58 {{ upvoteCount | shortNum }}
58 {{ upvoteCount | shortNum }}

What defines good/cr*p content?

by SamSebastian
50 replies
I hear over and over people saying Google is targeting "crap" content.

I have outsourced my article writing to a forum member, and I think the content is great.. But I'd still love to know how some of the more experienced guys (or Google) define good and bad content?

Thanks!
#content #defines #good or crp
  • Profile picture of the author Beverley Boorer
    Good content makes sense both gramatically and content-wise. It is written in a friendly yet professional manner that shows the reader that the writer knows what they are talking about. It should never contain information that is incorrect. Good content should be written logically starting at the beginning and progressing through the article in a way that educates and informs the reader. It should contain an introduction so that the reader knows what the article is about. And then the body should contain several paragraphs that go on from the introduction. The last paragraph or sentence should sum up all that has been said without repeating it.
    Bad content is the opposite.
    Example found on a website: " Be careful in your choice of boats, you don't want to autumn in love with the wrong boat." The writer obviously didn't know that the words fall and autumn are not always interchangeable. This is why so many people prefer native English writers.
    Signature
    Subscribe to my website, buy plr articles and get a free 2D or 3D eBook Cover
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6747567].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author wordpressmania
      Thanks you very much... It will help me a lot...
      Originally Posted by Beverley Boorer View Post

      Good content makes sense both gramatically and content-wise. It is written in a friendly yet professional manner that shows the reader that the writer knows what they are talking about. It should never contain information that is incorrect. Good content should be written logically starting at the beginning and progressing through the article in a way that educates and informs the reader. It should contain an introduction so that the reader knows what the article is about. And then the body should contain several paragraphs that go on from the introduction. The last paragraph or sentence should sum up all that has been said without repeating it.
      Bad content is the opposite.
      Example found on a website: " Be careful in your choice of boats, you don't want to autumn in love with the wrong boat." The writer obviously didn't know that the words fall and autumn are not always interchangeable. This is why so many people prefer native English writers.
      Signature
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6747734].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author Kurt
      Originally Posted by Beverley Boorer View Post

      Good content makes sense both gramatically and content-wise. It is written in a friendly yet professional manner that shows the reader that the writer knows what they are talking about. It should never contain information that is incorrect. Good content should be written logically starting at the beginning and progressing through the article in a way that educates and informs the reader. It should contain an introduction so that the reader knows what the article is about. And then the body should contain several paragraphs that go on from the introduction. The last paragraph or sentence should sum up all that has been said without repeating it.
      Bad content is the opposite.
      Example found on a website: " Be careful in your choice of boats, you don't want to autumn in love with the wrong boat." The writer obviously didn't know that the words fall and autumn are not always interchangeable. This is why so many people prefer native English writers.
      This assumes all "good content" has to be written. "Good" content can also be a beautiful or funny picture, a video or even a script.

      An example of a scipt that creates "good" content could be a simple mortgage calculator that calculates how much montly payments will be based on user input.
      Signature
      Discover the fastest and easiest ways to create your own valuable products.
      Tons of FREE Public Domain content you can use to make your own content, PLR, digital and POD products.
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6748425].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author dadadada
      Originally Posted by Beverley Boorer View Post

      Good content makes sense both gramatically and content-wise. It is written in a friendly yet professional manner that shows the reader that the writer knows what they are talking about. It should never contain information that is incorrect. Good content should be written logically starting at the beginning and progressing through the article in a way that educates and informs the reader. It should contain an introduction so that the reader knows what the article is about. And then the body should contain several paragraphs that go on from the introduction. The last paragraph or sentence should sum up all that has been said without repeating it.
      Bad content is the opposite.
      Example found on a website: " Be careful in your choice of boats, you don't want to autumn in love with the wrong boat." The writer obviously didn't know that the words fall and autumn are not always interchangeable. This is why so many people prefer native English writers.
      That was obviously a result of sloppy (auto) spinning.
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6750061].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author Alexa Smith
        Banned
        I've always found "good content" very easy to define, for my own working purposes (which relate, largely, to what gets paid into my bank account, since I'm running a business!).

        "Good content" is content which impresses others who have access to already-targeted traffic in my niche(s) sufficiently for them to choose voluntarily to link to it and/or otherwise share it with their readers/visitors/subscribers in a way which benefits me.

        It's a simple, pragmatic definition, perhaps, but it's been good enough for me, over the years.
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6750127].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author Zeus66
          Originally Posted by Alexa Smith View Post

          "Good content" is content which impresses others who have access to already-targeted traffic in my niche(s) sufficiently for them to choose voluntarily to link to it and/or otherwise share it with their readers/visitors/subscribers in a way which benefits me.
          That's a good point. "Good" can be defined subjectively as whatever gets the job done for you and helps you achieve your specific goals. That's not gonna be the same for everyone.

          And I think the notion of voluntarily sharing cannot be overemphasized. I think about Twitter. I have a college sports Twitter account because I'm into college basketball and football, and the marketer in me always notes that the sites people Tweet about and link to are usually the best content, the most authoritative, and the most easily shared. Not a bad idea to mimic that basic recipe.
          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6750219].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author BudaBrit
          Originally Posted by hebsgaard View Post

          For me it is pretty simple. Read through the content you're posting. Ask yourself did I just waste X minutes of my life reading this? If the answer is yes it's definitely crap content.
          That's true, definitely

          Originally Posted by Kurt View Post

          What if someone is searching for the answer to how many degrees C is 32 degrees F?

          If a page answers "0", why does the user have to return in order for that content to be "good"?
          And this too.

          Surely the definition of good content is simple: something that providess value to the reader/viewer/listener/potential customer.

          If something does not provide them with any value, then it cannot be considered anything other than garbage. In this way, the quality also differs depending on the audience, which we all know to be true.

          Lastly, on Google, surely Google simply wants to make happy customers? It wants the pages ranked high to include information that make the customer happy. With happy customers, Google has done its job. The other part of that is that you've done your job: they're happy at you to. Ergo, good content is good both for you and Google, it's not mutually exclusive.
          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6750246].message }}
          • Profile picture of the author ExRat
            Hi BudaBrit,

            Originally Posted by BudaBrit View Post

            Lastly, on Google, surely Google simply wants to make happy customers? It wants the pages ranked high to include information that make the customer happy. With happy customers, Google has done its job. The other part of that is that you've done your job: they're happy at you to. Ergo, good content is good both for you and Google, it's not mutually exclusive.
            With respect, in my opinion this is where a lot of people end up confused. It's way too simplistic and idealistic. Your explanation seems to imply that Google are some kind of charitable institution as opposed to a profit-driven enterprise.

            In my opinion, the ideal situation for Google is this - the SERPs list websites which appear to be what the searcher is seeking (the searcher is satisfied with the selection Google has made, believes Google has done it's job and will continue to use Google as a search engine) but in fact they fall a little short of providing the searcher with exactly what they are looking for.

            This scenario then increases the chances that the searcher will -

            a) conduct a different search, thus boosting the number of overall searches carried out on Google

            b) click on adwords, thus boosting Google revenue

            c) click on one of the multitudinous and ever-growing number of page one SERPs options which are owned/monetised by Google

            If you owned Google and had a ton of clever algo-tweakers on the staff, would you give people exactly what they wanted on other peoples websites or instead do what I have outlined above?
            Signature


            Roger Davis
            {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6750634].message }}
            • Profile picture of the author BudaBrit
              Originally Posted by ExRat View Post

              Hi BudaBrit,



              With respect, in my opinion this is where a lot of people end up confused. It's way too simplistic and idealistic. Your explanation seems to imply that Google are some kind of charitable institution as opposed to a profit-driven enterprise.

              In my opinion, the ideal situation for Google is this - the SERPs list websites which appear to be what the searcher is seeking (the searcher is satisfied with the selection Google has made, believes Google has done it's job and will continue to use Google as a search engine) but in fact they fall a little short of providing the searcher with exactly what they are looking for.

              This scenario then increases the chances that the searcher will -

              a) conduct a different search, thus boosting the number of overall searches carried out on Google

              b) click on adwords, thus boosting Google revenue

              c) click on one of the multitudinous and ever-growing number of page one SERPs options which are owned/monetised by Google

              If you owned Google and had a ton of clever algo-tweakers on the staff, would you give people exactly what they wanted on other peoples websites or instead do what I have outlined above?
              Well, indeed, but that makes no difference to the OP. If you provide high quality content then you have a better chance of ranking, simple as, surely?

              Google may drop you or rise you for it's own reasons but if you provide poor quality, then it will simply drop you: you provide nothing for it or it's customers.
              {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6750711].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author jamesrich1
    This is a grey area that will get a lot of different opinions. For me the intentions and delivery of the content defines if its crap or not. For some a 1,200 word quality article might only take 30 minutes while it might take another 5 hours. I do not look at the 1,200 word article that took 30 minutes as less valuable because it took less time. Some people have a abundance of knowledge and can put out quality content faster then others. As long as it is a theral, informative, well written piece of content it is quality in my book.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6747575].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author hebsgaard
    For me it is pretty simple. Read through the content you're posting. Ask yourself did I just waste X minutes of my life reading this? If the answer is yes it's definitely crap content.

    I got a mail from John Schwartz yesterday about his new Panda Pleaser product and have to say it's a pretty good shot at defining what Google wants. It's in the WSO forum.
    Signature
    Product Finder Extra Deluxe Bonanza! A shocking revelation that will shock you in a shocking way.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6747591].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author onSubie
    Originally Posted by SamSebastian View Post

    I hear over and over people saying Google is targeting "crap" content.

    I have outsourced my article writing to a forum member, and I think the content is great.. But I'd still love to know how some of the more experienced guys (or Google) define good and bad content?

    Thanks!
    In general 'good content' is useful to the visitor and provides some value while 'crap content' is useless text primarily aimed at getting ranked and diverting traffic to other offers.

    Google can't really tell the difference between 'good' and 'crap'. They try to evaluate content as best they can by using other factors like social signals and user activities on the site.

    If you are building an authority site and a relationship with your visitors, then you want very good content so they will return, interact and learn or have fun with you.

    If you are building niche adsense sites, it is surprising what 'crap' will rank. Even after all the penguins and pandas.

    Mahlon
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6747712].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Anonymous Affiliate
    If you're outsourcing your content at the standard $5-per-500-word-article for the main purpose of working up your SEO, then chances are that THAT is what Google defines as "crap content".
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6747826].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author fin
      Good content is that which makes someone want to come back to the site to read more.

      If that doesn't happen then it's crap content.
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6747838].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author Kurt
        Originally Posted by fin View Post

        Good content is that which makes someone want to come back to the site to read more.

        If that doesn't happen then it's crap content.
        What if someone is searching for the answer to how many degrees C is 32 degrees F?

        If a page answers "0", why does the user have to return in order for that content to be "good"?
        Signature
        Discover the fastest and easiest ways to create your own valuable products.
        Tons of FREE Public Domain content you can use to make your own content, PLR, digital and POD products.
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6748433].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author fin
          Originally Posted by Kurt View Post

          What if someone is searching for the answer to how many degrees C is 32 degrees F?

          If a page answers "0", why does the user have to return in order for that content to be "good"?
          I'm running a business, not a temperature conversion blog.
          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6748859].message }}
          • Profile picture of the author Kurt
            Originally Posted by fin View Post

            I'm running a business, not a temperature conversion blog.
            Good to know, but back on topic. I am posting about a subject brought up by the OP and responded to your comment in an earlier post by you, and not what your business is about.

            The point of my post, since you seemed to have missed it, is that the definition you posted earlier is inaccurate and there are far many more ways to determine what is good content than you stated in your post.

            I'll repeat what you posted above, since you may have forgotten:

            Good content is that which makes someone want to come back to the site to read more.

            If that doesn't happen then it's crap content.
            Funny...You didn't seem to mention your business in this post?

            Why not just admit that you didn't consider all types of content instead of getting defensive? It's really no big deal and makes you look more reasonable at the same time.
            Signature
            Discover the fastest and easiest ways to create your own valuable products.
            Tons of FREE Public Domain content you can use to make your own content, PLR, digital and POD products.
            {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6749056].message }}
            • Profile picture of the author fin
              Oh boo-hoo.

              Stop getting your silk panties in a twist. You can't define good content in one post. I was merely telling him what I think good content is in the way it relates to me.

              I'm not going to go through the entire internet listing things:

              • Up-to date with facts and figures
              • Correct line-height/font-size ration etc etc etc
              {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6749188].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Andrew74
    Good content engages the visitor and entices them to take action.
    Signature

    Cheers,

    Andrew

    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6747860].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author Daniel75
      Originally Posted by Andrew74 View Post

      Good content engages the visitor and entices them to take action.
      I really agree with this simple but profound statement. Good content is defined by the action that the reader takes after he reads the articles on your website.
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6750031].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Miguelito203
    Originally Posted by SamSebastian View Post

    I hear over and over people saying Google is targeting "crap" content.

    I have outsourced my article writing to a forum member, and I think the content is great.. But I'd still love to know how some of the more experienced guys (or Google) define good and bad content?

    Thanks!
    It's all about relevancy and unique content with a twist that provides value to the end user based upon what they are searching for. It's that simple.

    Joey
    Signature
    Learn How to Snipe in 2015 and Generate $750+ per Month in Record Time (Product Launches) - Great For Back-to-School, Fall & Holiday Seasons!
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6747891].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author websitedesigner
    If your grandmother asked you for a good article to read about [insert niche here] would you recommend your content? If not, it's not good content let alone great content.
    Signature

    Free internet marketers dashboard Web Control Room

    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6748346].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Trevor
    Crap content can mean the following:

    Spun content - automatically spun content that is barely readable and doesn't read well. Google has gotten a lot better at recognizing this type of content and you can't go too far with it.

    Copied content - if your content is not unique and only copied from other websites, it's not going to benefit your site at all.

    Keyword-stuffed content - if you include your target keywords too many times within the content, your site can get penalized for keyword stuffing - so be careful.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6748492].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Chris Worner
    Good content is writing that has been written in a manner that meets the expectations and standards of your target audience and potential syndication publishers.

    -
    Credit - MYOB


    -Chris
    Signature

    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6748525].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author Kurt
      Originally Posted by Chris Worner View Post

      Good content is writing in a manner that meets the expectations and standards of your target audience and potential syndication publishers.

      (I spun one of MYOBs responses)

      -Chris
      Only if we make the incorrect assumption all good web content is written. And it doesn't explain the popularity of sites such as Youtube or Pinterest.
      Signature
      Discover the fastest and easiest ways to create your own valuable products.
      Tons of FREE Public Domain content you can use to make your own content, PLR, digital and POD products.
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6748547].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author ExRat
        Hi SamSebastian,

        define good and bad content
        My version -

        Good content = leads the person to take my desired action

        Bad content = doesn't


        Google version -

        Good content = leads the person to take the desired action that Google wants

        Bad content = doesn't


        My ideal version -

        Good content - leads the person AND Google to take my desired action

        Bad content - does neither
        Signature


        Roger Davis
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6748568].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author Chris Worner
          Originally Posted by ExRat View Post

          Good content = leads the person to take a desired action
          What if that desired action is less than acceptable socially?

          Such as pro-anorexia content which tells people with anorexia they are beautiful, nothing is wrong with them and to avoid treatment?

          (You know where I am going with this)


          -Chris
          Signature

          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6748593].message }}
          • Profile picture of the author ExRat
            Hi Chris,

            Originally Posted by Chris Worner View Post

            What if that desired action is less than acceptable socially?

            Such as pro-anorexia content which tells people with anorexia they are beautiful, nothing is wrong with them and to avoid treatment?

            (You know where I am going with this)


            -Chris
            That's unethical good content, or good content used for unethical purposes.

            Hi Fin,

            I agree with Kurt. You said -

            Good content is that which makes someone want to come back to the site to read more.

            If that doesn't happen then it's crap content.
            The first sentence in isolation is OK, but the second sentence is the issue because it's stating that anything else is crap.

            What if the page is designed to make a sale? You don't want them coming back, you want them to take a specific action, ideally ASAP.
            Signature


            Roger Davis
            {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6749278].message }}
            • Profile picture of the author fin
              Originally Posted by ExRat View Post


              Hi Fin,

              I agree with Kurt. You said -

              The first sentence in isolation is OK, but the second sentence is the issue because it's stating that anything else is crap.

              What if the page is designed to make a sale? You don't want them coming back, you want them to take a specific action, ideally ASAP.
              I usually don't buy something the first time of asking. You better make sure your sales pages makes me want to come back.

              If you send me your first aotoresponder message you better make sure I'm going to read the next one.

              If I land on your site you better make sure I want to come back.

              If I share it with my friends on social media, you want me to come back and do it again.

              If I'm promoting your product I'm obviously going to come back to make sure it's still worth promoting.

              It's not exactly rocket science. Making sure someone comes back is the most important thing.
              {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6749776].message }}
              • Profile picture of the author ExRat
                Hi Fin,

                Originally Posted by fin View Post

                I usually don't buy something the first time of asking. You better make sure your sales pages makes me want to come back.

                If you send me your first aotoresponder message you better make sure I'm going to read the next one.

                If I land on your site you better make sure I want to come back.

                If I share it with my friends on social media, you want me to come back and do it again.

                If I'm promoting your product I'm obviously going to come back to make sure it's still worth promoting.

                It's not exactly rocket science. Making sure someone comes back is the most important thing.
                I still totally disagree. Anything that I create, my focus is primarily on the desired action taking place there and then and secondarily on what they might do if they come back.

                Take an example -

                If I share it with my friends on social media, you want me to come back and do it again.
                Primarily I want you to share it. If you come back and share it again that's a bonus. My focus is on getting you to take that action in the first instance.

                Another -

                I usually don't buy something the first time of asking. You better make sure your sales pages makes me want to come back.
                Are you saying that when you write a salespage, your primary focus is on getting the prospect to come back later and buy it whereas getting them to buy it on the first visit is a secondary thing, in terms of importance to you?

                To me it's not rocket science to understand that once I have someone's attention, I am not going to let it go without making some kind of pitch or call to action. If I let them go, I have lost them, probably forever. If they come back, that's a bonus. But there's no way on earth I am going to prioritise my efforts on encouraging them to come back rather than prioritising my efforts on achieving my primary goal the first time that I gain their attention/eyeballs.
                Signature


                Roger Davis
                {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6749852].message }}
                • Profile picture of the author fin
                  I think we could go around in circles all day.

                  Let's just say if your content was good enough to come back to it would be enough to take action, and equally, if your content was good enough to take action it would be good enough to come back to.
                  {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6749879].message }}
                  • Profile picture of the author ExRat
                    Hi fin,

                    Originally Posted by fin View Post

                    I think we could go around in circles all day.

                    Let's just say if your content was good enough to come back to it would be enough to take action, and equally, if your content was good enough to take action it would be good enough to come back to.
                    That's a fair point. When I look back at your original point, with this new context, I can see what you're getting at.

                    For example, in my example of a salespage where someone chooses to buy an ebook, it's the same concept as them 'coming back' for more content. They're just paying for that 'more content' instead - which was my point - primarily, I want them to take that action, whereas if they simply 'come back' I have failed, in my example.

                    But your above comment is logical enough to end this circle. Thanks for your replies and explanation.
                    Signature


                    Roger Davis
                    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6749956].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author WiltonChu
    For me good content is error free (correct grammar, spelling, sentence construction). A very informative and a content that your niche will surely benefit from. And a crap is something that isn't direct to the point, a content that you couldn't understand what the writer wants to say, and I tell you have bought a crap content online because it comes cheaper and faster, but the whole content is just crap.. Its always best to check out first before purchasing it online.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6748635].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author megatop
    Qualities of good content :

    1. will make a person comeback to read more.
    2. will engage the reader, and makes him complete the article.
    3. will be entertaining to the reader.

    Anything that doesn't do all this is CR*P content.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6748800].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Zeus66
    If you're talking about what Google expects and rewards, they tell you what questions to consider as you're creating content. It's not really a mystery or a guessing game. There's a series of questions they tell us to keep in mind and try to answer with our content. The theme throughout them all is to be unique and engage your reader. Don't copy everyone else and be as specific as you can be.

    In other words, you want your content to stand out from all the others and it needs to show Google that you didn't just whip it up in a hurry. That doesn't necessarily mean you have to an expert or spend hours on each piece of content you write (or pay to have written). But it does mean you need to go deeper than the usual crappy content that used to be enough to get ranked. Those days are mostly gone after Panda.

    Pleasing Panda (Google) means taking the content game up a notch. You're gonna get left in the dust if you keep using the typical $5 article or spun stuff.

    The biggest tip I can give is to pretend you're a visitor to your own site and you're hoping for something beyond a few hundred words of fluff that can be found on any number of other sites. If you can honestly say your own content would make that kind of visitor happy, you'll win in the long run.

    John
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6749391].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author gcbmark20
    Does anyone really and truly understand how Google works from one month to the next.

    It is a good job that I personally do not have to rely Google for targeted traffic to my offers.

    You could be guessing for a long time if you want to fully understand how Google works.

    It probably depends on what niche you are in how much you do end up depending on ranking in
    the search engines.
    Signature
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6749418].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Michael Nguyen
    Simple really, just analyze your bounce rate. Add this:

    Tracking Adjusted Bounce Rate In Google Analytics - Analytics Blog
    Signature
    FREE Cold Calling Course: >>> Looking for Serious & Aspiring Cold Callers to Train for FREE <<<
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6749928].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author yourreviewer
    I agree with Kurt. Content need not always be articles and there are a number of ways you can produce great content- podcasts, videos, infographics, pictures etc.

    And in some niches, you probably don't expect the visitors to return to your site because there already got the answer for what they are looking for.

    You can have the best content in the world, but there are some niches where people will not share the content with their friends and family because it may be something totally embarrassing to share.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6749936].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author fedor50
    Originally Posted by SamSebastian View Post

    I hear over and over people saying Google is targeting "crap" content.

    I have outsourced my article writing to a forum member, and I think the content is great.. But I'd still love to know how some of the more experienced guys (or Google) define good and bad content?

    Thanks!
    Basically does the content offer value to your readers. Does it answer the questions that your readers have been having. Is it at least 500 words of high quality content. This is what quality content is all about
    Signature


    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6750236].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author therichb
    Copyscape / Grammarly, 2 effective means to check if your writing is really good or a Cr*p...

    There are many providers out there on freelance communities who have learnt to do spintax & do not know the importance of unique content which is really important for establishing a website identity in long term...

    That must be taken into care after a review of content we generally outsource to other's...
    Signature
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6750674].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author ex9to5guy
    what i consider to be good quality content is if it answered the users question. If the user came to your site you want to give them quality that they can actually read and enjoy. Not something that has a kw stuffed 20 times in the article and has the user pressing the "back" button one paragraph in
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6751032].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Tanya E
    Originally Posted by SamSebastian View Post

    I hear over and over people saying Google is targeting "crap" content.

    I have outsourced my article writing to a forum member, and I think the content is great.. But I'd still love to know how some of the more experienced guys (or Google) define good and bad content?

    Thanks!
    A unique and relevant article with good value is what forms good content.

    Bad content is the exact opposite of good content i.e. copied content that offers no value and which may not even be relevant to the niche that the website represents.
    Signature
    ...
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6751312].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author SamSebastian
    Ok, theres some great info here -

    One comment mentioned about paying 1c/word = bad content.. how much generally translates to 'good' content, and does anyone have recommendations for writers that can produce 'good' content?
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6752303].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author cashp0wer
      Good content is relevant to the topic, useful to the reader, original, and grammar free. That's it in a nutshell anyway. As long as you have all of that Google will like you.
      Signature
      My Internet Marketing Blog - Warts And All!
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6752310].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author bless
    Good content either solves problems, answers questions or helps the prospect make a good choice by giving honest advice.
    Signature
    Your Own Sales Boosting List Building Video in 48 Hours! Sell 750% More. Click Here to Find Out How!
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6752338].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Jessica Lynn
    What Google defines as good/crap content, I have no idea. My definition of good content is something created with the intent to help. On the opposite end of the spectrum, crap content is something created just for the purpose of making money.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6752391].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Randall Magwood
    For some people, they associate good & crap content by the length of the article. Now while length is rarely important when it comes to determining good content... people naturally associate a 500+ word article (and above) as content be worthwhile. Just don't market spun articles.
    Signature
    ==>> Free book reveals make money with affiliate marketing
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6752470].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author JohnMcCabe
    Good content, in whatever format, satisfies the user. They got what they wanted to get out of the content.

    This leaves the door open, though, because what satisfies me may not satisfy someone else. So what may be good content to me may be crap to someone else and vice versa.

    So I'll make it more personal. Good content satisfies the users that I want to satisfy.

    Originally Posted by gcbmark20 View Post

    Does anyone really and truly understand how Google works from one month to the next.
    Because it's always changing, even Google doesn't really and truly understand how Google works from one month to the next.

    Originally Posted by Ken_Caudill View Post

    Good content engages the reader.

    That's all there is to it.
    Unless that reader is actually a viewer or listener. Is content that engages the reader/viewer/listener, but fails to bring about the action desired by the creator still good content?
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6752494].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author KickAss Marketing
    It's actually up to the reader whether the content is good or bad. But one thing we all know that internet has so many lousy content. If you will look at it closely and cannot see the difference between the two then maybe this isn't for you but if you can see the difference between good and bad content then that's good for you.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6752594].message }}

Trending Topics