These are some awesome tips, thank you! As someone who is looking to start doing a lot more blogging I have a question about "Write shorter posts". I have been researching how long posts should be for SEO purposes to help drive traffic and a lot of sources are saying that longer is better, like 2,000+ words is great. I personally always think this sounds too long because it feels like you would lose reader interest through it. So I am curious, what do you think is a good word length for a "short" post and what kind of impact would this have on SEO when going against the competition?
This is highly subjective. I dont find them boring, I find them better in most cases. I prefer walls of text compared bullet-points. I prefer walls of text instead of YouTube videos. It all depends on your audience. I want to be in control of the bullets that are important to me, not important to the writer, as this might not align. Keeping it (too) short might negatively impact your target audience more, as it might exclude different levels of knowledge.
You should determine your target audience and what you want to provide them, and what you want to get out of it. Do you want to provide thoughts on topics (e.g. short braindumps), learn them a trick (short) or want to really learn them something bigger (long)? Do you want more traffic or better quality traffic (longer page visits vs. more page visits).
These are some awesome tips, thank you! As someone who is looking to start doing a lot more blogging I have a question about "Write shorter posts". I have been researching how long posts should be for SEO purposes to help drive traffic and a lot of sources are saying that longer is better, like 2,000+ words is great. I personally always think this sounds too long because it feels like you would lose reader interest through it. So I am curious, what do you think is a good word length for a "short" post and what kind of impact would this have on SEO when going against the competition?
Yea. They're boring and people don't want to read a wall of text.
If you find people are interested in your old posts, you can always combine them into one big post.
Agreed. I haven't started writing yet, but that could be a good idea to keep in mind in the future for blog posts.
I guess for SEO impact shorter articles aren't necessarily bad if they are engaging more users. I like to think the search engines will notice that :)
Yea. And you have time to try more ideas.
If it's a long post and it flops, then you wasted lots of time.
This is highly subjective. I dont find them boring, I find them better in most cases. I prefer walls of text compared bullet-points. I prefer walls of text instead of YouTube videos. It all depends on your audience. I want to be in control of the bullets that are important to me, not important to the writer, as this might not align. Keeping it (too) short might negatively impact your target audience more, as it might exclude different levels of knowledge.
You should determine your target audience and what you want to provide them, and what you want to get out of it. Do you want to provide thoughts on topics (e.g. short braindumps), learn them a trick (short) or want to really learn them something bigger (long)? Do you want more traffic or better quality traffic (longer page visits vs. more page visits).
It depends on who you're targeting with your article.
Some like long and some like short.
The usefulness of the content matters more.
Not only the content, but also the reading experience for your audience. SEO and reader experience not always align for all parts of your audience.