Is content all that is cracked up to be?

1. 63

   bgamallposted 14 years ago

   I have some content that is pretty hard hitting. It is accurate and it is substantial. When I see a PR of 0 for this content it makes me think that there is a problem with the whole idea. Is there simply too much content out there now? And people are spinning articles and the like. Do we have to be spinners? I am beginning to think yes.

   replyreport
   1. 80

      thisisoliposted 14 years agoin reply to this

      PR has no relation to the quality of content, it is merely a numerical value calculated by PR of inbound links - a deduction for outbound links.
      
      The good news is that quality content is MUCH more important than PR for getting your work noticed by search engines

      replyreport
      1. 60

         kiigeorgeposted 14 years agoin reply to this

         huh ?
         " it is merely a numerical value calculated by PR of inbound links - a deduction for outbound links."
         like to explain this ? - numbered value by Page rank of inbound links - a deduction of of outbound links ?
         
         and
         " quality content is MUCH more important than PR for getting your work noticed by search engines " 
         
         why ? how ?  i thought Google cant tell whats good content and whats not .. apart from keyword use and associated keywords - after that, other measurement factors have to be employed , because Google cant judge good content by assessing the message the sense of the meaning of the post, like human reader can  ? thats why these problems exist.

         replyreport
   2. 87

      Marisa Wrightposted 14 years agoin reply to this

      Bgamall, your content may be hard-hitting but it's also topical.  You're up against news sites and financial sites with huge clout, whose sites have enormous credibility with Google.  So their results are always going to get presented to searchers long before yours.
      
      If you're always on the back pages of Google, you will never get much traffic.  And even if you did, what does someone want to buy if they're searching for articles on the Tea Party?  Nothing.  They're looking for opinion, so they have no motive to click on your ads.

      replyreport
      1. 60

         kiigeorgeposted 14 years agoin reply to this

         well said Marrisa - another realist like Nelle below ..
         
         less comp. content - or try the same content, presented with less competition keywords if possible.  And distinguish  between info content and selling content.

         replyreport
2. 60

   brettbposted 14 years ago

   There is way too much rubbish in the best niches, but just be patient and sooner or later Google will come up with something to identify all the spun rubbish.
   
   There are plenty of niches left, 90% of people are only writing about weight loss, acai berries or forex trading.

   replyreport
3. 67

   Joy56posted 14 years ago

   i will go over and have a look at your hubs..... hard hitting is a good.

   replyreport
4. 0

   Nelle Hoxieposted 14 years ago

   No it's not. If you don't merchandize and promote content, you could be screwed by the time your content rises to the top naturally.
   
   Case in point - high quality real estate sites, built on the perception that the market was hot and would remin a good investment. Not only did the premise change, but all the content about qualifying and getting a mortage, credit etc.
   
   You gotta catch a niche fast or it disappears, or your competition beats you out.

   replyreport
   1. 60

      kiigeorgeposted 14 years agoin reply to this

      good on you Nellie. I like hard hitting " realism "
      
      " No it's not.( hard hitting is good ). If you don't merchandize and promote content, you could be screwed by the time your content rises to the top naturally "
      
      direct and well said .. however, some content can  tend to be more evergreen than " real Estate " markets

      replyreport
      1. 0

         Nelle Hoxieposted 14 years agoin reply to this

         That's in hindsight. I doubt if you would have said that seven years ago. What retirement planning - that's been turned over completely as well.
         
         Nutrition? Big study just came out yesterday that calcium supplements are bad for a women's heart.
         
         Hormone Replacement Therapy the standard of treating menopausal symptoms for over a decade. How many sites were set up touting that and had to come down
         
         Vegetarian low-fat diets are now second to MUFA the right fat diets in nutrition studies.
         
         I can't think of one popular "evergreen topic" that has stood the test of time. The only people touting this strategy now are the gurus who want to make money teaching others how to make money. Everyone who really makes money on the net in affiliate marketing, knows that passive income is a joke.
         
         I've made a great living in affiliate marketing for 10 years, and I know how much time it takes every day and how much things change every day.

         replyreport
         1. 61

            wildorangeflowerposted 14 years agoin reply to this

            very nice information, thanks a lot for this one.

            replyreport
         2. 60

            kiigeorgeposted 14 years agoin reply to this

            i wasn't thinking of any of those .. i was thinking of if one wrote a review of a film, or a book ..  not much to be made from it though.
            
            there's gold in your comments Nelle, cause of your depth of experience.

            replyreport
5. 86

   WryLiltposted 14 years ago

   Content may be king but getting in first ranks up there too:
   
   

   replyreport
6. 86

   Pcunixposted 14 years ago

   I tried to craft a reply to this last night but I was too tired.
   
   Content is king, but as others have pointed out, your content is just a little Post-it note in a mountain of paper.
   
   You seem to want to write about politics.  Given good writing, time and a little luck, you could be moderately successful at that.  But it will take many more hubs, much more time and - again - some luck.
   
   I have a niche site that is thirteen years old, has approximately 7,000 posts on it, gets a quarter million page views per month, mostly from Google and it earns about $1,000 a month from ads. 
   
   That's all.  It's a tough business.  Content is king, but the king doesn't always have a gold crown.

   replyreport
   1. 61

      wildorangeflowerposted 14 years agoin reply to this

      Hi Pcunix, does this mean the older the site and the posts and good articles on it, the more it will ripen and be likened by google more than content?

      replyreport
      1. 0

         Nelle Hoxieposted 14 years agoin reply to this

         What site makes money depends on the competition it faces and the current google algorithm. Your online portfolio has to be diversified so that something always hits right. I've had crap sites that have done better than quality sometimes. Sometimes the age of the site matters, sometimes it doesn't.

         replyreport
7. 59

   kephriraposted 14 years ago

   Google has no way to asses quality content, so if you want to get all your traffic from them then quality content is not enough on its own - you also have to make it search engine optimized and it has to be on topics where you aren't competing directly with multi-billion pound media empires like Marissa says.
   
   But if you don't want to do that, then quality content can get traffic from other places, such as building up a readerships from hubbers and from social media sites.
   
   People are increasingly finding online content though friends rather than search engines, particularly certain types  of content such as news and politics related stuff. Maybe you should focus on this instead of google.

   replyreport
8. 0

   Nelle Hoxieposted 14 years ago

   True kiigeorge, I view content in terms of the revenue stream it generates over time. You're right in that a review of Shakespeare is timeless.
   
   However if you were monetizing it trying to sell a paper book, then that would have to be changed to an e-reader, with a note that Shakespeare can now be downloaded for free!)

   replyreport
9. 60

   kiigeorgeposted 14 years ago

   Nelle and Kephrira
   
   just want to say im quickly becoming a fan of each of you.
   Your right on the nail each time.

   replyreport
10. 61

    HRogerposted 13 years ago

    After so long, content still remains king.

    replyreport
11. 67

    Charles Jamesposted 13 years ago

    My heavy content pieces drift to the front page of Google in 3 to 6 months depending on the level of competition. Once they are there they get read and they stay there.
    
    Alas I have not found the trick of writing about Neighbours, The Simpsons, Beyonce and Madonna - otherwise my earnings would be significantly better.

    replyreport
12. 59

    Peter Owenposted 13 years ago

    Do it for the writing, not the score. which  artcles do you read if you do a google search on  a serious subject? I go right past all e-how articles and most hub articles. they are crap and written by people who have no knowledge of the subject and don't do any research. They just pick a topic and speak off the cuff. Accuracy is not only secondary, it is most of the times non-existent.
    So write to write well and the google rank will come.

    replyreport