• http://www.seopros.org Webmaster T

    Jill, nice post I agree totally especially since the Social Media factors are human and the lines between SEO and Social are being blurred. Those who don’t see that and don’t go back to the basics of discovering content needs of users coming from Social network sites and making that info visible in search engines will not do the job of SEO2.0 which is bridging Social to Search gap. Keyword obsession will be a thing of the past and keywords are what drives the strategy of the “man in the yellow shoes”.

  • http://www.netmagellan.com/ Ash Nallawalla

    Hi Jill, Totally agree with you. Rand’s post had me baffled – it was like reading a “The Earth is really flat, after all.” article from an authority. Quality content for a human will lead to traffic, which will be noticed by search engines. By all means, tweak the website for best SEO practices, but that is secondary.

    However, I don’t think he meant to imply that the user should be ignored. In a comment he wrote, “I’m getting really worried that because of how I phrased the title and the intro to this post, the message I was trying to communicate (that you can’t only focus on user-targeted SEO tactics if you want to succeed) has been lost… A follow up post is likely in order.”

  • http://www.metapilot.com metapilot

    Plain and simple: Those who have designed websites believing they can disregard SEO so long as they focus on what’s best for the user have made up a substantial part of my client base over the years.

    Regardless of how much information is out there, people get just as confused about what “designing” for the user” means as they do about what “SEO” means. As professionals, let’s not get caught up in that argument.

  • gnwendy

    I disagree very strongly with your post, for several reasons, but the main thing that I keep getting hooked up on is

    “…that should win in the search engines are those that best solve…”

    You chose to emphasize “best solve”. If you instead emphasize “should” in that sentence, then we get to the core issue. In theory, you are correct. However SEs do not return the page that “best solves the issue” since the SEs have no idea what that page is.

    I am not saying ignore the user, because then you become very dependent on new traffic and will have very few returning users. I feel the main take-away from Rand’s post should be, that when you have a choice of A vs B, where A is SE friendly and B is user friendly, you should choose A. In matters not relevant to SEO, you should do your utmost to focus on usability.

    Perhaps in the future we will see a convergence of SEO and usability where one does not exclude the other, but that day seems a long way off this Friday.

  • http://managinggreatness.com Gil Reich

    Sorry Jill, I don’t think this post was fair. Rand wrote “SEO starts with the user (of course), but cannot ignore the incredible importance of search-engine targeted (and specific) tactics” and “SEO is a task that requires paying close attention to the needs of both users and engines.” Your article pretends that Rand told people to ignore the users, and that he apologized for ever telling webmasters to do what’s right for their users.

    Rand argued that the statement “just focus on the user and not the engines” was simplistic and misleading. I think he’s right. And if you think he’s wrong, I wish you would have only argued the point and not also misrepresented his stance.

    I’m sorry, but I found Rand’s post balanced and carefully argued. I don’t think this post lived up to your standards. It was hyperbolic (a decade to recover from Rand’s post? Really?) misrepresentative, and IMO simplistic in its implication that you should only focus on the users.

  • http://www.highrankings.com/newsletter/ Jill Whalen

    @Gil a big part of my beef is that SEO tactics that Rand claims are for search engines are actually for users as well.

    And until people start thinking that way they’ll continue to make bad SEO decisions for their websites.

  • http://melcurtest Melcurtest

    Surely it must be obvious that the object of the exercise (from a website ownerw view) is users but the way of getting your message to the user is via search engines> One or the other?

    Bah Humbug!

  • http://www.thuk.c.o.uk Splinter09

    First of all I agree with Gil Reich and think Jill missed the point on Rand’s post. His post as Gil said was well balanced and carefully argued. Rand never said to focus only on SE or only on users.

    And second, SEO nowadays is all about finding that balance between Users and SEs, as Gill said in her comment :

    “SEO tactics that Rand claims are for search engines are actually for users as well.”

  • http://just.roger-it.co.uk thefraj

    Basically we cannot ignore the visitors needs anymore than a business can ignore the customers needs. But this does not mean you don’t have room for creativity. Google likes variety … particularly on the first page! Provided that your suggestion lies somewhere within the realms of the searchers topic, (and isn’t wildly irrelevant!) then I certainly wouldn’t see this as a bad thing.

    Like many things in the Universe, I think of it as a Zen-like balance. If you are overly focused on the search engine, you lose site of your visitor. Equally we write pages with search engines in mind, and if we didn’t we probably wouldn’t have any visitors in the first place!

    Becoming overly focused in any particular direction is not particularly helpful.