Long versus short copy
-
Does the search engines have a preference for pages with long or short copy? (Assuming our short copy fulfill the basic keyword requirements)
While a long copy, enable us to include more long tail keywords, i find that most people prefer to read a short copy. We currently try to keep each page short and give the reader an option to explorer further with links to more detailed pages.
-
You're right, Google doesn't appear to have an opinion on length that is has voiced - more pointing out the quality of the content itself - my statement was more from what I had seen here and there on various publications, and on also as a result of generally having seen pages with more content on performing better organically over time that pages with thinner content (this is not to say that the 500 number was a max at all - far from it, I too have pages 2 or 3 times that size). I would rather the task of optimising performance of 500 word pages than say 250 word pages.
Apologies to all for not being a bit clearer with my original answer
-
Relevant to this question, my experience is from building information pages on information sites. We load them with deep substantive content supplemented with data, media and images. Several thousand words, reference lists, data tables, a video or two and a dozen big images.
This is an info site with a small store. The info pages get us into competitive, high traffic SERPs but we often feature sales items just like you might see adsense or other promotions. These can be buy buttons right on the info page and always have links to a product pages with full product information.
A great way to put products into difficult relevant SERPs.
-
When you enrich a page with articles and video, do you include this in the same page or do you link to it?
In our case, we are trying to promote a product page. The page gives an overall product description and it has sub pages that each describe individual features. Plus we have a couple of resource links, that link to related datasheet and video.
In your experience, would we benefit from including more of the linked content directly on the product page, instead of linking to it on separate pages?
-
Where did that 400 to 500 word stat come from? I would guess that this is just conjecture and that no one knows.
I have a number of articles on my site that are well over 500 words and do well in the SERPS. I think that as long as you are writing useful information that is meant to help the reader then you will do well. I personally don't think Google has an optimum number of words that they like.
-
Quality first, and enough of it to avoid looking "thin". Post Panda, the general consensus of opinion appears to be around the 400 - 500 word mark.
As much as it is more work, that aim from the SE angle is to show results that are going to answer a searchers query.
The way in which SE's can quantify this is through bounce rate, time on site, and page views per visit. Bounce rate is fairly well known - high bounce rate means a good chance your content is not relevant and/or not ranking correctly for the terms it is targeting. Time on site, although not openly taken into consideration by google publicly - if you think about it, the more time a prospect spends on your site, the more chance of them performing your chosen call to action. Pages per visit will come naturally as a result of mastering the previous 2 points, and again increase your chance of a call to action happening.
-
We have enriched lots of pages from a few sentences to several paragraphs and then to substantive articles of a couple thousand words with images, tables, references and sometimes video. These enrichments usually were accompanied by a ranking improvement but were always accompanied by an increase in long tail traffic and an increase in the average visitor time on page. I believe that they also made the pages much more linkable.
-
The preference is for quality content.
Some page SEO tools will offer feedback based on the amount of characters or words, but those are just guides.
Think of a simple dictionary page. A random word definition does not offer a lot of content. As long as it is unique, relevant, and helpful to viewers then the content can still rank well.
You would never want to intentionally make an article longer to satisfy a search engine or stuff it with key words. If your content is larger then your page layout allows, a "read more" link to another page, or a link that then shows additional content is perfectly acceptable.
Browse Questions
Explore more categories
-
Moz Tools
Chat with the community about the Moz tools.
-
SEO Tactics
Discuss the SEO process with fellow marketers
-
Community
Discuss industry events, jobs, and news!
-
Digital Marketing
Chat about tactics outside of SEO
-
Research & Trends
Dive into research and trends in the search industry.
-
Support
Connect on product support and feature requests.
Related Questions
-
Another website copying our blog content but credit us. Still bad?
Hi Moz community, A few businesses that we work with are asking if they can leverage our content such as blogs by basically copying it and post it on their site. They will give us credit for the content though. My concern is that going to cause duplicate content issue and hurt us with our SEO? We'd like to provide it to them in a way that would benefit us or at least doesn't hurt us. I can think of a few possible options... 1. Have them only copy part of the content and link back to our site with a link "Read the original article" or something similar 2. Have them implement rel=canonical back to our site 3. Have them just copy the whole thing (because it doesn't really hurt us?). In that case, do we have them link back to us or no? Is there anything I missed? What's the best option for us? Thank you for the help in advance!
Content Development | | aphoontrakul1 -
Community Discussion - Pitches from content marketers versus publicists: any difference?
Howdy, Moz community! Hope you're all having a fine Friday so far! Tuesday on the blog we featured Samuel Scott's superpowered "Advanced Guide to Online Publicity Campaigns." One interesting tidbit stood out to me as I was reading; the author states: On online marketing websites and blogs, I see pitching often being discussed by "content marketers" as a way to gain shares of and links to one thing or another. They should stop. I receive e-mailed pitches from PR executives and "content marketers" all the time — and I can tell within three seconds which one I'm getting. How? Here is the difference between the two. "Content marketers" pitch me: 1.) To share or link to some random article, and they do so often when
Content Development | | FeliciaCrawford
2.) I have no connection to or interest in the topic at all Publicists pitch me: 1.) To write about an idea because
2.) They already know that I have a connection to or interest in that topic I ignore or delete the pitches from "content marketers." Following the pitches from publishers, I may choose to include their source, study, or idea in some future piece in the publications to which I contribute. Most "link earning" methods are poor imitations of traditional publicity practices. Pitch in a way that will genuinely interest the people who you are contacting. Do not pitch thinly-veiled attempts to get links and shares for you or your clients. I definitely get these emails fairly regularly, but I've never given thought to just what it is that makes me respond positively to some and decline others. So here's my discussion question for the week: What's the distinction for you? Have you noticed that, in your own pitches, you've had a better reception to a certain strategy? Does the "publicist" angle work better in your experience, or have you had plenty of luck with the "content marketer"-type pitch? What do you actually find yourself responding to, in these situations?9 -
Copying & Pasting the Moz Glossary onto my site.. is this white hat or black hat?
Hi, I run a small business writing optimised content for small businesses in Melbourne. I want to add a Glossary page to my website that lists all of the different words associated with website marketing and SEO. I found the Moz glossary and I am wondering if it would be a bad idea to copy and paste the list straight into a page on my site. I'd prefer to not have to reword all of the descriptions as it will take me ages and I don't want to compromise the information in the descriptions. Here is a link to the Glossary: http://moz.com/blog/smwc-and-other-essential-seo-jargon Obviously I don't want to do the wrong thing ethically or from Google's perspective. Any advice would be great.
Content Development | | StoryScout0 -
Images in articles - copying the authority in my industry
Hello, For my site, BobWeikel.com, I have an article about the type of coaching I do. It's called "What is NLP?" Here's the link. The two authorities in my industry which I respect the most have no (or sometimes one) images or anything in their best articles - it's all just text. Some examples of these authoritative articles are here and here. Note the second article has one image in it. That's common for that author, and he's the top person in the field. Note that that first link has no images at all. I'd like to refine my article until I can compete. Should I leave out all images since that's what the big guys are doing? Thanks!
Content Development | | BobGW0 -
Best way to publish FAQs to capture long tail traffic?
If you want to target long tail traffic from commonly asked questions what is the best way to publish answers to these questions? A really long FAQ page, a new page for each question in a /faq/ subfolder, adding them to relevant product pages that already exist? Is creating a new page for each question a problem because the answer might be a paragraph and Google doesn't like thin content?
Content Development | | ProjectLabs0 -
Prevent average users from copying content and pasting into their websites
Please do not respond with a "you can't stop them" comment, I understand this. Most of our pages have content that is duplicated across multiple domains. The recent Google algorithm update focused on penalizing pages that have duplicate content, and it could be one of the reasons that we have been seeing traffic loss. I'm looking for some type of javascsript/php code that will help minimize this issue.If could be code that does not allow you to copy and paste the code without turning of javascript or a dialog box pops up and says "this content is copyright protected, anyone copying this content is subject to legal action" I've found one script that might work http://www.ioncube.com/html_encoder.php My questions are still the same: 1 What is the best method to achieve my objective? 2 Will this additional code affect how the webbots see our site and or affect rankings? I know that anyone can figure out how to get the code, I am trying to mitigate by providing a warning about copyright infringement and making it more challenging to copy our content. Please do not respond with a "you can't stop them" comment, etc, I understand this. Thank you for your comments!
Content Development | | 4RealLocal0 -
Does this count as Copied Content ?
Hi, we are publishing news on our website blog. In the news we use excerpts from other websites but do mention the source like "according to XYZ news source" etc. Does it count as copied content as sometime copyscape shows alsmot 30% duplicated content due to inclusion of references from different sources in our news stories ? Regards, shahzad
Content Development | | shaz_lhr0 -
Content being copied from our product page hurting our site overall?
On our product pages, he have short descriptions and some bulleted lists. Resellers of our products, and many other sites who are not resellers are copying this content, often verbatim. While I'm not as concerned for the product pages themselves as we're hoping the category pages will rank, does this duplication of our content hurt our site overall? FWIW, our brand name is in our domain and often also shown on these sites that copy the content.
Content Development | | minutiae0