Driving Forward > Digital Marketing Blog

Google On “Over-Optimization”

By

SEO over-optimization

Google’s Gary Illyes announced this week that he was looking for topics for a post that would seek to debunk some of the myths that exist in the SEO community. Because Google’s algorithm is kind of a black box, they’re rarely 100% clear in explaining how it works. People like Illyes, his colleague John Mueller, and Matt Cutts before them, are very skilled at putting out messages that seem like thorough explanations on the surface, but leave a lot open to interpretation. Because of this, the history of Google’s relationship with SEOs is full of people drawing the wrong conclusion from some statement by a Googler, leading to the spread of SEO myths.

Gary’s call for proposals got me thinking about a term that’s been making the rounds for a few years and that I’ve always had issues with: “over-optimization.” I don’t question whether it’s possible to take SEO efforts too far. If you ignore the needs of real users and just work to make a page as close as possible to what you think a search engine is looking for (ignoring the fact that the search engine is mostly looking for pages that meet the needs of real users), you’re going to end up with a page that ought to be ignored. Examples of these activities can include doing too much of anything, like getting 100,000 new backlinks in a week, publishing a thousand new pages at once, or using a keyword far too many times on a page, turning it into nonsense.

As I understand it, there isn’t a specific part of Google’s algorithm that looks for what’s called over-optimization, but Google is always on the lookout for signals that suggest that you’re making pages that are all about trying to please the algorithm and not at all about pleasing real people.

My problem with the term is really the term itself rather than the idea behind it. If “optimal” is as good as something can be, and “optimization” is the process of improving something — moving it closer to optimal — then what is over-optimization? You can’t make something too perfect, can you? But you can take something further away from perfect because you made the mistake of somehow overdoing it, when you thought you were making it better. It’s a mistake that a lot of SEOs make, and I think it should have a name that makes sense.

This all led to the following interaction on Twitter:

Tags

Boston SEO

SEO delivers the Highest ROI

CMO’s Guide to SEO

By

The Value Proposition of SEO Your goal: To be found online consistently at the top of search results— search engines are the principle way prospects learn about your products and services. Findability online is key! 81% of B2B purchase cycles start with web search, and 90% of buyers say when they are ready to buy, “they’ll find…

Read the full article

Contact Us

Schedule a presentation, tell us about your marketing goals, find our offices or just to say hello. We would love to hear from you!

Contact Us   

Webinar

Always-On Account Based Marketing – Webinar Slides & Video

aoabm

Webinar slides and video with tactics you can start using right away.

Get Access!   

Webinar

Ultimate SEO Dashboard for CMOs – Webinar Slides & Video

SEO-Dashboard-KC

Webinar slides and video with tactics CMOs can start using right away.

Get Access!   

Infographic

Lead Gen Metrics Timeline

lead-gen-metrics-timeline-v2

The lead generation metrics that really matter.

Get Access!   

Archives

  • June 2017
  • May 2017
  • April 2017
  • March 2017
  • February 2017
  • January 2017
  • December 2016
  • November 2016
  • October 2016
  • September 2016
  • August 2016
  • July 2016
  • June 2016
  • May 2016
  • April 2016
  • March 2016
  • February 2016
  • January 2016
  • December 2015
  • November 2015
  • October 2015
  • September 2015
  • August 2015
  • July 2015
  • June 2015
  • May 2015
  • April 2015
  • March 2015
  • February 2015
  • January 2015
  • December 2014
  • November 2014
  • October 2014
  • September 2014
  • August 2014
  • July 2014
  • June 2014
  • May 2014
  • April 2014
  • March 2014
  • February 2014
  • January 2014
  • December 2013
  • November 2013
  • October 2013
  • September 2013
  • August 2013
  • July 2013
  • June 2013
  • May 2013
  • April 2013
  • March 2013
  • February 2013
  • January 2013
  • December 2012
  • November 2012
  • October 2012
  • September 2012
  • August 2012
  • July 2012
  • June 2012
  • May 2012
  • April 2012
  • March 2012
  • February 2012
  • January 2012
  • December 2011
  • November 2011
  • October 2011
  • September 2011
  • August 2011
  • July 2011
  • June 2011
  • May 2011
  • April 2011
  • March 2011
  • February 2011
  • January 2011
  • December 2010
  • November 2010
  • October 2010
  • September 2010
  • August 2010
  • July 2010
  • June 2010
  • May 2010
  • April 2010
  • March 2010
  • February 2010
  • January 2010
  • December 2009
  • November 2009
  • October 2009
  • September 2009
  • August 2009
  • July 2009
  • June 2009
  • May 2009
  • April 2009
  • March 2009
  • February 2009
  • January 2009
  • December 2008
  • November 2008
  • October 2008
  • September 2008
  • August 2008
  • July 2008
  • June 2008
  • May 2008
  • April 2008
  • March 2008
  • February 2008
  • January 2008
  • December 2007
  • November 2007
  • October 2007
  • September 2007
  • August 2007
  • July 2007
  • June 2007
  • May 2007
  • April 2007
  • March 2007
  • February 2007
  • January 2007
  • September 2006
  • May 2006
  • September 2005