text:
Posted by randfish
There's no doubt that quite a bit has changed about SEO, and that the field is far more integrated with other aspects of online marketing than it once was. In today's Whiteboard Friday, Rand pushes back against the idea that effective modern SEO doesn't require any technical expertise, outlining a fantastic list of technical elements that today's SEOs need to know about in order to be truly effective.
Video transcription
Howdy, Moz fans, and welcome to another edition of Whiteboard Friday. This week I'm going to do something unusual. I don't usually point out these inconsistencies or sort of take issue with other folks' content on the web, because I generally find that that's not all that valuable and useful. But I'm going to make an exception here.
There is an article by Jayson DeMers, who I think might actually be here in Seattle — maybe he and I can hang out at some point — called "Why Modern SEO Requires Almost No Technical Expertise." It was an article that got a shocking amount of traction and attention. On Facebook, it has thousands of shares. On LinkedIn, it did really well. On Twitter, it got a bunch of attention.
Some folks in the SEO world have already pointed out some issues around this. But because of the increasing popularity of this article, and because I think there's, like, this hopefulness from worlds outside of kind of the hardcore SEO world that are looking to this piece and going, "Look, this is great. We don't have to be technical. We don't have to worry about technical things in order to do SEO."
Look, I completely get the appeal of that. I did want to point out some of the reasons why this is not so accurate. At the same time, I don't want to rain on Jayson, because I think that it's very possible he's writing an article for Entrepreneur, maybe he has sort of a commitment to them. Maybe he had no idea that this article was going to spark so much attention and investment. He does make some good points. I think it's just really the title and then some of the messages inside there that I take strong issue with, and so I wanted to bring those up.
First off, some of the good points he did bring up.
One, he wisely says, "You don't need to know how to code or to write and read algorithms in order to do SEO." I totally agree with that. If today you're looking at SEO and you're thinking, "Well, am I going to get more into this subject? Am I going to try investing in SEO? But I don't even know HTML and CSS yet."
Those are good skills to have, and they will help you in SEO, but you don't need them. Jayson's totally right. You don't have to have them, and you can learn and pick up some of these things, and do searches, watch some Whiteboard Fridays, check out some guides, and pick up a lot of that stuff later on as you need it in your career. SEO doesn't have that hard requirement.
And secondly, he makes an intelligent point that we've made many times here at Moz, which is that, broadly speaking, a better user experience is well correlated with better rankings.
You make a great website that delivers great user experience, that provides the answers to searchers' questions and gives them extraordinarily good content, way better than what's out there already in the search results, generally speaking you're going to see happy searchers, and that's going to lead to higher rankings.
But not entirely. There are a lot of other elements that go in here. So I'll bring up some frustrating points around the piece as well.
First off, there's no acknowledgment — and I find this a little disturbing — that the ability to read and write code, or even HTML and CSS, which I think are the basic place to start, is helpful or can take your SEO efforts to the next level. I think both of those things are true.
So being able to look at a web page, view source on it, or pull up Firebug in Firefox or something and diagnose what's going on and then go, "Oh, that's why Google is not able to see this content. That's why we're not ranking for this keyword or term, or why even when I enter this exact sentence in quotes into Google, which is on our page, this is why it's not bringing it up. It's because it's loading it after the page from a remote file that Google can't access." These are technical things, and being able to see how that code is built, how it's structured, and what's going on there, very, very helpful.
Some coding knowledge also can take your SEO efforts even further. I mean, so many times, SEOs are stymied by the conversations that we have with our programmers and our developers and the technical staff on our teams. When we can have those conversations intelligently, because at least we understand the principles of how an if-then statement works, or what software engineering best practices are being used, or they can upload something into a GitHub repository, and we can take a look at it there, that kind of stuff is really helpful.
Secondly, I don't like that the article overly reduces all of this information that we have about what we've learned about Google. So he mentions two sources. One is things that Google tells us, and others are SEO experiments. I think both of those are true. Although I'd add that there's sort of a sixth sense of knowledge that we gain over time from looking at many, many search results and kind of having this feel for why things rank, and what might be wrong with a site, and getting really good at that using tools and data as well. There are people who can look at Open Site Explorer and then go, "Aha, I bet this is going to happen." They can look, and 90% of the time they're right.
So he boils this down to, one, write quality content, and two, reduce your bounce rate. Neither of those things are wrong. You should write quality content, although I'd argue there are lots of other forms of quality content that aren't necessarily written — video, images and graphics, podcasts, lots of other stuff.
And secondly, that just doing those two things is not always enough. So you can see, like many, many folks look and go, "I have quality content. It has a low bounce rate. How come I don't rank better?" Well, your competitors, they're also going to have quality content with a low bounce rate. That's not a very high bar.
Also, frustratingly, this really gets in my craw. I don't think "write quality content" means anything. You tell me. When you hear that, to me that is a totally non-actionable, non-useful phrase that's a piece of advice that is so generic as to be discardable. So I really wish that there was more substance behind that.
The article also makes, in my opinion, the totally inaccurate claim that modern SEO really is reduced to "the happier your users are when they visit your site, the higher you're going to rank."
Wow. Okay. Again, I think broadly these things are correlated. User happiness and rank is broadly correlated, but it's not a one to one. This is not like a, "Oh, well, that's a 1.0 correlation."
I would guess that the correlation is probably closer to like the page authority range. I bet it's like 0.35 or something correlation. If you were to actually measure this broadly across the web and say like, "Hey, were you happier with result one, two, three, four, or five," the ordering would not be perfect at all. It probably wouldn't even be close.
There's a ton of reasons why sometimes someone who ranks on Page 2 or Page 3 or doesn't rank at all for a query is doing a better piece of content than the person who does rank well or ranks on Page 1, Position 1.
Then the article suggests five and sort of a half steps to successful modern SEO, which I think is a really incomplete list. So Jayson gives us;
- Good on-site experience
- Writing good content
- Getting others to acknowledge you as an authority
- Rising in social popularity
- Earning local relevance
- Dealing with modern CMS systems (which he notes most modern CMS systems are SEO-friendly)
The thing is there's nothing actually wrong with any of these. They're all, generally speaking, correct, either directly or indirectly related to SEO. The one about local relevance, I have some issue with, because he doesn't note that there's a separate algorithm for sort of how local SEO is done and how Google ranks local sites in maps and in their local search results. Also not noted is that rising in social popularity won't necessarily directly help your SEO, although it can have indirect and positive benefits.
I feel like this list is super incomplete. Okay, I brainstormed just off the top of my head in the 10 minutes before we filmed this video a list. The list was so long that, as you can see, I filled up the whole whiteboard and then didn't have any more room. I'm not going to bother to erase and go try and be absolutely complete.
But there's a huge, huge number of things that are important, critically important for technical SEO. If you don't know how to do these things, you are sunk in many cases. You can't be an effective SEO analyst, or consultant, or in-house team member, because you simply can't diagnose the potential problems, rectify those potential problems, identify strategies that your competitors are using, be able to diagnose a traffic gain or loss. You have to have these skills in order to do that.
I'll run through these quickly, but really the idea is just that this list is so huge and so long that I think it's very, very, very wrong to say technical SEO is behind us. I almost feel like the opposite is true.
We have to be able to understand things like;
- Content rendering and indexability
- Crawl structure, internal links, JavaScript, Ajax. If something's post-loading after the page and Google's not able to index it, or there are links that are accessible via JavaScript or Ajax, maybe Google can't necessarily see those or isn't crawling them as effectively, or is crawling them, but isn't assigning them as much link weight as they might be assigning other stuff, and you've made it tough to link to them externally, and so they can't crawl it.
- Disabling crawling and/or indexing of thin or incomplete or non-search-targeted content. We have a bunch of search results pages. Should we use rel=prev/next? Should we robots.txt those out? Should we disallow from crawling with meta robots? Should we rel=canonical them to other pages? Should we exclude them via the protocols inside Google Webmaster Tools, which is now Google Search Console?
- Managing redirects, domain migrations, content updates. A new piece of content comes out, replacing an old piece of content, what do we do with that old piece of content? What's the best practice? It varies by different things. We have a whole Whiteboard Friday about the different things that you could do with that. What about a big redirect or a domain migration? You buy another company and you're redirecting their site to your site. You have to understand things about subdomain structures versus subfolders, which, again, we've done another Whiteboard Friday about that.
- Proper error codes, downtime procedures, and not found pages. If your 404 pages turn out to all be 200 pages, well, now you've made a big error there, and Google could be crawling tons of 404 pages that they think are real pages, because you've made it a status code 200, or you've used a 404 code when you should have used a 410, which is a permanently removed, to be able to get it completely out of the indexes, as opposed to having Google revisit it and keep it in the index.
Downtime procedures. So there's specifically a… I can't even remember. It's a 5xx code that you can use. Maybe it was a 503 or something that you can use that's like, "Revisit later. We're having some downtime right now." Google urges you to use that specific code rather than using a 404, which tells them, "This page is now an error."
Disney had that problem a while ago, if you guys remember, where they 404ed all their pages during an hour of downtime, and then their homepage, when you searched for Disney World, was, like, "Not found." Oh, jeez, Disney World, not so good.
- International and multi-language targeting issues. I won't go into that. But you have to know the protocols there. Duplicate content, syndication, scrapers. How do we handle all that? Somebody else wants to take our content, put it on their site, what should we do? Someone's scraping our content. What can we do? We have duplicate content on our own site. What should we do?
- Diagnosing traffic drops via analytics and metrics. Being able to look at a rankings report, being able to look at analytics connecting those up and trying to see: Why did we go up or down? Did we have less pages being indexed, more pages being indexed, more pages getting traffic less, more keywords less?
- Understanding advanced search parameters. Today, just today, I was checking out the related parameter in Google, which is fascinating for most sites. Well, for Moz, weirdly, related:oursite.com shows nothing. But for virtually every other sit, well, most other sites on the web, it does show some really interesting data, and you can see how Google is connecting up, essentially, intentions and topics from different sites and pages, which can be fascinating, could expose opportunities for links, could expose understanding of how they view your site versus your competition or who they think your competition is.
Then there are tons of parameters, like in URL and in anchor, and da, da, da, da. In anchor doesn't work anymore, never mind about that one.
I have to go faster, because we're just going to run out of these. Like, come on. Interpreting and leveraging data in Google Search Console. If you don't know how to use that, Google could be telling you, you have all sorts of errors, and you don't know what they are.
- Leveraging topic modeling and extraction. Using all these cool tools that are coming out for better keyword research and better on-page targeting. I talked about a couple of those at MozCon, like MonkeyLearn. There's the new Moz Context API, which will be coming out soon, around that. There's the Alchemy API, which a lot of folks really like and use.
- Identifying and extracting opportunities based on site crawls. You run a Screaming Frog crawl on your site and you're going, "Oh, here's all these problems and issues." If you don't have these technical skills, you can't diagnose that. You can't figure out what's wrong. You can't figure out what needs fixing, what needs addressing.
- Using rich snippet format to stand out in the SERPs. This is just getting a better click-through rate, which can seriously help your site and obviously your traffic.
- Applying Google-supported protocols like rel=canonical, meta description, rel=prev/next, hreflang, robots.txt, meta robots, x robots, NOODP, XML sitemaps, rel=nofollow. The list goes on and on and on. If you're not technical, you don't know what those are, you think you just need to write good content and lower your bounce rate, it's not going to work.
- Using APIs from services like AdWords or MozScape, or hrefs from Majestic, or SEM refs from SearchScape or Alchemy API. Those APIs can have powerful things that they can do for your site. There are some powerful problems they could help you solve if you know how to use them. It's actually not that hard to write something, even inside a Google Doc or Excel, to pull from an API and get some data in there. There's a bunch of good tutorials out there. Richard Baxter has one, Annie Cushing has one, I think Distilled has some. So really cool stuff there.
- Diagnosing page load speed issues, which goes right to what Jayson was talking about. You need that fast-loading page. Well, if you don't have any technical skills, you can't figure out why your page might not be loading quickly.
- Diagnosing mobile friendliness issues
- Advising app developers on the new protocols around App deep linking, so that you can get the content from your mobile apps into the web search results on mobile devices. Awesome. Super powerful. Potentially crazy powerful, as mobile search is becoming bigger than desktop.
Okay, I'm going to take a deep breath and relax. I don't know Jayson's intention, and in fact, if he were in this room, he'd be like, "No, I totally agree with all those things. I wrote the article in a rush. I had no idea it was going to be big. I was just trying to make the broader points around you don't have to be a coder in order to do SEO." That's completely fine.
So I'm not going to try and rain criticism down on him. But I think if you're reading that article, or you're seeing it in your feed, or your clients are, or your boss is, or other folks are in your world, maybe you can point them to this Whiteboard Friday and let them know, no, that's not quite right. There's a ton of technical SEO that is required in 2015 and will be for years to come, I think, that SEOs have to have in order to be effective at their jobs.
All right, everyone. Look forward to some great comments, and we'll see you again next time for another edition of Whiteboard Friday. Take care.
Video transcription by Speechpad.com
Sign up for The Moz Top 10, a semimonthly mailer updating you on the top ten hottest pieces of SEO news, tips, and rad links uncovered by the Moz team. Think of it as your exclusive digest of stuff you don't have time to hunt down but want to read!
Source: moz


text:
Less Than 1 minute to get approved!
By telling us how much you can afford we're able to match you with the dealer partner who best meets your needs.
What is your date of birth?
Program eligibility in Canadian provinces and territories varies based on age.
What is your employment status?
The status of your employment helps us determine the appropriate loan program for you.
Are you working while in school?
Select From these other income sources
The status of your employment helps us determine the appropriate loan program for you.
Where do you work?
Occupation or Job Title
Company Name
These employment details help us improve your chances of getting approved for a car loan.
Before taxes or deductions
I get paid?
Your income details show that you have the resources to make your monthly or bi-weekly payments, increasing your approval rate.
Any additional income source
How much do you receive monthly before taxes and deductions?
How long have you been employed or received this income?
Providing the length of the time you have been receiving this income
helps us better understand your employment situation, increasing the likelihood
of you getting approved.
What is your estimated Credit score?
Credit Score Helps Us Find You a Suitable Loan Offer
Would you like some help to improve your credit score?
This could lead to lower interest rates and easy approvals for auto loans and mortgages!
What is your home address?
This is the address we found. If it looks good, click continue. If not, you can try manually entering your address by clicking here.
Available programs vary based on where you live. Please help us find the most convenient option for you by entering your home mailing address above.
Do you rent or own?
Your address details help us determine a suitable budget and loan amount that will maximize your chances of getting approved.
How long have you lived at your current address?
Searching for vehicles in:
You Qualify for Pre-Approval in:
Confirm your information on the next page, and get pre-approved for your car loan!
By clicking on the Continue Button, I confirm my consent to Getgoing.ca, car dealers and lenders obtaining credit reports about me to facilitate my application for a car loan.
What is your name?
First Name
Last Name
Phone Number
To complete your application and access your loan we need your basic information.
Your contact details
Email Address
Primary Phone Number
You have been pre-approved for an auto loan, to access this loan please provide us with your contact details so our financial advisors can get you driving.
By clicking the Apply Now Button, I confirm my agreement to Getgoing.ca Privacy Policy and my consent to Getgoing.ca, car dealers and lenders obtaining credit reports about me to facilitate my application for a car loan.
Want To Do It Via Phone? Click Here To Call Us 1-855-250-2814
Sending Your Application..
Warning: You have applied max times already. A finance manager will be in touch with you shortly. If you've entered wrong information, please let our finance manager know.

subset: commoncrawl


text:
ANKARA, Turkey, Jan. 11 (UPI) -- The killing of three leading members of the separatist Kurdistan Workers' Party in Paris may have been an inside job, the Turkish prime minister said Friday.
French authorities said three women were "executed" this week at the Kurdistan Information Center in Paris, reports Radio France Internationale. Two of the women were shot in the neck, while a third was shot in the stomach and forehead. One of the victims, Sakine Cansiz, was a co-founder of the separatist movement, known by its Kurdish initials PKK.
The three women were said to be alone in the center before the shootings.
The PKK has been waging a militant campaign against the Turkish government since the 1980s. The group is listed as a terrorist organization by Turkey and the United States.
Read More
The killings came as Ankara resumes efforts to resolve the ongoing Kurdish issue by reaching out to jailed PKK leader Abdullah Ocalan.
Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan said Friday there were "interesting" details that have emerged from the French investigation into the Wednesday incident, daily newspaper Today's Zaman reports.
He said investigators found the bodies in a room that was locked from the inside.
"They opened the door to someone they knew," Erdogan said.
The Turkish newspaper reports that PKK hard-liner Fehman Huseyin, a Syrian, was overheard asking for new militant attacks. He allegedly added that peace talks between Ankara and the movement were part of a "game" against the PKK.
A move to settle issues with the Kurdish minority was upended in 2009 when a court banned the pro-Kurdish Democratic Society Party from politics because of alleged ties to the PKK.


text:
There's a cautious mood on Wall Street as investors consider Monday's s sell-off, which was led by heightened uncertainty over the U.S. debt ceiling and government shutdown.
U.S. stock futures were barely moving ahead of the opening bell.
Tuesday marks the eighth day of the government's partial shutdown. In that time, the Dow Jones industrial average has dropped 193 points.
Tuesday is also the start of third-quarter earnings season, with results due after the closing bell from aluminum producer Alcoa (AA), along with Yum! Brands (YUM), the parent of KFC, Pizza Hut and Taco Bell.
Related: 4 ways a debt ceiling crisis could affect you
But investors will likely remain focused on the debt drama playing out in Washington.
"Earnings, I expect they're going to take a backseat as the impasse overshadows," said Peter Cardillo, chief market economist at Rockwell Global Capital. "We're probably going to tread water as we get closer to the Oct. 17 date [a critical debt ceiling deadline]."
Related: Fear & Greed Index still mired in fear
U.S. stocks fell Monday on the continuing political standoff.
Despite heated posturing, many hope and expect the Democrats and Republicans will be able to reach a last-minute agreement to raise the debt ceiling and avoid a default.
European markets were all moving lower in morning trading, led by declines in London's FTSE 100, while Asian markets ended with gains. The Shanghai Composite index jumped by 1% after investors returned from a long holiday.


text:
Clinical trials are designed to test treatments under very specific scientific and ethical guidelines. Clinical trials use written protocols to define the purpose, design and conduct of a specific clinical trial. All of the research centers participating in a particular study use the same research protocol. The protocol is written by the sponsor of the study and explains what the trial will do, how it will be conducted, where it will be conducted, who may participate and how and when the participants will be evaluated. Sponsors of clinical trials include, but are not limited to, the National Cancer Institute, groups or networks of physicians, individuals within a single cancer institution and manufacturers of biopharmaceutical products.
In order to protect patients participating in clinical trials, the sponsor reviews the protocol for safety and appropriateness and then the protocol must undergo a second neutral review by an Institutional Review Board (IRB). The Institutional Review Board is responsible for overseeing any clinical trials that are performed in the specific healthcare institution where the clinical trial is offered. An Institutional Review Board includes physicians, healthcare providers and individuals not involved in healthcare, including the clergy or ordinary citizens. Institutional Review Board members do not have any personal interest in the results of the trial and, therefore, can ensure that the study is conducted fairly and safely. Committee members serving on Institutional Review Boards address the following questions in reviewing protocols:
- Does this protocol have scientific value?
- Does the protocol have scientific validity?
- Are risks to subjects minimized?
- Are the risks to subjects reasonable in relation to anticipated benefits (if any) to subjects and the importance of the knowledge that may reasonably be expected to result?
- Is the selection of subjects equitable?
- Are additional safeguards in place for subjects likely to be vulnerable to coercion or undue influence?
- Will informed consent be obtained from research subjects or their legally authorized representatives?
- Is there adequate provision for monitoring the data collected to ensure the safety of subjects?
- Are there adequate provisions to protect the privacy of subjects and to maintain the confidentiality of data?
The Institutional Review Board also reviews all informed consent documents to make sure that they provide clear and complete information for those evaluating the merits of enrolling in a specific clinical trial.
Clinical trials evaluating cancer treatments or strategies may be offered in large university hospitals, local community hospitals and/or physician practices. The location where a clinical trial is conducted depends on the specific resources required to conduct the trial, the number of patients needed for enrollment in the trial to answer the question and the individual or institution's interest in performing clinical trials in general.
Next Section: Clinical Trials Safeguards »
Clinical Trials Topics:
- What Are Clinical Trials
- Phases of Clinical Trials
- How are Clinical Trials Conducted?
- Clinical Trials Safeguards
- Participating in Clinical Trials
- The Cost of Clinical Trials
- Finding Specific Clinical Trials
- The Future of Clinical Trials
Copyright © 2016 Omni Health Media. All Rights Reserved.


text:
I've been obsessed with food and it's ability to kill or cure you for years.
My obsession with food and nutrition started with the movie Supersize Me. When I first saw the film I was eating fast food (and other junk) regularly. Watching Food Maters opened my eyes to a new world. I had to know more about food's magical healing powers.
By the time I saw Fat Sick & Nearly Dead my eating habits had already changed considerably. Still, the film was a shock to my system. In my mind fruit juice had always been made from concentrate and was nothing miraculous or special. Suddenly real fruit and vegetable juice became much more valuable.
I must have watched every food documentary on the internet at one point, even a few with subtitles. Craving information, driven for answers to all of my countless questions. Hours upon hours watching, reading, and studying. I enjoyed learning about nutrition and how all the vitamins, minerals, and microbiome work in the human body.
All of my obsessive information diving (which typically includes reading scientific research papers) was pointing to a problem with the standard American diet. No one thing could be nailed down and many problems seemed to be popping up.
There also seemed to be a lot of evidence pointing to problems associated with contact with environmental toxins (pesticides, chemicals in cosmetics & household items).
Our bodies have amazing abilities to flush out toxins and heal themselves even against "incurable" conditions, but we can only harness this power if our machines are tuned to perfection.
Pople's bodies and immune systems are out of balance – we are getting sick at alarming rates. The problems very often seem to be tied to either diet and or chemical exposure (assuming we forgo getting into environmental epigenetics and other genetic conditions).
Down to the molecule, these things have an impact in ways we cannot even understand yet. We are using people as lab rats and the test subjects are not doing very well. Cancer rates are shocking, diabetes is also on the rise. It's a health crisis that not enough people are talking about.
Modern agricultural practices, foods soaked in pesticides, and groceries filled with ingredients nobody can pronounce, are a failure. Since their invention cancer and terminal illnesses have spiked in nearly all first world countries (especially America).
Each person's body is different and unique. Another one of my obsessions over the years (since childhood) has been evolution, human, and animal. Without getting too off topic, it would be reasonable to believe that people all over the planet evolved to eat different foods dependent on what was available in their native culture.
Before GMO's and the invention of year-round access to foods out of season, people were much more limited in their diets depending on local availability. In former times, predating modern migrations, indigenous peoples all over the world thrived on a variety of whole food diets limited based on local climate. Back then we were more in tune with the earth, all foods were whole foods, and nothing was processed.
I've had some mysterious health issues my entire life. Some of them smaller, (acne and water retention) others more obnoxious (severe PMS, chronic insomnia, headaches, & and IBS). Doctors have not been helpful. I've spent almost a lifetime searching for answers in a thirty-year mystery.
When they don't know the answer apathetic MD's dismiss you. It's been difficult to get any doctor to take my complaints too seriously. The fact that I don't want to take prescriptions unless as a last resort doesn't seem to help. "Take this drug, you need more vitamins, drink more water, get more sleep, try more exercise." All things I've done.
I truly believe in the body's ability to heal itself. Having these health issues means something in the engine is not calibrated correctly and it's time for a tuneup.
Over and over again I kept getting pointed back to the Ketogenic Diet so I'm making the change. Today is day two. I'm feeling great despite the knowledge that a detox flu may be just around the corner.
I feel like this could be a positive change to a diet that more closely reflects what my ancestors would have eaten – carbs and sugar would not have been on the menu.
My new diet may not be for you. The truth is we all have to pay careful attention to the whispers (and sometimes screams) of our bodies. We come from a variety of genetics there is really not just one "type" of human.
Genetic diversity is something we should value as a species but with that in mind, a one size fit's all diet doesn't seem logical.
You have to find the foods that work for you.