Tuesday, March 29, 2005
Here's an argument that links=content
I have preached the "content is king" argument for a long time, hastening to argue with anyone who thinks that links are more important than content in the blogging world.
Today I read an interesting article on the topic on MarketingProfs.com.
The author says that links are a kind of content.
How so? Well, basically he acknowledges that links improve search engine ranking and all the other search engine optimization advantages to blogging that we hear so often, but he acknowledges that there is still a person who clicks through to those search result hits, and is either intrigued or annoyed by what he/she sees.
If you're a link whore and trying to exchange links with anyone who will give them to you, then your blog roll is likely to look random and, well, link-whorish. Does this matter so much for a personal blog? Maybe not. But if you have a blog that's representing your business or your brand, then it's not going to reflect well on the business/brand for it to be associated with dozens of random links, which are of no interest to your potential and actual customers.
Some long-time bloggers claim that no one uses blog rolls anymore, and at least one I've read thinks that's a good thing. But I think many people, especially those newer to blogs, do lean on blog rolls to find new voices from people whose voices they like. If you link them to a bunch of useless sites...how long will it be before they are annoyed by you? Not long I fear.
So author Gerry McGovern throws an interesting twist into the discussion of links vs. content...helping us see that links are a form of content.
True enough, Gerry, true enough.
Today I read an interesting article on the topic on MarketingProfs.com.
The author says that links are a kind of content.
How so? Well, basically he acknowledges that links improve search engine ranking and all the other search engine optimization advantages to blogging that we hear so often, but he acknowledges that there is still a person who clicks through to those search result hits, and is either intrigued or annoyed by what he/she sees.
If you're a link whore and trying to exchange links with anyone who will give them to you, then your blog roll is likely to look random and, well, link-whorish. Does this matter so much for a personal blog? Maybe not. But if you have a blog that's representing your business or your brand, then it's not going to reflect well on the business/brand for it to be associated with dozens of random links, which are of no interest to your potential and actual customers.
Some long-time bloggers claim that no one uses blog rolls anymore, and at least one I've read thinks that's a good thing. But I think many people, especially those newer to blogs, do lean on blog rolls to find new voices from people whose voices they like. If you link them to a bunch of useless sites...how long will it be before they are annoyed by you? Not long I fear.
So author Gerry McGovern throws an interesting twist into the discussion of links vs. content...helping us see that links are a form of content.
True enough, Gerry, true enough.
// posted by ElisaC @ 2:50 PM 
