Post by account_disabled on Dec 27, 2023 0:02:15 GMT -5
I have often spoken about the rules of writing for the web and also about writing to facilitate reading : today I am going in a certain sense against that article of mine from 2 years ago. I don't deny what I have written many times in the blog, obviously, but I think that every writing rule must be adapted to the writer. I'm not talking about grammar: grammar is not a rule of writing, it represents its foundations. As you have read in the subtitle, I reflect on the validity of keywords, short words and simple writing. 1) Researched keywords Keywords are a craze, everyone is infected by them, as if they were the basis of writing for the web.
While on the one hand Google has to Special Data understand what the hell our web page or article is about, on the other hand it is not always possible to associate content with a specific keyword (and I also mean keyword phrase). When I write articles for my clients, however, I have to carry out some analyses: Keyword Search Volume : I mentioned this in the most searched for stories online article . Represents the amount of searches made by users on a specific keyword in the last year. Search intent : that is, why users search for a topic. They can search for a specific site, a guide, buy a product, read a review.
For the same topic we can have 4 different objectives: "Pennablu writing" (navigational intent, they are looking for my blog), "writing for the web" (informational intent, they want to know how to write for the web), "ebook writing" (transactional intent , are looking for an ebook on writing)”, “writing in the first or third person” (commercial investigation intent, they want to know the advantages and disadvantages of the 2 forms). In your opinion, is it always possible to write an article following these analyses? As far as I'm concerned, no. For this article I didn't do any keyword or search intent research: which keywords should I optimize it for? Who's looking for how to break the rules of online writing? None (I checked). Also because the generic topic "writing rules" has very few searches (40 a year, not even one a week). “Then why did you write it?”, someone will ask. “Because I felt like writing it,” is one of the answers.
While on the one hand Google has to Special Data understand what the hell our web page or article is about, on the other hand it is not always possible to associate content with a specific keyword (and I also mean keyword phrase). When I write articles for my clients, however, I have to carry out some analyses: Keyword Search Volume : I mentioned this in the most searched for stories online article . Represents the amount of searches made by users on a specific keyword in the last year. Search intent : that is, why users search for a topic. They can search for a specific site, a guide, buy a product, read a review.
For the same topic we can have 4 different objectives: "Pennablu writing" (navigational intent, they are looking for my blog), "writing for the web" (informational intent, they want to know how to write for the web), "ebook writing" (transactional intent , are looking for an ebook on writing)”, “writing in the first or third person” (commercial investigation intent, they want to know the advantages and disadvantages of the 2 forms). In your opinion, is it always possible to write an article following these analyses? As far as I'm concerned, no. For this article I didn't do any keyword or search intent research: which keywords should I optimize it for? Who's looking for how to break the rules of online writing? None (I checked). Also because the generic topic "writing rules" has very few searches (40 a year, not even one a week). “Then why did you write it?”, someone will ask. “Because I felt like writing it,” is one of the answers.