siloing. I want to re-enforce the idea that change is always an issue in search. Lee Odden of Top Rank Blog has a great quote:
“if it can be searched, it can be optimized”
And check this out: A recent SEMPO (Search Engine Marketing Professionals Organization) Study found that spend on search marketing will grow to more than $26.1 billion by 2013. That doesn’t sound like a death rattle to me.
When you read or hear statements of “SEO is dead” look at who is saying it and why. The fact is SEO is not dead. It’s changing.
How do you see SEO changing and moving forward?
Tags: SEO