Titles? That is for the user. Sitemaps? Actually they don't matter as long as your content is linked to internally. They can be produced trivially anyways if you really feel the need, but Google finds all my pages. Optimizing flash pages? That sounds like frowned upon injection. You should not change the way you write for a search engine. Have anchor text that represents what you are linking to? Come on, thats how it should be regardless. The best thing you can have is backlinks - which good content/interesting sites should naturally develop.
I don't know of a single thing you should do to optimize your site for a search engine. edit: If you are downmodding me be because this is incorrect, speak up.
This article is clearly garbage though.
Do you just not like the term "SEO"? Would you prefer "user experience consultant"?
My point is, there's a gap that skilled SEO people fill, regardless of semantics or the notion that optimization is inherent in a properly built site.
BTW, there's plenty to optimizing Flash sites that don't involve frowned upon methods. Yes, much of it is also about user experience.
I have to come down on the side of "SEO is bullshit", even though the article in question was mostly content free. It's not that there's nothing to "SEO", just that there's not enough to justify it being a "career". The whole thing smells fishy to me, and I think that the market for it will eventually implode due to all the snake oil being sold. That or the structure will change radically as people who are honest and know their stuff start charging in a different way - perhaps something like getting money for training rather than working directly on a site.
Genuine designers/UI/user experience people are a different breed entirely, who know about making a site nice for people. That's not what "SEO Professionals" sell, though, generally.
Another few disjointed thoughts from my flu-ridden head:
* In terms of comparative advantage, if the thing you are relatively best at is attempting to fiddle with search engine results, as compared to, say, programming, or user interface work, or design work... what's that say?
* ... I had another one a few minutes ago, but my headache got the better of me. Oh, here it is: can't most of this stuff be automated somehow? That would be a legitimate business, creating tools that help people get things right.
I agree with you here, but I don't think I said anything related to people who perform 'SEO'. I am talking about the general notion that is perpetuated that you should modify your site to 'improve SEO'. No, you should create a better user experience by conforming to standards and as a side effect search engines use these as markers.
Inbound links, for example, play a huge role in ranking–but are completely external to the site's user experience.
Not true 'tall. I'll speak up. Here are a few SEO things that don't effect user experience positively, but do help SEO:
1) Meta descriptions (unless you're counting the SERP as your user experience) 2) Avoiding AJAX to expose more content and increase spiderability 3) optimizing anchor text for internal links to match the target keywords you get from thorough keyword research 4) systematically building backlinks with good anchor text. Yes, they "naturally develop". So what? If I spend 40 hours a week working on accelerating this in a non-sleezy way, which of our businesses is going to naturally develop faster? 5) Flat site organization, minimizing # of clicks to content pages (MIGHT benefit users, but not necessarily) 6) Tons of cross-linking on detail pages (again, MIGHT benefit users...) 7) SEO optimized title tags, header tags, etc. Is the best markup/text for users ALWAYS the best for SEO? 8) Keyword in domain name (vacuum-cleaner-house.com is better than suckit.com for SEO-- is it for the user or the brand?) 9) Age of the site (a "used/established" domain name) might be better for SEO 10) Keyword research. Understanding not only what people search for, but WHICH PHRASES ARE COMPETITIVE. You might sell shoes online, but learn that the search phrase "shoes" is locked up tightly-- and referring to it as "footwear" gives you business-critical traffic because you can get on Page 1 of the (less searched for) phrase.
I could go on.
Yes, valid/well structured sites give you an SEO head-start, but there's more to it: - Properly structured browser titles matter - The way you write matters - Sitemaps matter - Optimizing Flash-based sites/pages is important because there are a lot of them - Links matter ... A LOT
There is a valid need for honest, skilled SEO professionals. The fact that there are so many bogus ones simply underscores this. Businesses on the web simply need to be educated on when and how to find a good one, when not to use one, and what they can DIY.
I'm sorry, but this post doesn't show much "intellectual honesty".