Short vs Long Content. Which one is best?

You can also extend the amount of unique content by encouraging users to leave comments at the end of the post/article and then personally reply to each person who comments to keep the conversation going.

Another trend you'll see among top Google results are a long string of user comments.

The problem with "studies" such as these are that even if they're well designed (and that's a really big IF), they only tell you about averages and not about you, your niche or your business. For instance, the link you shared says, "The ideal length of a Facebook post is less than 40 characters" but in my experience that's just not true at all. For instance, here is some real data from three of our more popular posts on Facebook:

2,100 characters
27,350,000 people reached
450,000 likes
310,000 shares
22,000 comments

4,100 characters
19,100,000 people reached
460,000 likes
500,000 shares
53,000 comments

5,200 characters
18,750,000 people reached
130,000 likes
130,000 shares
6,000 comments

I am NOT suggesting that others should use long-form Facebook posts. Maybe they should, maybe the shouldn't. What I'm saying is it all depends. You develop your voice; you develop your niche; you develop your audience. For some, that might be a 40 character Facebook post or a 1500 character blog post. For others, like us, that might be much, much longer. Try a bunch of things out, do what works for you and forget about what anyone else says.

Yeap! That's the way to go! I am currently making articles with more than 2000 words. Still to early to throw results. Will probably need many months to test.

I don't want just search engine traffic. But in almost all traffic reports I see that more than 60% of the traffic comes from search engines, so it's really important. I am looking for referrals and social media but even that is not that stable as good rankings.

You have a good point. Quantity is also important but it has to go along with quality. Posting 5 x 2000 words useful articles per week will be better in terms of traffic than just 1 x 2000 word article per day. But it will only work if it's good quality content. Plus quality content gets free backlinks

I love data driven case studies. To tell you the truth I have seen studies like the ones from Neil Patel from Quick Sprout that says writing 3 x 2000 words articles per week will achieve 100.000 visits in 18 months.

But also has seen a study that a professor from an MBA. He made his students create a new blog in any niche and post the results after many months later. You can see the trend that every new blog is like in a sandbox in Google. And just like 3 months later ALL blogs increase dramatically in search engine traffic. They key is frequency and consistency. Weird that the ones that got more traffic were the ones that posted multiple times per day around 250 words per article.

Google spiders words. The more words you give them the more ways you are giving them to rank you. Learn about writing themed articles and filling them with the words you want to rank for. It is possible to rank for 50-100 different keywords and keyword phrases just from one well written 2000+ themed article. Good luck.

Or you can do that. It's a great idea.

Doesn't matter, most of these guys will never rank a page considering they think the amount of text on a page has something to do with SEO.

Odds are they'll also never figure out PPC, having a bankroll won't help If they're too lazy to do their own testing (proof = this thread subject).

Your experience is short, then.

So what? Elaborate. How does that answer the long vs short question.

Normally, I watch short movies. But that doesn't bring me one step closer to being an actor in a short or long movie.

Idea is great and well enough. I like it.