SEO for PR people
•Download as PPTX, PDF•
1 like•169 views
SEOs often see PR People as key to their success, but the PR community often find it hard to relate their approach back to the SEO community. This presentation shows why SEO is as important to PR people as words and feelings. (2018)
Recommended
Recommended
More Related Content
What's hot
What's hot (20)
Similar to SEO for PR people
Similar to SEO for PR people (20)
More from Dixon Jones
More from Dixon Jones (19)
Recently uploaded
Recently uploaded (20)
SEO for PR people
- 1. From Trust Flows Understanding The Top 10 Ranking Factors (Myth over Method)
- 2. Top 10 Ranking Factors in One Slide SEMRUSH MOZ Solvid (Local) 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Direct website visits Time on site Pages per session 3 Bounce rate 49% Total ref. domains Total backlinks Total referring IPs Total followed backlinks Content length (long) HTTPS Mob Friendly Perceived page value Instant Answers Qual Usage Data (CTR) UX Structured Data Mobile Apps Pop. Traffic (Clickstream) Site Speed HTTPs My Business Signals Link Signals On Page signals Citation Signals Review Signals Behavioural Signals Personalization Social Signals
- 4. Why People don’t get SEO “In 2017, Google ran 31,584 side-by-side experiments with its raters and subsequently launched 2,453 search changes.” Source: Jillian D'Onfro on CNBC.com giphy.com
- 5. Nearly Algorithm 7 Changes Every Day
- 6. SAME RESULT (SERP). SAME TIME.
- 7. Think: What is the User Doing?
- 8. Follow Google’s Goal, not its Journey Giphy.com
- 9. Acronyms • PQ = Page Quality • NM = Needs Met • E-A-T = Expertise, Authority & Trust • YMYL = Your Money or Your Life
- 10. Needs Met (NM)
- 12. Expertise, Authority & Trust PicturesfromWikipedia
- 13. Your Money or Your Life
- 14. Q: But I’m A PR Professional, not at The Tower of London! How can this help a PR Professional to win more business/help my client? A: You can be an important piece in Google’s journey. PR can rarely the destination. You create the story… Google sees where the story ends.
- 15. Their Goal uses Robots… Giphy.com
- 17. Why Links Still Matter Shirt:LinkResearchTools.com
- 18. How many links is “Enough”? It’s not that simple of course • Links have wildly different “strengths” • But we CAN Estimate page strength Google: Page Rank Moz: Page Authority Majestic: Citation Flow
- 19. How many Links is “Enough”? (Alternative Answer… Same Logic) 1(or even 0*)* Nil suggests internal links to the target page from other pages on the site. Links Still Matter!
- 20. 10 Takeaways for PR Pros 1. Get an SEO to check GSC 2. Answer a Query in the Title (NM) 3: Answer the Query in the Content 4. Write on Quality sites (PQ) 5. Write about what you know (EAT)
- 21. 10 Takeaways for PR Pros 6. Up budgets for certain sites (YMYL) 7: Make the content engaging Help the content gain power by: 8: Internally link to your article 9: Make other sites link to you! 10: Point Google to the end of the story
- 22. That’s it – I’m out! • @Dixon_Jones • @Majestic To Get the whole deck: Email: talk@majestic.com With “PRMoment” in the subject Giphy.com
Editor's Notes
- My name is Dixon Jones. I am the Global Brand Ambassador of Majestic.com – which maps the Internet to understand how all the web pages knit together, by uncovering the backlinks to any given webpage. It is one of the most important tools in an SEO’s armoury. I have been involved in Majestic for nearly a decade and before that I founded one of the UK’s first and most enduring SEO consultancies, Receptional. Back in 1999. The title of this talk is the Top 10 Ranking factors. This title is of course a poison chalice.
- Search Engine Optimisation (SEO) is the art of optimising web page so that it appears in (primarily) the Google Search results. How many people here are “Cynical” about SEO? Why? Nobody trusts SEO consultants or SEO. There’s many reasons for this, but one big reason is that whenever an SEO tells you something “True” about the Google algorithms, it is almost always easy for a lay-person to find an example on Google where that fact doesn’t hold true. How many people think this is a fair criticism? As human being, we like to seek out stability in our beliefs. We want to be able to say “This is how Google works, so if I do X, I will see results of Y”. But Google is by far from stable. Here’s an interesting statistic…
- Decisions are data driven. This was similar to the example that the CNBC reporter sat in on. Layout changes to on the mobile results. Actually the meeting was comparing TWO types of layout, but there are many more tests. Some done on user and some using a team of 10,000 Quality Raters. Which of these layouts did Google go for? Green header, Brown header or white header? Image carousel or single image and word disambiguation? The truth is that I grabbed all three of these layouts within minutes of each other from Google.co.uk on the 18th August.
- This is something you can do as well – you can easily find the same content appearing more than once in the results. Google is continuously and systematically testing variations on real users, in real time. This is because, when a user types in a query, the Google suggest is not only helping the user complete the query, but it is also polling MANY different databases. Some for web pages, some for pictures, dome for structured data, some for shopping queries… some for local searches. Every database comes back to Google with results and with a degree of certainty! Then Google representats several data types on te page, but does not have time to deduplicate the results on the fly. Big data has limits. So when an SEO says “ You must do X”, not only are they answering with a backdrop of 2,453 algorithm changes a year, but also they have already assumed that they know what datasources are being returned… so SEOs are wrong far more often than they are right when it comes to helping in general terms. They can only generally give Black and White answers by looking at a specific query in context. So if you are not spending all day, every day, looking at these changes, how does a “normal” person approach content writing with SEO in mind?
- I think the first thing is to understand that Google is trying to please the user, not the website owner or the writer. So Google spends inordinate amounts of resources trying to understand what the user actually wants, before trying to match the search results to the query.
- On top of ongoing testing with humans, Google also uses manual testing of pages, by employing (reputedly) over 10,000 quality evaluators around the globe. These evaluators have to judge pages, all day every day, based on a written set of guidelines, which generally only updates every few years. It updated in August 2018. By basing your own judgements on your own work on these written guidelines, rather than your own opinions of what “works” and what doesn’t, will give you a powerful but non-technical edge over other PR Professionals. Using this methodology, you can change thing that you CAN change, but not worry about Google’s algorithm changes along the way. You head straight to Google’s stated goal… so then you’ll know you have the optimum content, so you are just waiting for Google’s algorithms to catch up with what you have already achieved. So I am going to bring out some of the most important points about what Google is asking the raters to judge their algorithm results on.
- The EAT directives are new. This gives the writer new power in the relationships online. WHO writes the content is now important, not just the authority of the page or site. Who is the best authority when it comes to writing about the Tower of London? Tricky question!
- The last thing I am going to bring out from the Quality Rater guidelines today is that pages that are asking for Money, or are asking for lifestyle changes face a much harsher “stress test” by the raters. This page that won is indeed asking for money! (Actually, since the Tower of London is mainly known for executing people, you can also imagine algorithms having trouble about “your life” too). In this case, this page still won out, even though it was selling tickets on the home page.
- Although I said you should focus on Google’s GOAL, rather than their journey, you still need to understand that Google’s goal is increasingly to engage with their users at many points in the USER’s journey. That’s an important part of the puzzle for PR Professionals to understand, because any PR you generate creates a signal at a point in time. It is not the destination for the user. PR Professionals create stories that are within the user’s journey… If your story was the destination, then the client doesn’t really have their own product… but more importantly. The “needs Met” criteria really comes into its owm. If you are looking for a Soap Box Derby, then I bet Red Bull’s PR company will get their brand well and truly associated with this activity… but the results have to match the needs of a person looking for a soap box derby… not a caffeine based fizzy drink. So in this case it will make sense for Google to send the user to the Soap Box site, not the Red Bull site. You are helping to shape the brand, so that the brand is the ultimate search term… but you also have to help make sure that the brand does rank well… and if it doesn’t, that’s partly your fault – because of the link graph…
- Earlier I said that you should look at what Google’s GOALS are in the search results. You should, because your clients are trying to be those goals. Or at least, they should be. What the Quality Rater guidelines can’t do is tell us how Google gets to the results that create these goals. For this we do need to understand the core of what made Google great in the first place. Google doesn’t manually put the HRP site above Google. It follows a set of Mathematical proncipals. In this case, we can replicate the top 2 results without even looking at the actual content on the page at all!
- What you write, counts! It affects this table significantly.
- OK – let’s go back to Gary’s point, that you cannot tell (or cannot easily tell) what links Google counts. Another way this concept surfaces is when people ask you “How many links is enough”. How many people have been asked this question? I find this lego pyramid a good way to visualize the problem. If each 1X1 lego square is a page on the internet, the pages on the second row are MASSIVELY more influencial than the third row… and fourth etc. But there are many less pages near the top of the pyramid that the bottom.