今天談一個關于搜索引擎優化細節得有點無聊的問題。

以前在論壇里有朋友問,什么樣的文章長度有利于SEO?首先先說兩句基本上永遠正確的廢話原則:

1)從用戶出發,考慮用戶體驗,別考慮搜索引擎優化。

2)有話則長,無話則短。

再來分析一下,假如必須要站在SEO的角度考慮,應該有些什么樣的處理?

首先,文章最短也應該在200字左右以上。原因有兩個:

1)假如只有幾十個字,搜索引擎不輕易判定出文字的主題是什么,也就判定不出與什么要害詞最相關。

2)正文太短的話,有可能比導航系統,菜單,版權聲明等雜七雜八的東西加起來的字數還少,被懷疑是復制內容。假如這樣的文字過少的頁面大量存在,可能造成網站內部復制網頁增多。因為你的網頁之間相似性太高,有區別的文字太短。

長文章輕易吸引鏈接。看過很多很長的文章,甚至長到幾十頁。雖然讀的時候拉來拉去有點兒不方便,但這樣的文章其實是比較輕易吸引鏈接的。

因為這樣的文章通常都是就某個話題深入分析,不深入他也寫不了這么長。所以其他的博客或網站發現這樣的深入研究文章,自然會發現它的價值,把文章當作資源,然后引用。

假如把長的文章分成幾段,其他博客就不輕易引用。較零碎的文章被當作資源的可能性會降低。這兩者之間其實是有微妙的心理差異的,一篇很長,很完整,很深入的文章,給人的印象就是有價值的資源。

再一個好處是,這樣的文章內容豐富,在搜索引擎看來,能夠增強權威性。

有的時候把長文章分成幾頁,也有它的優勢。第一個好處是整個網站頁面增多,網站規模變大。而大的網站有天生的權威度。

第二個是,假如你的文章能夠劃分成不同的章節,而每一個章節都各有重點,這時候把不同章節分成不同頁面就更有利。因為每一個章節都有他的主題相關性,分成多頁后,能夠針對不同的要害詞優化網頁。

一般來說,除了前面所討論的很長的文章,根據文章本身的特性和你是否想更輕易的吸引鏈接,來考慮是否分成不同頁外,普通文章應該在400-800字之間比較合適。這并不僅僅是從SEO的角度考慮,也考慮到用戶。太長輕易讓用戶看第一眼就煩了,太短像前面說的不能形成主題。

當然這里討論的是以SEO角度出發,但很多時候做網站,SEO只是很小的一部分考慮。比如說很多網站都有的常見問答FAQ,假如問題一兩句話就答清楚了,也沒必要寫到幾百字。

EMBA的小眼睛 發表在 痞客邦 留言(0) 人氣()

The bell curve is moving (mass geekery)

We've got more nerds than ever before.

Rogers famously described the ways products are adopted:

Bellcurve2

On the left, geeks and nerds and people who love stuff because the new is new and edgy and changes things. All the way to the right, the laggards, the ones who want to be the last to change. And in the middle, the masses, the ones who wait for the new idea to be proven, cheap and widely adopted. Most people are in the middle, and a few are on either edge. (Note that in every area of interest, different people put themselves into different segments. You might be a shoe geek but a movie laggard).

Marketers work to change the market. And for the last thirty years, marketers have been working to turn people into geeks, into people eager to try the new. And it's working.

Shiftedbellcurve2

There are more and more people lining up to buy the new gadget, more exploring the edges of the internet, more willing to engage in ways that were seen as too risky just a generation ago.

In addition to an ever increasing amount of media and advertising about what's new, the products and services themselves are designed to draw us in. It used to be that a car nerd would buy a new car every year while the laggard could wait a decade quite happily before upgrading. Today, because our software connects, the upgrade cycle is built in. Like it or not, the new version (or the new TOS or the new interaction style) is about to become part of your life.

The cultural implications here are significant. We now live in a society with more people more willing to change more often. And that means your customers are restless, and more likely to walk away if you don't treat them the way nerds want to be treated. Amaze, delight and challenge...
http://sethgodin.typepad.com/seths_blog/2012/10/the-bell-curve-is-moving.html?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+typepad%2Fsethsmainblog+%28Seth%27s+Blog%29 

EMBA的小眼睛 發表在 痞客邦 留言(0) 人氣()

What are professional reviews for?

I know what they used to be for. A decade ago, there really was no way to tell if a movie, a book or a play was worth your time before you paid up. A professional review could be a valuable signal, a way to save people time and money.

Along the way, professional reviewers also decided that they could alter the culture by speaking up. Since creators of culture are often sensitive to what the critics have to say, establishing critical baselines (particularly when you are a powerful arbiter of what sells and what doesn't) became a real function of the critic.

Today, of course, there's no shortage of cultural feedback. If I want to know what people thought of a bit of culture, it's only a click away. In fact, for the consumer who doesn't want to know (spoiler alert) it's almost impossible to avoid.

With that much feedback to choose from, what purpose do the anonymous book reviews in Publishers Weekly or Kirkus Review serve? Or the long movie reviews in the Times or the short ones in Variety? Or the restaurant reviews in the local paper?

They might be saying, "I have a track record, and if you agree with my past picks, you'll agree with this," which works fine if it's always the same reviewer and we know them by name.

They might be saying, "our publication has a good track record in picking what's going to be popular, so if you're a theater owner or a bookstore, pay heed," except they don't have a good track record, they have a terrible one.

Or they might be saying, "attention actors and directors and writers--we don't like it when you make books and movies that we don't like, and we're going to pillory your work until you stop." Assigning someone who doesn't like an author's work to review the author's next book seems cruel to all involved.

[And sometimes, they're just fun.]

All a long way of saying that if you make something that people are likely to criticize, pay careful attention to which critics you listen to. They probably don't view the world the way you do, and worse, the way your fans do.

Reading criticism just to ruin your day is a waste of your talent.

EMBA的小眼睛 發表在 痞客邦 留言(0) 人氣()

Freedom in a digital world

For a long time, there was alignment between what we wanted when it came to privacy and what was possible for the government to do. We relished our privacy and got used to the freedom to act anonymously at the same time that the government and marketers really couldn't keep track even if they wanted to.

In the pre-internet world, there was just no way to imagine a useful database of every citizen's fingerprints. The thought that a store would know every item you've ever purchased (and not just at their store) was crazy. Freedom from intrusion existed largely because the alternative was impossible.

Today, of course, we know that we can sequence the DNA of every resident and put it in a database. We can install so many cameras in a city that just about every corner is under surveillance. We can even wire cars so that they give themselves tickets when the driver is speeding. And yes, marketers already know about which websites you've visited recently.

Which leads to a series of questions that we're not asking.

Should there be speed limits? If so, should a violation depend on the bad luck of getting caught by a random cop on a random road (maybe)? Or should it be automatic?

Should drunk driving be permitted? If not, why not have a breathalyzer in every car, so that a simple puff of air is necessary to start the car? What if the insurance company gave you a big discount if you opted in?

Should everyone, even the presumed innocent, be required to put their DNA in a databank so that violent criminals are much more likely to be found? If not, who should have their data shared? How many innocent people behind bars could we free (and guilty parties could we catch?)

Should the government be able to sift through bank records looking for money laundering behavior? What about seeking out trends in tax records or cell phone calling patterns?

What about building a database of everyone who attends a football game (using facial recognition)? A politcal rally?

Should we take advantage of technology to allow us to trace every bullet and know what gun it was fired from?

One argument is that those with nothing to hide are already being surveilled in countless ways, and we probably ought to make laws to get those that would hurt the rest to be included.

The other argument is that all surveillance is too much, and it should be permitted to wear a clown mask into a bank and there ought not to be speed limits.

As usual, we're going to end up somewhere in between, but like all things the Net breaks, this one is going to take a long time to catch up to what's already happening.

In the meantime, I wish we were asking more questions.

http://sethgodin.typepad.com/seths_blog/2012/11/freedom-in-a-digital-world.html?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+typepad%2Fsethsmainblog+%28Seth%27s+Blog%29

EMBA的小眼睛 發表在 痞客邦 留言(0) 人氣()

安藤忠雄/日本建築家

編按:安藤忠雄從一個愛打架的小孩,到自認沒天分的拳擊手,想走建築之路,卻被質問「是不是一級建築師?」後,發憤考上執照,以及與各個困難重重的建築案奮鬥的歷程……,以下是他自述旅遊的書摘分享

 下定決心以自學走上建築之路的我,以讀書做為開端。同時,透過函授課程學習繪圖基礎、平面設計等。正如寫作者必須閱讀大量的書籍,建築家也必須以身體去體驗空間。

 我從高中時期開始對建築世界產生興趣,便走訪了京都與奈良各地的建築物。出社會以後,逐漸有意識地抱持著目的,更加頻繁地前往。無論是京都的傳統建築,或是書院與茶室等,都隨著時代與風格展現不同的面貌。此外,以法隆寺、東大寺等飛鳥時代建築為主的奈良,則開創出與京都完全不一樣的世界。我因為想理解日本建築的精髓而頻頻走訪。

 二十二歲那年(1963年),如果有讀大學,正好就是要畢業的那年,於是我計畫了自己一個人的畢業旅行。從大阪渡船到四國,再繞到九州、廣島,然後從岐阜往東北,是我嘗試性的建築巡禮。

 其中最受到衝擊的體驗,是在走訪廣島和平紀念資料館的那個夜晚。晚上十一點,周圍極其寧靜,在幾乎一片漆黑當中,我走過挑高廣場,看見核爆圓頂那令人不舒服的樣子,真切感受到戰爭的慘無人道。建築雜誌上令人過目難忘的和平紀念資料館,那種風格的典雅樣貌在這裡完全感覺不到。我感受到的是臨場空間的力量、建築所擁有的力量等各種錯綜複雜的情緒。觀賞日本近代建築巨擘丹下健三的作品,本來就是這趟旅行的目的之一,我得到超乎預期的感動。

 另一方面,分布在各地的傳統建築,尤其是白川鄉、飛驒高山這些世居民宅的空間,深深吸引著我。特別是在皎潔的月光下,佇立在民宅中彷彿要被黑暗吞噬的大黑柱,讓我體會到現代建築無法蘊含的感動。人們的生活與空間相互結合,並與大自然融為一體所創造的風景,真的很美麗。

 像這樣可說是日本原生風景的村落風光,現在正在消逝。果然和我感覺到的一樣,經過將近五十年的時光,使用許多工業產品,表面不易弄髒的現代建築,破壞了田園的景色。

 透過親自體驗、學習所得到的感動,是在書本與傳聞中絕對學不到的。

 現在,我的事務所規畫了「暑期研習營」,讓有興趣的學生體驗學習。利用長假到事務所打工之餘,選定一個主題,利用週末到京都、奈良等地去研究古建築。停留一個月的期間可以有八次探訪,每次花一整天時間徹底研究。如此一來,有時寺院等地會為了回應學生那份熱情,把平常見識不到的珍藏品特別展示出來,這對以為求學就是在大學聽課與讀書的學生來說,是非常寶貴的經驗。熱誠是能夠影響他人的。

 「暑期研習營」的最後,要把研究內容整理成報告,篇幅與題材完全由學生自行決定。憑自己的能力,彙整好一個月來的研究內容。起初看來靠不住的學生,頓時變得很可靠。

 去年夏天,有位學生選擇了東大寺的南大門。應該是特別熱衷與投入吧,報告裡竟然附上縝密到令人吃驚、非常細緻的手繪圖。

 南大門是東大寺的中興始祖俊乘坊重源建造的,這個被稱為大佛樣的建築,形式上的美感在日本建築史中,實在是簡潔有力,又充滿動感。我初次目睹時,便被它壯大的規模與充滿魄力的空間所折服,那份感動至今仍銘刻在心中,成為我自身想像力的泉源之一。這讓我再度體認到,對於從事創作的人很重要的是,能與多少感動相遇?而且盡量在年輕善感的階段去經歷與累積。

 2011年夏天,兩名東京工業大學學生申請參加「暑期研習營」,而且打算騎自行車由東海道一路到大阪。我即刻便答應這兩位勇敢的學生到我事務所來。儘管在途中遭逢一些意外,這兩名被烈日晒得黝黑的年輕人最終平安抵達。現今仍勇於嘗試與冒險的年輕人,我很感動也很欣賞。他們倆工作很勤快,週末則到京都研究古寺,然後在秋天回到東京。我對他們的未來充滿期待。

 我自己從旅行的經驗中學習到很多。無論如何,都一邊尋找著所謂的自我觀點,一邊思考並持續追尋。只是我們要關注的不是建築物的表層,而是建造者的人性與他們的人生故事,以及蓋出那棟建築物的時代,都必須進行了解。切實地走訪建築,邊看邊走邊思考,這個經驗將成為個人寶貴的資產。(本文節錄自《安藤忠雄:我的人生履歷書》,聯經出版,2012年11月29日 )

EMBA的小眼睛 發表在 痞客邦 留言(0) 人氣()