If you've ever suffered from back pain you'll relate to grief that I discuss in this article. You'll relate even more if your back pain started on onset of your SEM career. Not surprisingly, mine did.
Don't get me wrong, I absolutely love this industry. It's entertaining, thought provoking, and challenging. It's an ever-changing industry that keeps me on my toes in constant search of information, knowledge, and new ideas.
But there are some aspects that make me just want to squeal. Most of my rants rest on shoulders of SEO kinship. The, often self-proclaimed, gurus and goddesses of search engine community. The often disbelieving falsities, self propaganda nonsense that many in this industry procreate.
Don't get me wrong. I respect many SEM professionals. The likes of Danny Sullivan, Shari Thurow, Morgan Carey, and Peter da Vanzo - to name but a few. But then there are those, who I'll refrain from naming, who seem to think they are know-it-alls, alluring people to follow their often devious or bandwagon practises, and occasionally belittling those who don't.
What really gets my pain throbbing is constant battle to find original content from these self-proclaimed "gurus". As you will know, many swear that increasing link popularity is most important factor in obtaining high search engine placement. Those same experts proclaim that bulking up content is way to gain link popularity.
I'll take this one step further and say that original, interesting content is what really works. These are sites that people want to share with friends, families, and colleagues alike. The problem I have with this is quite simple: where has original content disappeared to?
I cannot remember when last I read an original piece or commentary on SEO industry? Most of "content-bulking" copy that I come across is repetition of something said before. "Thesaurusised content" is what I like to call it.
The majority of population, myself included, don't have time to sit and read old information. As far as link popularity is concerned, why would someone want to devalue their own site by linking to sites that have similar content? Makes no point at all. Ever noticed that most populated sites on Net are those that genuinely have interesting and original information that people find enticing. Isn't that what gurus mean by "content is king"?