Article Syndication:1 Thing That Messes With Your Traffic?

12 years ago

Originally Posted by ChloeCKimberley

I know this might sound annoying to the article syndicators, and maybe even amateurish - but I have a reason for sticking with SEO (ranking in Google) as a traffic source instead of "article marketing".

So the question is...

...If I am leaning towards harvesting traffic from the Search networks like in Google... And wish to gather "backlinks" from syndication, how would you go about doing it?

I don't think it sounds annoying so much as writing for SEO and writing for syndication are very different. Writing for SEO very much neutralizes your syndication efforts. There are many threads here explaining this in great detail.

Backlinks are a natural benefit of syndication. Your backlinks come from your resource box and any relevant links you might have in the article.

I don't know what your reason for sticking with SEO is but I truly doubt you'll find more benefits with that than active syndication. Do yourself a favor and go through Alexa's posts and comments on syndication. Alexa Smith

Many of the most active and successful article syndicators here have contributed a lot of great info on the topic that might shed light on the true nature on how it all works. Good luck.

[ 6 ] Thanks

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5988029].message }}

philipdwyer

12 years ago

Yeah, I don't believe article marketing has the same power it did a few years ago.

Thanks
2 replies

Signature

--
Philip Dwyer

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5988044].message }}

Tadresources 12 years ago

Originally Posted by philipdwyer

Yeah, I don't believe article marketing has the same power it did a few years ago.

Agreed, though it still has its uses. A decade ago you could write a dozen articles and get the same response you get out of 500 now.
- Thanks
- 1 reply
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5990564].message }}
- Alexa Smith Banned 12 years ago
  
  Originally Posted by Tadresources
  
  A decade ago you could write a dozen articles and get the same response you get out of 500 now.
  
  You've confused article syndication with article directory marketing (again), I think.
  
  Article syndication is notable for the fact that very small numbers of articles, even in competitive niches, can attract floods of highly targeted traffic. It has nothing to do with submitting articles to directories in an attempt to get potential customers from the article directory copies, or for SEO benefits from directory backlinks.
  
  http://www.warriorforum.com/main-int...ml#post5035794
  
  http://www.warriorforum.com/main-int...ml#post5068872
  
  [ 1 ] Thanks
  
  {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5990808].message }}
successproducts 12 years ago

Well I beg differ. Article marketing is and still will be one of the most legitimate sources for traffic. here is the thing -- not trash the net with junkies fluffy craps that offer no real values to the readers -- those can't and never will be good for us or for the search engines.

Offer something of values -- hence we are going back to the values again. Have a conscience in all things we do online. It's not because someone is going to put a bat over our head and forces us to be nice.

It's a good way to earn a living. Offer something of substaintial good when you write. Offer something of values then

1- you get free traffic
2- you get customers.
- Thanks
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5995487].message }}

Ray Wilson

12 years ago

This is a very nice blueprint to get quality traffic with quality content with SEO. I would say that you stick with it for a while, probably you already do it.

Remember, nobody will tell you the whole truth because nobody knows it. What might worked a few months ago for me doesn't work now.

But the plan is admirable, if you take action on a daily basis.

Cheers,
Ray

Thanks

Signature

Hire a WSO Sales Letter Copywriter

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5988050].message }}

AnniePot

12 years ago

Originally Posted by ChloeCKimberley

So the question is...

...If I am leaning towards harvesting traffic from the Search networks like in Google... And wish to gather "backlinks" from syndication, how would you go about doing it?

*Note: Not asking anything about spinning articles, alternative backlinking methods, blog networks.

You are still missing the point slightly. True quality article syndication divorces you from the ongoing need to kowtow to Google, and SEO. I accept that by the act of getting your articles syndicated on popular, well trafficked, niche relevant web sites, you will receive quality backlinks naturally, but you should view them as a bonus, not as the goal.

The goal of syndication is not SEO, it is to put your enticing, authority content in front of the other sites' visitors and subscribers; people who will click through to your web site for more information.

Implemented correctly, you won't give a hoot about Google, yet the funny thing is, Google will love you because you will be the source of high quality content, and this is exactly what all the algorithm changes are working toward. Google wants to send their searchers to the very best material, and if you are the one providing it, you will be the winner.

[ 6 ] Thanks
1 reply

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5988053].message }}

MikeTucker

12 years ago

Originally Posted by philipdwyer

Yeah, I don't believe article marketing has the same power it did a few years ago.

Well, what can we do... Every method loses some steam after being extremely effective for several centuries. :rolleyes:

Originally Posted by Ray Wilson

This is a very nice blueprint to get quality traffic with quality content with SEO. I would say that you stick with it for a while, probably you already do it.

Remember, nobody will tell you the whole truth because nobody knows it. What might worked a few months ago for me doesn't work now.

But the plan is admirable, if you take action on a daily basis.

Cheers,
Ray

Nobody knows the truth??
Article marketing didn't start a few years ago, and it didn't stop working a few months ago.

Originally Posted by AnniePot

You are still missing the point slightly. True quality article syndication divorces you from the ongoing need to kowtow to Google, and SEO. I accept that by the act of getting your articles syndicated on popular, well trafficked, niche relevant web sites, you will receive quality backlinks naturally, but you should view them as a bonus, not as the goal.

The goal of syndication is not SEO, it is to put your enticing, authority content in front of the other sites' visitors and subscribers; people who will click through to your web site for more information.

Implemented correctly, you won't give a hoot about Google, yet the funny thing is, Google will love you because you will be the source of high quality content, and this is exactly what all the algorithm changes are working toward. Google wants to send their searchers to the very best material, and if you are the one providing it, you will be the winner.

This is exactly right. ^^^
The only thing I would add is that your whole goal, especially in the beginning, is to build a network of outlets for your work-- You don't even have to write very much. And you are not only working to get syndicated on good websites, but also in newsletters/ezines and even real, paper magazines from time-to-time.

But, if you're determined to stick to SEO, more power to you. Whatever fries your flounder. I am curious why you would focus on such slightly targeted, low quality traffic?

[ 3 ] Thanks

Signature

The bartender says: "We don't serve faster-than-light particles here."

...A tachyon enters a bar.

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5988158].message }}

Alexa Smith

Banned 12 years ago

After the replies from Travlinguy, Anne and Mike above, I have very little to add ...

Originally Posted by ChloeCKimberley

...If I am leaning towards harvesting traffic from the Search networks like in Google... And wish to gather "backlinks" from syndication, how would you go about doing it?

Backlinks from article syndication are very powerful, as they're (more or less by definition) from relevant sites. This post explains how I go about doing it: http://www.warriorforum.com/main-int...ml#post5035794

Article syndication isn't intrinsically "an SEO method" at all. It's a traffic-generating system in its own right.

The most valuable and profitable article syndication I achieve, in many different niches, is actually syndication to ezines/magazines and so on, which (unless they happen also to have a copy archived online) don't produce backlinks at all.

"Ironically", though, it's quite true that the incidental, "side-benefit" backlinks I achieve through article syndication do tend to be worth a whole lot more to me, in the long run, than any I've ever achieved by "aiming specifically for SEO".

[ 4 ] Thanks
3 replies

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5988169].message }}

MikeTucker 12 years ago

Originally Posted by Alexa Smith

After the replies from Travlinguy, Anne and Mike above, I have very little to add ...

LOL, well, I learned 80% of what I know from you.
- Thanks
Signature

The bartender says: "We don't serve faster-than-light particles here."

...A tachyon enters a bar.
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5988201].message }}
travlinguy 12 years ago

Originally Posted by Alexa Smith

After the replies from Travlinguy, Anne and Mike above, I have very little to add ...

It's been you, Alexa, along with several of the others that opened my eyes. I am but a humble (well, maybe not so humble on some things ) student.
- Thanks
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5988242].message }}

ChloeCKimberley

12 years ago

Thanks to Travlinguy, Anne, Mike and Alexa for clarifying matters!

Part of the reason why I'm a (bad) mule staying by the Google stable is because of the ROI of SEO in online businesses. From some analysis, it really has huge leverage - especially horizontally.

I wouldn't say it has bad-conversion traffic, especially if there are follow-ups on transactional search terms from "Just checking it out" to the "Buy" phase.

A little out-of-topic, but here's a tiny digression (excerpt):

Originally Posted by http://www.eecs.umich.edu/db/files/SupportTransactionalSearch-SIGIR06.pdf

It is typically the case that a user is willing to spend $500 to book a hotel on the web, including a $50 commission to the web site, but is unwilling to spend even an amount smaller than $50 for information to help choose the hotel.

The business model for many web businesses is to provide information for free in the hope of making money from a transaction that eventually results.

Not surprisingly, generic search engines (as far as we can tell) already special case selected transactional searches. For instance, a Google query naming a pair of cities will bring up a link to ﬂight booking services as the top hit, before providing the standard list of matches.

It is therefore in the interests of companies like Orbitz and Expedia to provide appropriate additional information to search engines, in order to enable them to support transactional requests better.

All right, the top short, it's essentially targeting towards people leaning towards the buying phase that has me attracted. And if the page gets ranked in appropriate link neighbourhoods, long-tailed queries will get my page targeted traffic as well.

* back to topic *

I'm not discounting article marketing, maybe you could say I'm at the crossroads being torn between SEO and article syndication. (Since there's an opportunity cost of focusing on either one lead generation method)

But hmm - reading all those posts by Alexa has gotten article marketing's tiny finger around me.

Do you have a "budget" or an average investment per niche site that you drive traffic to (via article marketing)?

Thanks
3 replies

Signature

Signed, Chloe C Kimberley
copywriter,designer,marketer

"If you're making good money with SEO/PPC/product creation, I'll be willing to offer copywriting assistance to you so that I can learn from you."

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5988282].message }}

Christopher Fox

12 years ago

I scanned that pdf you attached Chloe. Did you note the age of the references they cited? Most are approaching 10 years old, at least three dating back to last century and the newest being 2005. That is ancient stuff in the internet world.

Don't let a bunch of greek letters, mathematical symbolism and a .edu fool you into thinking that this group who put together the report are the experts on search algos and how to take them into consideration when devising a business strategy.

Part of the reason why I'm a (bad) mule staying by the Google stable is because of the ROI of SEO in online businesses. From some analysis, it really has huge leverage - especially horizontally.

Using this logic, you would have to assume that there have been enormous leaps in dieting/weight loss knowledge in the last decade as well. With all of these new businesses, including a guy making $1,000,000 / month off of how to get a set of abs that would make America's Top Model want to do jell-o shots off of your belly, it is only natural to assume that some new development, some new secret and previously undiscovered method has come to light, shaking Weight Watchers, Jenny Craig, et al., to the core, right? After all, look at the ROI on a simple ebook, mostly rehashing what we all already know. The key then, is to go write an ebook on abs and try to do today what others had success with yesterday and expect the same results. Right? A million per month. It certainly appears that the ROI for a weightloss/ripped abs book is enormous. It is right there, staring us in the face, so it must be true. Right?

I think we all know the answer to those rhetorical questions. Many doors have now be closed for that model and a large part of that person's success had to do with his Clickbank commission he offered versus the norm a few years ago. But that has changed and the ROI you can reasonably expect to make off of that model is nowhere near the example I cited.

And that is because large parts of the model, namely offering a higher commission than most others in an effort to hire a huge stable of salespersons (IMers) to sell your product is no longer a viable method - everyone is offering 75% now.

That example may not seem to be applicable to you or to have an overarching point - but, it does ...

Myself, as well as people who have years of experience, would argue that the ROI on SEO is on its way out the door, compared to yesterday. In fact Google just recently announced that they are in the process of making sure that your ROI for overly SEOed sites is going to give you a negative return and end up in a de-indexing or being buried in the SERPs.

If you do not want to believe the people here who have established themselves as experts in the field you are asking about, certainly you must take into consideration what Google is telling you about the SEO industry, in general. And then you need to ask yourself if you really want to implement a business model for future income that has, at its core, placing a bet against a $200,000,000,000, very successful, corporation.

Google does not want to promote your business model. They don't want to because they believe it will drive their base to a competitor - Bing. If that happens, they view you as having taken money from their pockets. Their, deep, deep pockets they are currently reaching into in an effort to assure that your model you are outlining will fall flat on its face and the SEO industry as we know it today to be a horrible long term investment.

I'm just another random knucklehead, but I would think long and hard about some of the advice being handed out here by people who know way, way more about Google and SEO today than did the authors of that pdf did yeas ago.

Thanks

Signature

One man alone can be pretty dumb sometimes, but for real bona fide stupidity, there ain't nothing can beat teamwork.

- Seldom Seen Smith

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5989325].message }}

fin

12 years ago

Originally Posted by ChloeCKimberley

I'm not discounting article marketing, maybe you could say I'm at the crossroads being torn between SEO and article syndication. (Since there's an opportunity cost of focusing on either one lead generation method)

Think of it this way: article syndication is more of an art; SEO is more of a slave labor drudge.

I think it's a waste of time to do SEO. Don't get me wrong, if I could afford it I would pay for it. I just wouldn't want to spend my time making little backlinks or using software.

I prefer to write and build relationships. Anyway, syndication is still a form of SEO I suppose.

Thanks
2 replies

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5989748].message }}

fin 12 years ago

Originally Posted by Alyona The Publicist

Great post but don't undervalue SEO - it's an unnecessary evil! .... which pays you back a lot!

Yeah, I just wouldn't want to spend my time doing it. I have no problem outsourcing it.
- [ 1 ] Thanks
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5989975].message }}

Christopher Fox

12 years ago

Originally Posted by Alyona The Publicist

Great post but don't undervalue SEO - it's an unnecessary evil! .... which pays you back a lot!

Do you think that holds true for this case? A case where the business model is apparently, from what I interpret from Chloe's words, heavily dependent upon articles? And 1000+ word articles at that? Written to please an ever changing search algorithm instead of written to please a human audience? Even though Google via Matt Cutts (umm, head of anti-SPAM) is telling us that writing content for their algo is not going to cut it in the future? That they are working to make sure that 1000+ word articles written for algos will not end up anywhere near page 1 in the future?

Do you think that this SEO game, specifically regarding content (read: 1000+ word articles) is going to remain the same in the future? That spinning crap (not you Chloe, you said as much), paying 5 bucks for somebody who cannot write English like a native speaker is able to or writing said articles with an algo in mind instead of a human will produce the same results tomorrow as it did yesterday?

Do you think that this latest iteration of Gutenberg's Press is going to break free from the mold created by almost 6 centuries of evolution of the printed word and people will no longer demand quality content as they do in offline publishing? That the cream of non-SEOed contnet will not rise to the top?

I am not trying to pick on you here Alyona, merely attempting to hone down your thoughts on how you feel one should approach SEO, or whether they should throw it out the window and follow the model of what works in the offline world regarding content creation for future success - to see if you think that as this whole thing called da net, still in its infancy (even though I had my first online experience in the early 80's and have been a web surfer since the late 80's I still consider it to be in its infancy), might evolve to a higher demand for quality from the end user, as they have come to expect in traditional print.

I think that evolution is well along its way and its trajectory is pointing towards mimicking traditional print models regarding content. And Google is certainly spending plenty of financial and human capital to try to push it in that direction and away from SEOed content. SEOed content exampled here:

http://www.warriorforum.com/main-int...noying-we.html

Of course, I am speculating about future events. And as the infamous Yogi Berra stated:

It's tough to make predictions, especially about the future.

And, more appropriately for the point I am trying to get across:

The future ain't what it used to be.

[ 2 ] Thanks
1 reply

Signature

One man alone can be pretty dumb sometimes, but for real bona fide stupidity, there ain't nothing can beat teamwork.

- Seldom Seen Smith

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5992695].message }}

ChloeCKimberley

12 years ago

Jeez what an exciting thread, the temperature's rising around here!

Here's an update to my stance...

"I'm sold!"

Picked up a copy of How To Turn Words Into Traffic
Starting an action plan of article syndication

Here's my nuanced analysis of the whole matter. Google has been filing major updates one after another - Caffeine, Panda etc - all with the single motive to sieve out content farms and deliver highly relevant content to each search query.

In fact, Google's actions have gave their secrets away...

Firstly, Google is going to stand by "passing of page rank" to determine the popularity of a page for quite a while. (That's why they're still beating down blog networks and all those manipulative nets of sites for a very long time)

Secondly, Google is going to set huge specificity to each individual query. We saw that from drastic changes in long-tailed queries, blended SERPs (videos, maps, images, instant answers etc) and of course, their addition of Google+ to incorporate social data to "personalize" results for people. My prediction is that SEOs will probably slant towards Social Media Optimization in the near future.

Third, Google is still ranking "relevance" over "popularity". Exact match domains may have diminished in efficacy, but they still hold a definite advantage. They've publicly stated that a page with more "relevance" can rank higher than one with higher "popularity" (if both are sufficiently "popular").

Fourth, Google is heading towards incorporating their Search features into daily life (See their latest video update). This confirms a lot of things, along with their acquisition of relevant patents:

"Human-Like" Social Interactions/Activity
"Human-Like" Conversations/Articles

Pretty "science-fictiony"... lol

***

I decided to go with article syndication because while the article traffic might come a little more painstakingly, I've devised some strategies that may incorporate social media into the "syndication picture" - Which I predict Google will love in the future.

***

I have some extra questions for the crowd here though... (which I think could be a good thread by itself)

What happens if the niche you pick... happens to be "oh-not-so-exciting"?

Eg. It's awfully hard to write provocative articles about technical things or things with sophisticated functions like drugs etc

(The chances of syndication seem to be pretty low as well?)

[ 3 ] Thanks
1 reply

Signature

Signed, Chloe C Kimberley
copywriter,designer,marketer

"If you're making good money with SEO/PPC/product creation, I'll be willing to offer copywriting assistance to you so that I can learn from you."

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5993003].message }}

Christopher Fox

12 years ago

Originally Posted by ChloeCKimberley

What happens if the niche you pick... happens to be "oh-not-so-exciting"?

That's where you come in Chloe. I think you are doing a fine job of introducing your personality into a rather mundane topic through your words. You have writing skills, it is apparent to me and I am sure the others in this thread.

I think you'll do just fine ...

[ 3 ] Thanks
1 reply

Signature

One man alone can be pretty dumb sometimes, but for real bona fide stupidity, there ain't nothing can beat teamwork.

- Seldom Seen Smith

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5993107].message }}

ChloeCKimberley

12 years ago

Originally Posted by Christopher Fox

That's where you come in Chloe. I think you are doing a fine job of introducing your personality into a rather mundane topic through your words. You have writing skills, it is apparent to me and I am sure the others in this thread.

I think you'll do just fine ...

Thanks Christopher. The difference is that I'm a copywriter (I spice things up).

But there's a pretty distinct difference between "writing to sell" and "writing to pre-sell/get syndicated". Besides, certain target audiences might not like the "spicy" touch that is reminiscent of a sales pitch.

For example, if I were to write a 1000 word article on 2010's most popular drug... "Nexium" from "AstraZeneca Pharmaceuticals"... It'll be dreadfully worded with huge technical terms and medical technicalities.

And I guess most of the readers will cringe when they see an article with a high Fleisch-Kincaid readibility level. An obvious way would be to simplify - but that would lose a lot of the meaning and complicated technicalities are sometimes hard to put in simple terms.

There's also the problem of finding a "Sensationalistic" angle towards such an article (which I'm more concerned about).

Any tips?

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

Signed, Chloe C Kimberley
copywriter,designer,marketer

"If you're making good money with SEO/PPC/product creation, I'll be willing to offer copywriting assistance to you so that I can learn from you."

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5993214].message }}

Alexa Smith

Banned 12 years ago

I'm with Christopher in thinking that your posts in this thread alone make it pretty clear that you're going to do just fine.

It's also true that it doesn't hurt to select one's niches - to some extent - according to (a) what one can write about, and (b) what it looks like people will syndicate. Or, if starting off with the niche as a "given", to acknowledge that some niches are going to be easier than others. :p

Originally Posted by ChloeCKimberley

But there's a pretty distinct difference between "writing to sell" and "writing to pre-sell/get syndicated".

Indeed there is ... but some of the people doing this don't really even understand that, and even some of them are doing not-too-badly out of it (by comparison with their earlier, largely SEO-based attempts, anyway), so it's certainly not easy to see where you're going to have great problems.

Originally Posted by ChloeCKimberley

Besides, certain target audiences might not like the "spicy" touch that is reminiscent of a sales pitch.

I think that one's going to depend on the extent to which the "available syndication-sites" are owned by competitors (again, a factor for niche selection, really, perhaps?) ...

Originally Posted by ChloeCKimberley

For example, if I were to write a 1000 word article on 2010's most popular drug... "Nexium" from "AstraZeneca Pharmaceuticals"... It'll be dreadfully worded with huge technical terms and medical technicalities.

Perhaps so, but this will also be mitigated by two things ...

(i) People wanting to read an article on Nexium will expect some of that, and ...

(ii) You'll be able both to minimize and to simplify those aspects of it.

So it won't matter all that much.

And provided what you write is entertaining, provocative and just "interesting" enough, you'll circumvent that problem.

Originally Posted by ChloeCKimberley

And I guess most of the readers will cringe when they see an article with a high Fleisch-Kincaid readibility level.

I'm convinced, after 3+ years of doing this, that that matters very much less than one would expect. I don't pretend to understand this fully. Looking at it superficially, one would say that "that seems to be the problem" with what I'm producing in almost every niche I write about. For whatever reason(s), it just doesn't matter as much as you'd think. :confused:

Originally Posted by ChloeCKimberley

There's also the problem of finding a "Sensationalistic" angle towards such an article (which I'm more concerned about).

Yes, there is that ...

Originally Posted by ChloeCKimberley

Any tips?

I found this helped (i.e. helped me to learn how to associate two things, the two things being "the subject I'm writing about" and "the sensationalistic angle from which I want to do so"!):

Amazon.com: Po: Beyond Yes and No... (it's not specifically for writers, really - but it helped me. Used copies are always available for a few dollars).

Good luck!

[ 2 ] Thanks
1 reply

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5993701].message }}

ChloeCKimberley

12 years ago

Originally Posted by Alexa Smith

Indeed there is ... but half the people doing this don't really even understand that, and even they're doing pretty well out of it, so it's not easy to see where you're going to have great problems.

Yup, I see where you're coming from... Lol it's a bit funny if I think about it but I have this little habit of writing an article - and suddenly somewhere at the bottom transforming the later part into a sales pitch!

Originally Posted by Alexa Smith

I think that one's going to depend on the extent to which the "available syndication-sites" are owned by competitors (again, a factor for niche selection, really, perhaps?) ...

MM... I haven't considered that point yet - Maybe I should research a little more for a little more "umph" in leverage haha. I'd hate to be stuck in a bottleneck...

Originally Posted by Alexa Smith

Perhaps so, but this will also be mitigated by two things ...

(i) People wanting to read an article on Nexium will expect some of that, and ...

(ii) You'll be able both to minimize and to simplify those aspects of it.

Hmm... you're right. It's weird but it makes more sense when you phrase it that way.

Originally Posted by Alexa Smith

I'm convinced, after 3+ years of doing this, that that matters very much less than one would expect. I don't pretend to understand this fully. Looking at it superficially, one would say that "that seems to be the problem" with what I'm producing in almost every niche I write about. For whatever reason(s), it just doesn't matter as much as you'd think. :confused:

Oh that's strange... Even in copywriting I'd be advised to write for the 8th grade level - and the standard would be the Fleisch-Kincaid Readibility Index. But yea, I always found that standard weird in a way...

Originally Posted by Alexa Smith

I found this helped (i.e. helped me to learn how to associate two things, the two things being "the subject I'm writing about" and "the sensationalistic angle from which I want to do so"!): Amazon.com: Po: Beyond Yes and No (9780140137828): Edward De Bono: Books (it's not specifically for writers, really - but it helped me. Used copies are always available for a few dollars).

Good luck!

Thanks Alexa! I can't thank you enough but you helped loadssss. (and all the other Warriors who helped out in the thread)
(virtual hugs) I'll check out that book, sounds pretty amazing... especially that review about "lateral thinking"! I'm always stuck in a corner :p

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

Signed, Chloe C Kimberley
copywriter,designer,marketer

"If you're making good money with SEO/PPC/product creation, I'll be willing to offer copywriting assistance to you so that I can learn from you."

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5993767].message }}

Alexa Smith

Banned 12 years ago

Originally Posted by ChloeCKimberley

Originally Posted by Alexa Smith

I'm convinced, after 3+ years of doing this, that that matters very much less than one would expect. I don't pretend to understand this fully. Looking at it superficially, one would say that "that seems to be the problem" with what I'm producing in almost every niche I write about. For whatever reason(s), it just doesn't matter as much as you'd think. :confused:

Oh that's strange... Even in copywriting I'd be advised to write for the 8th grade level - and the standard would be the Fleisch-Kincaid Readibility Index. But yea, I always found that standard weird in a way...

It is strange. I suspect - without altogether understanding why - that this is far more significant for copywriting than it is for article writing.

[ 1 ] Thanks
1 reply

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5993805].message }}

JohnMcCabe

12 years ago

Originally Posted by ChloeCKimberley

What happens if the niche you pick... happens to be "oh-not-so-exciting"?

Eg. It's awfully hard to write provocative articles about technical things or things with sophisticated functions like drugs etc

(The chances of syndication seem to be pretty low as well?)

In a follow-up post, you mentioned a popular prescription drug. You're right, writing about the drug itself could get pretty boring unless you're a biochemist.

So you write about the people who take the drug or who might be candidates for it. You tell stories. You tell people how such drugs are developed and tested. You might even talk about other treatments and how well they do or don't work.

As a copywriter, you already know that there is always a hook you can hang your copy on.

As for adhering to the F-K index, some topics just won't be bent to a certain grade level without the result coming across as 'talking down' to the audience. You define your terms where you have to, then do the best you can.

[ 2 ] Thanks
1 reply

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5994362].message }}

ChloeCKimberley

12 years ago

Originally Posted by Alexa Smith

It is strange. I suspect - without altogether understanding why - that this is far more significant for copywriting than it is for article writing.

lol :p

Originally Posted by JohnMcCabe

As a copywriter, you already know that there is always a hook you can hang your copy on.

As for adhering to the F-K index, some topics just won't be bent to a certain grade level without the result coming across as 'talking down' to the audience. You define your terms where you have to, then do the best you can.

Oh yes, the "hook" concept... and I can't help but think of all the magazines like Cosmopolitan that feature sensationalistic headlines for their articles.

I see where you're going with the F-K index... With all these advice, I guess I might have to stop sulking and try to "simplify" the context a little.

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

Signed, Chloe C Kimberley
copywriter,designer,marketer

"If you're making good money with SEO/PPC/product creation, I'll be willing to offer copywriting assistance to you so that I can learn from you."

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5994914].message }}

RnGWriter

12 years ago

Originally Posted by ChloeCKimberley

lol :p

I see where you're going with the F-K index... With all these advice, I guess I might have to stop sulking and try to "simplify" the context a little.

If you are writing to utilize the information marketing strategy then the readability of your articles depend completely on the kind of audience you want to attract. I am actually going to quote my High School English teacher who instructed me to always write according to my audience. In many ways the kind of audience you are targeting has a lot to do with how you set about to accomplish your goals.
If you are in the pharmaceutical niche or another sub-niche, what are you trying to do? assuming your articles get syndicated, who in your opinion would be the perfect publisher? If you are aiming for scientific journals and blogs then do not bother simplifying the complicated terms.
If you are writing for the masses, then you should always make it simple enough to understand. I don't know about 8th grade level or under graduate level but the kind of language I need to use, in my opinion depends on what I'm trying to accomplish. "Masses" may be considered an euphemism for "not so bright" but it is good marketing and you really cannot blame a business graduate to not know what bacterial vaginosis is. ( I am only using this example because I just spend two hours researching this god-awful topic). Naturally while writing this article I concentrated on answering the questions that anyone suffering from these condition may have, explaining in layman's terms what the symptoms are and what the usual diagnosis is. It is definitely not going to be published on Medicine Journal Today but it is going to help the woman who has an online store selling ointments that treat this condition.

To sum it up:
1) Know your audience.
2) Know your aim.

Hope this helps form your writing philosophy

Thanks

Signature

Sign Up For AI BotNinja - A Messenger Chatbot Platform by ChatLeads

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5995317].message }}

RnGWriter

12 years ago

Originally Posted by ChloeCKimberley

Thanks to Travlinguy, Anne, Mike and Alexa for clarifying matters!

Part of the reason why I'm a (bad) mule staying by the Google stable is because of the ROI of SEO in online businesses. From some analysis, it really has huge leverage - especially horizontally.

I wouldn't say it has bad-conversion traffic, especially if there are follow-ups on transactional search terms from "Just checking it out" to the "Buy" phase.

A little out-of-topic, but here's a tiny digression (excerpt):

All right, the top short, it's essentially targeting towards people leaning towards the buying phase that has me attracted. And if the page gets ranked in appropriate link neighbourhoods, long-tailed queries will get my page targeted traffic as well.

* back to topic *

I'm not discounting article marketing, maybe you could say I'm at the crossroads being torn between SEO and article syndication. (Since there's an opportunity cost of focusing on either one lead generation method)

But hmm - reading all those posts by Alexa has gotten article marketing's tiny finger around me.

Do you have a "budget" or an average investment per niche site that you drive traffic to (via article marketing)?

I love threads related to article marketing/syndication/ directory marketing ( although the last one shouldn't really be here but invariably is every time

)

Lets consider scenario 1 when you are going to "SEO" your content:
You open your text editor. You write your headline and write an article. Lets not consider the length at the moment. After writing the article, you forget that you forgot to include all the keywords that you so diligently researched on. So you take those keywords and include them in a few awkward sentences which disrupts the natural flow of your article. You publish that article or syndicate it or what ever. A search engine indexes your content, finds your keywords and can successfully categorize what your content is about. Congratulations! Your article read by a robot who will list it along with the hundreds if not thousands of others. If you want search engines to bring you traffic, you want your website to be ranked high up on the results page but don't you realize that as far as SERP is considered having organic back links and traffic counts for more than lacing your website content with a couple of keywords?

Scenario #2:
You DO not include your keywords, make it full of quality information and submit it to a directory. Someone with a blog or a newsletter likes it and publishes it. Remember that someone already has access to hundreds if not thousands of potential readers and he or she is willing to feature your content. Your work is going to instantly have readers "Real readers who are actually interested in what you have to say". Include a link to your site; an organic link that is going to get your site noticed by search engines in no time. Imagine two guys publishing your content. Imagine three? Four? Imagine you contacting each of those webmasters personally and offering them the chance to publish your content directly without any directories acting as the middlemen? Article syndication when done correctly lets you build a network of publishers who will give you access to the millions in your market.

As for the length of the content, in the syndication perspective 1000 word articles only matter simply because they are longer and webmasters like stuff that fills up the empty space on their website.

[ 5 ] Thanks

Signature

Sign Up For AI BotNinja - A Messenger Chatbot Platform by ChatLeads

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5993066].message }}

stephenwaldo

12 years ago

I'm not going to tell you that SEO is going to stop having a presence in Internet marketing, because if there is a search engine then there is a way to optimize for it. However, I will say that SEO is only going to get more difficult, and the idea of 'building links' is quickly becoming invalid/ineffective.

Google has always wanted SEO to be a popularity contest...That has always been their ideal model. Given that, think about which methods are going to place the most EYEBALLS on your content, and in the long term those methods will be the ones that remain effective. Therefore, in that frame of mind, article syndication is actually one of the more effective and sustainable SEO methods available.

Think about it - the goal of article syndication, by definition, is maximizing the number of eyeballs exposed to your content. That is EXACTLY what Google wants to see.

Abandon the idea of building links, focus on building traffic. Orthodox Internet marketing is the future of SEO.

[ 3 ] Thanks
1 reply

Signature

Need an awesome ghostwriter to fill in for you?

Check out StephenWaldo.com

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5990002].message }}

JohnMcCabe 12 years ago

One thing I think we may be glossing over is that most people seeking traffic from syndication are doing what you say - leading people to non-syndicated "money" pages where they look for the buy response. This might be a direct sale or a click via affiliate link to a vendor's sales page.

Those money pages get SEO benefit from the links originating at syndicated content.

Syndicated Content > Landing Page > Money Page

Sometimes:

Syndicated Content > Landing Page > Opt-in Email Campaign > Money Page

Article Syndication and SEO are not mutually exclusive.
- [ 1 ] Thanks
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5990431].message }}

Article Syndication:1 Thing That Messes With Your Traffic?

Trending Topics

The X Factor that turns your affiliate marketing business into a solid business venture

Would You Go?

Are billboards still effective in driving customers?

My WordPress website was hacked and this is what happened

How do I effectively build and nurture an email list for affiliate marketing purposes?