As a result of this strong focus, the meta data and onsite copy is often very similar with very little informative content. With this in mind it does create issues with the effectiveness of the site. If people land and read some KW copy they will quickly deduce that the content isn’t the works Billy Shakespeare.

This content therefore gets them to act, whether it is to return to the SERPs or to click through!

Is there is an attractive call to action amidst the copy, this has a proportionately high chance of getting clicked on if the copy isn’t compelling! Sure the page ranks for a particular term but if the copy lacks information then they are left with only one option, action!

Now I’m not suggesting that copywriters should be producing spam content and creating dross copy for microsites, but what I am saying is that the negatives for SEO based content is ‘unclear’.

I appreciate that bad email content can have a negative response but with microsite click throughs, people appreciate that if Google determine a site deserves to be in the SERPs for a particular term, then the site must be trustworthy (which it is) therefore they instantly trust the site and the call to action which exists on that page!

It will be interesting to see the difference between evocative and well written copy to SEO content with excellent CTA.

Just a thought!

There are no posts related to SEO copy creates higher CTR.