<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<rss version="2.0" xml:base="http://www.marketingfan.com" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">
<channel>
 <title>keyword stuffing</title>
 <link>http://www.marketingfan.com/seo-glossary/keyword-stuffing</link>
 <description>The taxonomy view with a depth of 0.</description>
 <language>en</language>
<item>
 <title>Death of the SEO Copywriters - Spam Detection with Phrase Based Information Retrieval</title>
 <link>http://www.marketingfan.com/a/search-engines/research/death-of-the-seo-copywriters-spam-detection-with-phrase-based-information-retrieval.php</link>
 <description>&lt;p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Bill Slawski of SEObytheSea has a &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.seobythesea.com/?p=413&quot;&gt;great post up&lt;/a&gt; explaining a concept of how search engines (Google, man!) do a phrase based analysis &amp;#8211; of your content to assign quality measures to it and possibly put it into the wastebasket or at least supplemental index.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;The idea is that quality documents have a different co-occurrence of certain phrases (&amp;#8220;money-words&amp;#8221;) than spammy or low quality articles you bought for two dollars each from that low-quality writer in India recently who wasn&amp;#8217;t even aware of how to use Word properly, not to speak about creating quality content&amp;#8230; &lt;/p&gt;
&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Certainly a &amp;#8220;SEOed&amp;#8221; article around a phrase, let&amp;#8217;s say &amp;#8220;President of the united states&amp;#8221; would use that term in all variations, word order and such.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;A quality article really talking about the President of the united states would probably mention other &amp;#8220;unimportant&amp;#8221; things like names of past presidents, non-important things like amorous adventures, hollywood careers or other generally bad habits of those big guys that nobody would place an Adwords bid on for example.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;The search engines just create a &lt;b&gt;co-occurance matrix&lt;/b&gt; for all phrases in the document and match those statistics against other quality documents.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;
&lt;div class=&quot;bb-quote&quot;&gt;&lt;b&gt;patent,bill wrote:&lt;/b&gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;blockquote class=&quot;bb-quote-body&quot;&gt;
&lt;p&gt;From the foregoing, the number of the related phrases present in a given document will be known. A normal, non-spam document will generally have a relatively limited number of related phrases, typically on the order of between 8 and 20, depending on the document collection. By contrast, a &lt;b&gt;spam document&lt;/b&gt; will have an excessive number of related phrases, for example on the order of between &lt;b&gt;100 and 1000 related phrases&lt;/b&gt;. Thus, the present invention takes advantage of this discovery by identifying as spam documents those documents that have a statistically significant deviation in the number of related phrases relative to an expected number of related phrases for documents in the document collection.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/blockquote&gt;
&lt;/div&gt;
&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;So short &amp;#8211; that patent and the wonderful clear exlpanation by Bill outlines pretty well, that Google &amp;amp; co DO have the means and technology to judge on content quality &amp;#8230;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;and that is the death for all &lt;span class=&quot;caps&quot;&gt;SEO&lt;/span&gt; &amp;#8220;copywriters&amp;#8221; just focussing on keyword density, repetition and keyword stuffing.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;What does that mean for you if you &lt;span class=&quot;caps&quot;&gt;HIRE&lt;/span&gt; a writer for creating content?&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;DO &lt;span class=&quot;caps&quot;&gt;NOT&lt;/span&gt; overdo your specifications concerning keyword phrases to use!&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Especially in the last months I have seen content rank &lt;span class=&quot;caps&quot;&gt;GREAT&lt;/span&gt; on Google (if on the right domains) for &lt;b&gt;related phrases&lt;/b&gt; versus phrases that were really used in the content&amp;#8230; you don&amp;#8217;t need to have an exact mention of a keyword phrase for it to be found on Google anymore!&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;NO, it could even harm you nowadays &amp;#8211; that&amp;#8217;s the next phase of overoptimization penalties &amp;#8211; create good, natural content and RANK!&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&lt;/p&gt;
</description>
 <comments>http://www.marketingfan.com/a/search-engines/research/death-of-the-seo-copywriters-spam-detection-with-phrase-based-information-retrieval.php#comments</comments>
 <category domain="http://www.marketingfan.com/a/search-engines/research/index.php">research</category>
 <category domain="http://www.marketingfan.com/seo-glossary/keyword-stuffing">keyword stuffing</category>
 <category domain="http://www.marketingfan.com/seo-glossary/supplemental-index">supplemental index</category>
 <category domain="http://www.marketingfan.com/products-people-companies/bill-slawski">bill slawski</category>
 <pubDate>Fri, 29 Dec 2006 14:03:12 +0100</pubDate>
 <dc:creator>Marketing Fan</dc:creator>
 <guid isPermaLink="false">1217 at http://www.marketingfan.com</guid>
</item>
</channel>
</rss>
