value vs. content
I prefer "topic distillation" to "regurgitation," of course. There isn't a whole lot that's earth shattering or new in SEO, but here is always a demand for common sense, and for different perspectives. Anyone can knock it all they want, for any writer, but the proof is in the results.
I agree with nuclei that just putting content on your site isn't going to magically draw a lot of links in a hurry. Sending it out into the world works a lot faster. Link building is not the largest benefit of providing content, though. A good article generates a long term flow of quality traffic. Case in point, the old sales site for my book gets at least a hundred visits every day, almost a year after we took it out of the search engines and stopped promoting the URL.
I make very little effort to "manufacture" links for my own sites. I am, quite frankly, too busy to worry about how many links show up. I'd rather see good links in the right context. I've made more requests for links to be removed in the past year, than for links to be added.
The prescription of "put good content on your site, and the links will come" is a bit simplistic. I think it was Stephen Covey who said, "first diagnose, then prescribe." Here's a better prescription: make sure your site offers visitors a compelling value proposition. If "lots of content" is part of that, fine, but content isn't the only way to add value on the web.
[b]Bar graphs Web Browsers[/b]
[b]Web Browsers[/b]
[b]Web Browsers[/b]
[b]Web Browsers[/b]
[b]Bar graphs Web Browsers[/b]
[b]Web Browsers[/b]
[b]Web Browsers[/b]
[b]Web Browsers[/b]
[b]Bar graphs Web Browsers[/b]
[b]Web Browsers[/b]
[b]Web Browsers[/b]
[b]Web Browsers[/b]
|
