Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

What I learned in ten years of blogging

ferrucc.io

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 168 posts

Re: What I learned in ten years of blogging

#11

Post by cantthinkofone »

andrenth wrote: post #3
qwerty456127 wrote: post #2

> No one has time to read your article, write the first lines like they’re a TLDR. So true! > For SEO don’t write short articles (>2000 words) So sad!

Sad and annoying. Top Google results are very likely to include long articles that ramble on and on and never get to the point, in the name of "optimization". Search Engine Optimization is Reader Experience Pessimization.

Is that a feature or a byproduct? It doesn't make sense to me on the surface that a larger text would be linked to more necessarily.

The length of a text doesn't seem like it would factor into the outcome of the page ranking unless I'm missing something.

How would you determine what is a "good" or "bad" article, given a reader's preferences rather than one that simply gets associated most regularly with a search query?

Re: What I learned in ten years of blogging

#12

Post by Mnlfrgr »

qwerty456127 wrote: post #2

> No one has time to read your article, write the first lines like they’re a TLDR. So true! > For SEO don’t write short articles (>2000 words) So sad!

That long articles are necessary to rank in Google is a myth. https://twitter.com/mnlfrgr/status/1074653395997388800

Re: What I learned in ten years of blogging

#13

Post by andrenth »

0xferruccio wrote: post #7
andrenth wrote: post #3

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sad and annoying. Top Google results are very likely to include long articles that ramble on and on and never get to the point, in the name of "optimization". Search Engine Optimization is Reader Experience Pessimization.

OP here, I think this is a consequence of choosing bad KPIs (like time spent on page) to define what should rank higher. In my experience the best approach to deal with this is the TLDR on top idea, so the Reader experience stays good and then going deep into the topic for the curious ones and the SEO juice

It's a workaround, but I think the real problem, as you mention, is search engines using time spent on page as a proxy metric for "this page is useful", which in many situations just isn't the case.

Re: What I learned in ten years of blogging

#14

Post by cantthinkofone »

nyc111 wrote: post #4

> The design of your site is irrelevant. But it helps if the font is legible in all media. Good, straightforward advice, better than many similar articles. Personally, in my blog, I only write what I like. I also do what he says about editing and linking old articles.

Any blog IMO should have a minimalist design. You want to draw attention to the content and present it as plainly and with as little visual clutter as possible.

Some people want to use their blog as a kind of interactive CV but that should be treated as a separate project, as it will just introduce more clutter.

Re: What I learned in ten years of blogging

#15

Post by 0xferruccio »

Mnlfrgr wrote: post #12
qwerty456127 wrote: post #2

> No one has time to read your article, write the first lines like they’re a TLDR. So true! > For SEO don’t write short articles (>2000 words) So sad!

That long articles are necessary to rank in Google is a myth. https://twitter.com/mnlfrgr/status/1074653395997388800

Didn't know that! Great advice, I think that the origin of this might be in the fact that longer content is generally more researched and thus ranks better

Re: What I learned in ten years of blogging

#16

Post by ghaff »

qwerty456127 wrote: post #2

> No one has time to read your article, write the first lines like they’re a TLDR. So true! > For SEO don’t write short articles (>2000 words) So sad!

I would need to see a citation for this. I work with digital marketing folks a lot, who are well-versed in things like SEO, and the general trend seems is toward shorter and more frequent content. That's not to say that I don't write a longer piece when the content warrants it, but for written articles/blogs/etc. 800-1000 words seems to be fairly common. Certainly there's also something of a trend from giveaway long books to 25-50 page ones.

Re: What I learned in ten years of blogging

#17

Post by SonicSoul »

One well researched article is better than a lot of mediocre content

I remember similar advice on patio11 (Patrick McKenzie) blog that i really took to heart. something along the lines of "it's better to have a few laser polished articles, than a ton of content". so to this date i start writing posts and quit half way through to keep only my favorite ideas up there..

there is another camp i.e. Seth Godin who write a short post every day, and that could work too perhaps. but i think most people would be better off with the advice in OPs post

Re: What I learned in ten years of blogging

#18

Post by andrenth »

cantthinkofone wrote: post #11
andrenth wrote: post #3

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sad and annoying. Top Google results are very likely to include long articles that ramble on and on and never get to the point, in the name of "optimization". Search Engine Optimization is Reader Experience Pessimization.

Is that a feature or a byproduct? It doesn't make sense to me on the surface that a larger text would be linked to more necessarily. The length of a text doesn't seem like it would factor into the outcome of the page ranking unless I'm missing something. How would you determine what is a "good" or "bad" article, given a reader's preferences rather than one that simply gets associated most regularly with a search quer…

As I understand it, Google (and others?) rank pages higher if the time spent on them is high. Long text takes longer to read, so it's a way to increase that metric.

Another explanation I've seen is for ranking longer texts higher is that longer text is assumed to be of higher quality because it's more content/took more work to produce/whatever.

Whatever the reason, this leads to the rambling articles I mentioned, which seems to be a trend even for cases when the actual useful content is short.

Re: What I learned in ten years of blogging

#19

Post by AndrewStephens »

martimatix wrote: post #10
andrenth wrote: post #3

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sad and annoying. Top Google results are very likely to include long articles that ramble on and on and never get to the point, in the name of "optimization". Search Engine Optimization is Reader Experience Pessimization.

I look forward to the day that a recipe doesn't come with a life story prepended to it.

With video advertising, sites have started to optimize for length of stay on the page rather than hits and I hate it.

The recipe format was perfected in the middle ages - a simple list of ingredients and a description of the steps required. But the sites that capture the first page of search results for even the simplest recipe are all designed to keep you on the page long enough for the video ads to play through.

Listen up idiots, if I like your recipe I will be on your page for minutes figuring out how to follow it and will return every time I want to make the meal. Your stats will be favorable - no need to bother me with how your dead granny used to make roast beef sandwiches or whatever.

Just another way that advertising kills everything it touches.

Re: What I learned in ten years of blogging

#20

Post by AndrewStephens »

This is good stuff. I blog for fun and I agree with almost everything here, especially the stuff about advertising. I am not against advertising in general but putting ads on your page is an acknowledgment that you care more about money than writing what you want. There is nothing morally wrong with this, but it turns a hobby into a job.

Lastly, I encourage everyone to publish blogs or articles. Each blog post on an independent site is a blow against the content farms and social media giants that control so much of the discourse these days.

Post reply on HN