Atomic Media text

Atomic Media

SEO grew up, a lot of SEOs didn’t

SEO grew up, a lot of SEOs didn’t

When we were young, we all wanted to sit at the adult’s table. But we couldn’t, often, because of our behavior.

Growing up, we often thought we were cool, but we weren’t. Look back at your past. There are probably photos or things you did that you find questionable today.

This is exactly how we SEOs should be looking at our work. SEO has grown up a lot; we SEOs didn’t. 

Our mindset is a problem when tackling challenges like needing a strong brand or satisfying users the most.

❌ What we do:

This is the wrong approach. 

✅ What we should be doing: 

To finally grow up, we have to look into the mirror. We have to change.

If you are pressed on time, here’s a quick rundown of what I suggest you should start doing today:

Disclaimer: This is not a purely tactical guide. My goal is to make you think. Motivate you to ask yourself tough questions and provide you with the necessary mindset to fill out the shoes of adolescence. If you get one good thought from this I’m more than happy.

Let’s get into the trenches: This is how we grow up!

Embrace change as an opportunity to grow

When we were children, we didn’t want to accept that change was inevitable. As we grow up, we realize it’s much easier to accept the world for what it is than to strive for what it should be. 

“You don’t get to dictate the course of events. And the paradoxical reward for accepting reality’s constraints is that they no longer feel so constraining.”

– Oliver Burkeman, “Four Thousand Weeks

The same should apply to our SEO mindset.

Change can be old tactics no longer working (like putting white text on a white background; I only mention this because some website owners still do this today) or new things appearing on the horizon, like generative AI.

Many of our SEO playbooks are outdated, and forces are pulling on us to change. Here are two examples:

We often don’t have a crawl budget problem, but an indexing problem

Indexing is becoming harder. 

From what we know, the size of Google’s index seems to be more or less static (about 400 billion documents). Due to AI, we are:

More content of a higher quality baseline vs. same index size = it’s harder to get indexed. 

A graph of Google's index size (which stays stable), and an increasing quality threshold after 2022, when ChatGPT launched. The spot, where the growth for the quality threshold increased, is marked with a box.

Google is allergic to technical issues and low-quality content.

Google’s fierce changes in ecommerce searches

Google is under pressure to become a shopping engine.

As a result, Google renovated the SERPs for commercial queries. 

In 2023, Google started to push a new feature: product grids.

An example SERP for the keyword ebikes. Beneath the sponsored ads and refinement options, there is an integration called "Popular products". Under the headline there is a grid of 5 products in each row. No regular organic listing is in sight.

Categorized as “Merchant Listings,” these grids appear in commercial searches at Position 1 more and more often. 

Based on my research for German SERPs, depending on the industry, product grids appear in position 1 between 15-45% of the time.

Thanks to some research done by Kevin Indig for the U.S., we know Google changed the rate of them appearing in Position 1 more often than in Position 3 around March 2024.

If your domain doesn’t play a role in product grids but your competitors do, you are in for a tough time.

The solution: Reframing problems as opportunities

Problems are what make life worth living. A problem can be reframed as a challenge or an opportunity. The cards are shuffled again, doors are opening up, and we are all new to these things. 

Here’s a practical reframing example from a talk by Carrie Rose I heard this year: 

Main takeaways: 

Double down on things that never change

On the one hand, we don’t want to change our behavior. On the other hand, our brain craves novelty, constantly looking for a dopamine hit. 

I know it’s very easy to be sucked in. New trends like AI chatbots, AI phones, AI toothbrushes. All good. But you have to avoid the shiny toy syndrome and embrace what will always matter.

If you focus on the things that never change, you can predict the future.

There lies great power in what you can’t measure

It will always pay off to do what is logical and rational. 

Google of 2004 is not Google of 2024. Just because Google cannot measure something right now doesn’t mean it cannot in the future. One example is having author bios and pages.

Due to the leak, we have our answers now, but having author bios and pages just because Google “wants” them didn’t make sense.

Things that cannot be measured are often underestimated and easily ignored. Fun fact: A metric is often more useful if it is harder to measure.

Prefer the repeatability in the present over the luck of the past

Luck is something positive that is not predictable. Repeatable means puzzle pieces falling into place like they used to. They are not the same.

In SEO, we love to look at what others did and you should. But focus on what is repeatable, not what was lucky.

You cannot follow in the footsteps of Amazon or HubSpot, as their operating conditions fundamentally changed. However, there are things worth learning from them.

Do what is repeatable; don’t try to emulate what was lucky.

Some more things that will never change

To draw on the Amazon example, Google will always need users to be satisfied with their search product. At least as long as this is their biggest revenue source.

One of your goals, in this case, should always be to have “best in the world content,” not good content.

In the SQRG, Google tells us exactly what they want. They have been doing so for years:

Make no mistake: The next update is coming. The next disruption of the SERPs you operate in is coming as well.

It’s much better to invest in preparation over prediction. What we can’t see coming hits us the hardest.

Main takeaways:

Get the newsletter search marketers rely on.


See terms.


Stop manipulating, start taking responsibility

Do you remember that when you were a kid, you often tried to manipulate and cheat in games?

In Germany, there is a game called “Mensch ärger dich nicht,” which roughly translates to “man, don’t be angry.”

I took chances to roll the dice again because someone “distracted me,” for example. This also happens often in golf and is known as a “mulligan,” so you get a pass and can take another shot.

At times, SEOs are like children who don’t want to accept the rules, cheat when no one is looking and love to blame others for our failures.

Examples of SEO manipulation practices

SEO is a breeding ground for manipulative tactics, and everyone knows the good old tales. Here are a few classics and recent ones:

A graph showing organic traffic and referring domains across the span of 2022 to 2024. In February 2024 the curve for referring domains exploded. There is another text in the image that says "Someone wanted to earn a quick buck"

If you want to be taken seriously in SEO, don’t take shortcuts. Like Sonia Simone said, they take too long.

Why Google can’t tell us the truth

It’s easy to point fingers at Google. To call them liars and whatnot. Anyone with a clear mind has to understand that they cannot tell us exactly what is going on behind the curtain. If they did, at least a small group of SEO goblins would do everything in their power to ruin the game for everyone else.

SEO is the perfect example of the tragedy of commons. 

“Each man is locked into a system that compels him to increase his herd without limit – in a world that is limited. Ruin is the destination toward which all men rush, each pursuing his own best interest in a society that believes in the freedom of the commons.”

– Garrett Hardin, “The Tragedy of the Commons

A graphic visualizing the tragedy of commons. There are 3 different stages. Everyone behaves well, a few cheaters, and a lot of cheaters. The environment, equipped to handle only no cheating behaviour, deteriorates over time.

Some of us just can’t behave properly and break the system for everyone else.

Yet here we are, proud of engaging in our questionable get-rich-quick schemes, which no one would publicly endorse as employees of a real brand or big company.

Incentives beat intentions, unfortunately

Recently a guide on how to manipulate Reddit got a lot of traction. I understand what the intentions of the author were: Make things better. But I don’t agree with the approach and methods used to do it.

This is not an ad hominem case as this is not an individual problem.

Firstly, Google is blamed for creating incentives to spam Reddit. However, the article itself promoted incentives to do the same with the actual manual on a silver platter.

Publicly sharing the techniques to spam Reddit is promoting to spam Reddit even more, no matter how you put it. And it was never wise to fight fire with fire.

Also, people generally like Reddit and find the answers helpful. It’s no coincidence that they have these numbers: 

I’m not saying there is no spam. But we don’t know the denominator here. If you seek a needle in a hay stack you will find one.

Secondly, Google is blamed 100% for the consequences of the Reddit spam. I don’t agree.

If you would look at the chain of responsibility through the eyes of several great philosophers, like Kant, Aristotle or Sartre, you would come to the conclusion that users taking advantage of the spam techniques are to blame first, then the platform (= Reddit) and then Google (= the middleman).

The chain of responsibility. It emphasizes that it starts with the user, even if Reddit and Google are enabling and incentivizing cheating behaviour.

FYI: Others cheating doesn’t give you permission to do the same. Enabling and incentivizing these tactics is not a free ticket to cheat, either.

Look into the mirror: If spammers wouldn’t spam there would be no problem, so the root cause is our sometimes unbearable human nature.

The blame is (also) on us, not (just) the others

It’s more comfortable to blame others than to check on ourselves. 

“Google got worse” is one on the trendiest topics of 2023 and 2024. 

“Before Content Marketing was a thing, idiots did not publish content. You wouldn’t write encyclopedia articles without knowing anything. Now, we created a perverse incentive for any idiot to write about anything. We sit in a mountain of garbage.”

Peep Laja, CEO, Wynter

What if Google didn’t get worse, but the ratio of good to bad content shifted?

If you fill a glass with more water (bad content) than wine (good content), the relative amount of wine in the glass decreases, even if the quality of the wine itself is good. It becomes harder to serve good content.

Google is responsible for their search results, but we are responsible for the mountains of garbage we produce.

German study presumably claimed Google got worse. Their argument, only focusing on a small query subset in a specific niche, is insufficient to make such claims. It’s not even what they said but what people want to believe.

According to Statista, users are once again slightly more satisfied with Google search. And yes, according to the 286-pager on Google being a monopoly, Google tried to devaluate search quality to test the impact on revenue. But that test only lasted three months. 

No one can predict if there wouldn’t be a negative impact on revenue in the long term, which is all that matters.

Let’s assume for a moment that this was true: Google got worse and our domains were demoted in favor of some big digital publishers. How would the confirmation of this bias actually help me?

It doesn’t.

Yes, I can and should be vocal about it. But a lot of time and energy goes into being negative. Negativity is like a candy rush. It distracts us, so you need to avoid it.

Author Ryan Holiday hit the nail on the head with this quote: 

“In our own lives, we aren’t content to deal with things as they happen. We have to dive endlessly into what everything “means,” whether something is “fair” or not, what’s “behind” this or that and what everyone else is doing. Then we wonder why we don’t have the energy to actually deal with our problems.”

We need this energy wasted being negative in working on achieving positive outcomes, like crafting the best content out there or being the most helpful resource for our target audience.

Loopholes are risky short-term arbitrage opportunities, not long-term safe bets

A loophole is not a real competitive advantage, but a short-term arbitrage technique that brings a lot of risk with it. If revealed to the outside, there can be grave consequences. 

I loved this from Alex Birkett recently LinkedIn:

“Shortcuts in SEO often bring a sugar high, but they also come with a crash. […] If you treat it like a get-rich-quick scheme, you’ll need to ‘fix the plumbing’ later.”

Some things, like reputation, are not worth risiking, no matter how much there is to gain. Think of Sports Illustrated for example

Building a good reputation takes years. Setting it on fire can happen in seconds. 

Main takeaways: 

Communicate und understand SEO as a growth engine, not as routine maintenance/polishing the edges

The grand finale: SEO has gotten a lot bigger.

Keeping SEO small and limited might be a way to avoid change. Could this be why many SEOs were reluctant to admit that Google uses user signals in their ranking algorithms?

Less change = SEO is smaller = more comfortable + less risky.

As outlined at the beginning, change is an opportunity. We walk into the fire of discomfort only to step out of it stronger, wiser and better.

SEO in 2024 is nothing like it was in 2004 or 2014. The fundamenta principles are the same, but we are driving a much different vehicle now with much more horsepower under the hood.

SEO is the wrong word for what we are actually doing

Digital publishers often get two-thirds or more of their traffic through SEO. A lot of companies rely heavily on organic traffic.

Some examples like Hardbacon had to file for bankruptcy as a result of the HCU and other updates. Some are or were on the cusp of it, like HouseFresh, Retro Dodo and Healthy Framework.

SEO stands for search engine optimization. But 70% or more of traffic share vs. other channels doesn’t sound like optimizing to me.

Optimization sounds like squeezing the last 5-10% out of what you already have. Limited and marginal.

The problem is that we all have different understandings of SEO, so we are not talking with each other but past each other.

To some, SEO means fixing mistakes/bugs. To others, myself included, SEO means (almost) limitless growth.

Fixing and optimizing is not enough:

A graphic highlighting that fixing and optimizing are not enough in form of a pyramid. The bottom is fixing, the middle is optimization, and the top is building. Building increases the overall potential, so it's a symbol for growth.

To visualize the idea further, see the following graphic:

An explanatory graphic that shows the relationship between fixing, optimizing, and building. Fixing increases the existing potential, optimizing reaches the existing potential, and building increases the overall potential.

Here are some things you need to communicate, understand and execute SEO as a growth engine:

Finding your (real) competitive advantage

The last bullet point is especially important. It’s something that is missing quite often, from my experience.

Why should I buy from you? Why is your content the best in the world? The answer has to be the opposite of the “jumping the line” techniques criticized earlier.

The obvious question is how you get or find your real competitive advantage. It’s part of a good strategy. A strategy is always unique to a company. 

In “Good Strategy, Bad Strategy,” Richard Rumelt says the kernel of a strategy involves three pieces:

To find a competitive advantage, you need to ask the right questions, like:

A SWOT analysis can be a helpful tool here. An alternative to getting started is to list all the abilities and assets that make your brand you and then answer the last two questions.

Examples of abilities or assets could be that you:

Main takeaways:

We have work to do

I hope a lot of what I said is something you heard at least once already. But like Christian Morgenstern said (translation by me): 

“Sometimes you see something 100 or 1,000 times until you really see it for the first time.”

We have work to do.

Courtesy of Search Engine Land: News & Info About SEO, PPC, SEM, Search Engines & Search Marketing

Category seo news | Tags:

Social Networks : Technorati, Stumble it!, Digg, de.licio.us, Yahoo, reddit, Blogmarks, Google, Magnolia.

You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.

No Responses to
“SEO grew up, a lot of SEOs didn’t”





XHTML: You can use these tags: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>

By submitting a comment here you grant Atomic Media a perpetual license to reproduce your words and name/web site in attribution. Inappropriate comments will be removed at admin's discretion.