Ignore Keywords; GOOG Fail
Ruminations on the death of the keyword metatag, wherein our hero again questions GOOG and the other horsemen of the search apocalypse.
Back in September, Matt Cutts wrote a post on how Google does not factor in the keywords metatag in its web search results. For most, this came as a fat “no shit” moment. We’ve all smelled something funny for years — it just took animal control to pull the carcass out and prove there was something actually dead.
Google’s reasons are legit, I suppose. Before they wrote the PR algorithm that saved the world, knuckle-dragging search engines were heavily emphasizing metatag values in their ranking, which of course led to ridiculous spamming and keyword bombing. We all know the mid-90s were dark times. Google simply chose to wash their hands of the nonsense.
The GOOG continues to recognize just about all other pieces of page content. But it does not recognize the one tag that represents a 1:1 ratio to its core functionality. After we author a page of great content, we have to rig together a wobbly net of page titles, meta descriptions, header tags, strong and emphasis tags, alternative text attributes and a bunch of other bullshit hoping we strike just the right balance to match the right key phrase searches without the Master Control Program thinking we’re up to something fishy.
I’m not denying the historic abuse of the keywords meta tag. I am more incredulous at the fact that website owners have no means to directly suggest actual search phrases with which they want to be found. Google keeps pushing the amorphous “just write good content” propaganda, and the pale, bloodshot SEO industry spends its life circling a drain of speculative reverse engineering, insider trading and technical alchemy. Everyone in between is screwed.
DOES ANYONE ELSE SEE THE IRONY?
- Why can dedicated site owners not create a list of suggested keywords in Google Webmaster Tools?
- Why is Google not smart enough to map these suggestions against the actual site content to gauge their validity?
- Why does it show me the phrases for which I rank but offer no way for me to help improve my own relevancy?
- Where is the logic in heavily weighing some invisible content like meta description, but completely disregarding an even more direct clue?
- For all the noise given to structured data, why can’t properly tagged content (ahem) become a more controllable and civil keyword environment?
- Will my PageRank drop even further now that I’m badmouthing the Master Control Program and Herr Cutts?
I am getting tired of the tyranny.