I’m working on a new presentation that I’ll be giving next month and, unlike many of my recent talks, this one is SEO-focused.
That’s fun, because it gives me a chance to talk about the current SEO landscape and how things have changed in light of Google’s Panda and Penguin updates (and all the other changes that have affected how we approach SEO).
I’m wondering if you agree with these two slides that I’ll be using. They’re titled “Old SEO Tools” and “New SEO Tools” — and I don’t mean tools in the sense of web-based, online tools like Raven or SEOmoz or something else. I mean tools in the sense of … how SEO is best done now compared to how you could do it years ago.
Here’s the first one: Old SEO Tools.
My point with this slide is that, back in the day, you could overpower the algorithm with pure strength — i.e., the sheer quantity of inbound links, the sheer amount of pages or networked sites you could create, and things like that. Subtlety wasn’t often rewarded.
Here’s the second slide: New SEO Tools.
My point with this slide is that SEO now involves more balance (thus, the images of the level tool and the ballerina’s shoes), more sophistication (the conductor’s baton) and a more gentle approach (the artist’s palette).
I’m trying to echo the point that I made last year when I said, “So much SEO is ugly because the person doing it is using a hammer, when the better tool is a paintbrush.” (And that post references Adam Audette’s excellent SEO Should Be Invisible article, which is worth reading again.)
So, what say you? Do you agree or disagree? Comments are open.
(PS – yes, I’m aware that in uber-spammy and uber-competitive spaces, winners are still often overpowering the algorithm with brute force. That’s not the audience I’ll be speaking to, nor is it the audience I write for on this blog … i.e., small business owners.)