In the Internet world, there’s an abundant pile of information. There are data out there about SEO, and sadly, some are not even true. Worse, Google sometimes magnifies the wrong data.
An example would be when Google’s John Mueller currently disproved the SEO myth regarding LSI keywords. The fact is there is no LSI keywords and that is why John Mueller tweeted:
“There’s no such thing as LSI keywords-anyone who’s telling you otherwise is a mistake, sorry.”
The problem here was that Google weakened Mueller’s message by ranking the erroneous SEO information at the top of the search results. Thus, if you will check LSI Keywords in Google, the top rated web pages claim that LSI Keywords is an important concern for SEO and you will find search results about LSI Keyword generators.
DISTINGUISH BETWEEN OPINIONS AND FACTS
It is vital to confirm if the writer is just merely stating an opinion or using authoritative source. Sort of similar to a Googler statement, a research paper aids to upgrade a view to an insight that is based on facts. It does not mean that when Google ranks something at the topmost of the search results that it is automatically true or correct. Hence, you will need a little bit of research here.
Statements Should be Within the Context
When people start to refer Googler statement, of course, these people have their own personal opinions and agendas. Sometimes, creating fear and confusion will mean more business for these people.
In a #SEOisAEO podcast, John Mueller mentioned that most of his statements are taken out of content. These are his extact words:
“two thirds of what he is quoted as saying is misquoted or quoted out of context.”
It happens; at times, people can misinterpret words. However, it doesn’t mean you would not research about it.
It Could Be a Fact-Based Insight
In a blog post, Google said…
“In fact, there’s nothing in a core update that targets specific pages or sites. Instead, the changes are about improving how our systems assess content overall. These changes may cause some pages that were previously under-rewarded to do.”
In the same blog post, Google also shared on how to self-evaluate web pages. More on: Interpreting ‘Quality’ According to Google (Part 1).
Studies Are Not Always Dependable
Correlations studies have a tendency to be meaningless. Appointing the meaning when there is no evidence is erroneous.
To be honest, correlation studies are a clickbait strategy for many. It doesn’t seem to be of use in understanding important SEO factors.
Additionally, corrections articles can produce the wrong conclusion because interpretation of these studies can be very subjective. Hence, it is fluid and changeable.
Check What You Are Reading
If there’s any statement, don’t be too gullible; it is best to research and test things first. Learn from the Google Webmasters channel on YouTube!