<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: The Official Death of Keywords</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.mackerelmedia.co.uk/blog/the-official-death-of-keywords/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.mackerelmedia.co.uk/blog/the-official-death-of-keywords/</link>
	<description>Internet Marketing Scotland</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Tue, 06 Jul 2010 09:05:49 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0</generator>
<xhtml:meta xmlns:xhtml="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml" name="robots" content="noindex" />
	<item>
		<title>By: Donald Mackenzie</title>
		<link>http://www.mackerelmedia.co.uk/blog/the-official-death-of-keywords/comment-page-1/#comment-307</link>
		<dc:creator>Donald Mackenzie</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 12 Oct 2009 13:42:21 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.mackerelmedia.co.uk/?p=799#comment-307</guid>
		<description>Thanks Nick, thats really good advice.

My site is ranked No1 for the search phrase, &quot;wedding piper&quot;. I managed to obtain the ranking by getting links to point back at the home page with the keywords in the anchor text.

However I do need to drive much more traffic to the site to convert impressions into leads

Any good ideas? Is this something you guys do?

Donald</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Thanks Nick, thats really good advice.</p>
<p>My site is ranked No1 for the search phrase, &#8220;wedding piper&#8221;. I managed to obtain the ranking by getting links to point back at the home page with the keywords in the anchor text.</p>
<p>However I do need to drive much more traffic to the site to convert impressions into leads</p>
<p>Any good ideas? Is this something you guys do?</p>
<p>Donald</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Nick</title>
		<link>http://www.mackerelmedia.co.uk/blog/the-official-death-of-keywords/comment-page-1/#comment-303</link>
		<dc:creator>Nick</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 10 Oct 2009 09:38:45 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.mackerelmedia.co.uk/?p=799#comment-303</guid>
		<description>Donald - Thanks a lot for your comment.

I&#039;m generally in favour of taking a &#039;silo&#039; approach to content inasmuch as if you approached building content without considering search engines, it&#039;s the way you&#039;d probably do it.

As an example, if you were creating a web site about bagpiping and wanted it to be the best bagpiping site in the world, you&#039;d think carefully about all the different topics you&#039;d write about and you&#039;d think about how best to organise the content so that it&#039;s easy for users to follow. You&#039;d probably end up creating silos for different types of related content such as &#039;History of Bagpiping&#039;, &#039;Bagpipes&#039;, &#039;Bagpipers&#039;, &#039;Bagpipe Bands&#039; and so on.

As regards LSI, it&#039;s not something we think about. Rather, when we create content we don&#039;t focus on simple repetition of keywords, but on writing useful, interesting and varied content that captures the attention of users and search engines.

Nick</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Donald &#8211; Thanks a lot for your comment.</p>
<p>I&#8217;m generally in favour of taking a &#8216;silo&#8217; approach to content inasmuch as if you approached building content without considering search engines, it&#8217;s the way you&#8217;d probably do it.</p>
<p>As an example, if you were creating a web site about bagpiping and wanted it to be the best bagpiping site in the world, you&#8217;d think carefully about all the different topics you&#8217;d write about and you&#8217;d think about how best to organise the content so that it&#8217;s easy for users to follow. You&#8217;d probably end up creating silos for different types of related content such as &#8216;History of Bagpiping&#8217;, &#8216;Bagpipes&#8217;, &#8216;Bagpipers&#8217;, &#8216;Bagpipe Bands&#8217; and so on.</p>
<p>As regards LSI, it&#8217;s not something we think about. Rather, when we create content we don&#8217;t focus on simple repetition of keywords, but on writing useful, interesting and varied content that captures the attention of users and search engines.</p>
<p>Nick</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Donald Mackenzie</title>
		<link>http://www.mackerelmedia.co.uk/blog/the-official-death-of-keywords/comment-page-1/#comment-300</link>
		<dc:creator>Donald Mackenzie</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 08 Oct 2009 12:36:48 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.mackerelmedia.co.uk/?p=799#comment-300</guid>
		<description>What is your view of LSI and silo structured web design? 

Do you think this is a better approach for content development and ranking improvements?

Donald</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>What is your view of LSI and silo structured web design? </p>
<p>Do you think this is a better approach for content development and ranking improvements?</p>
<p>Donald</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Anna Green (web design)</title>
		<link>http://www.mackerelmedia.co.uk/blog/the-official-death-of-keywords/comment-page-1/#comment-298</link>
		<dc:creator>Anna Green (web design)</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 25 Sep 2009 07:47:38 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.mackerelmedia.co.uk/?p=799#comment-298</guid>
		<description>Thanks for your fast response, it has been most useful. I will keep an eye on your blog for further useful information.

Anna</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Thanks for your fast response, it has been most useful. I will keep an eye on your blog for further useful information.</p>
<p>Anna</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Nick</title>
		<link>http://www.mackerelmedia.co.uk/blog/the-official-death-of-keywords/comment-page-1/#comment-297</link>
		<dc:creator>Nick</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 24 Sep 2009 21:47:04 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.mackerelmedia.co.uk/?p=799#comment-297</guid>
		<description>Hello Anna and thanks for another comment.
According to Google the meta-keywords aren&#039;t used at all in ranking so there really is no point in using them.
You may find that other smaller search engines use them as a signal, but given the importance of Google in the market, we take our lead from them.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hello Anna and thanks for another comment.<br />
According to Google the meta-keywords aren&#8217;t used at all in ranking so there really is no point in using them.<br />
You may find that other smaller search engines use them as a signal, but given the importance of Google in the market, we take our lead from them.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Anna Green (web design)</title>
		<link>http://www.mackerelmedia.co.uk/blog/the-official-death-of-keywords/comment-page-1/#comment-296</link>
		<dc:creator>Anna Green (web design)</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 24 Sep 2009 08:04:27 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.mackerelmedia.co.uk/?p=799#comment-296</guid>
		<description>Hello

I have heard talk of the meta descriptions not being of importance anymore for a while now. However is it still not of use to have that extra space where key words can be present? To back up any keyword rich text you may have. Or are the meta keywords discounted altogether and not even see by Google anymore?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hello</p>
<p>I have heard talk of the meta descriptions not being of importance anymore for a while now. However is it still not of use to have that extra space where key words can be present? To back up any keyword rich text you may have. Or are the meta keywords discounted altogether and not even see by Google anymore?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
