well actually many of us keeps on saying that content is the king. but a content can't be that much interesting if there's no spices included in the whole article. however, we can capture the attention of the readers if we create interesting title that will help to trigger the reader to read your whole content. just like what i did in this post. i do some contrast in the title to make you to checkout the whole entry of this post.
so in order to make people be interested in your published article, you need to think of very catchy title.
do you agree with what i am suggesting?
Certainly! But this idea is not new.
yeah i know, i just want to share my thoughts about content. maybe some of the freshman might appreciate this.
Completely agree :agree:
You can write the best article ever that it will be useless if nobody reads it... and good, descriptive (and, yes, catchy) title will help to get those readers coming your way.
I do insist on the "descriptive" side. You have to be careful. A title sets up certain expectations about the what's in the article and if people don't get what they expect you may find that readers may come... and leave as fast as lightning bolt
I don't know if I'd say title is the Queen. Maybe the title is the Joker. I'd probably say...
Content is King
Promotion/SEO is Queen
Jack is ...?
Joker is the Title
What would you put as the Jack in this case?
Sorry but anyone who puts SEO before the real content (title or not) that attracts visitors, is doing it wrong.
In what context is this being said?
I often find myself split on this as "catchiness" is not always good for SEO. A straight forward title may sometimes be dull, but it can reinforce the context of the content. On the other hand some clever pun might be cool, but could confuse SEs. Now, dont 'read'' me wrong here. Am a human , and if the content isnt both interesting and engrossing am bolting. However, most interesting things are on the web are found using search engines. It's a trade off.
so to juxtapose everything, an optimized, catchy title is the queen, and a keyword-rich, valuable and well-written content is the king.
How about if Content is King the Design is Queen? and Link is Ace?
Read more here:http://chrislema.com/if-content-is-king-then-design-is-queen/
A catchy title would be really nice. What I notice though is that writers would try to push it. They have this awesome catchy title yet it doesn't live up to what the article is all about. I just hope writers won't exaggerate just so people would click on their blog posts.
As with everything, there's a happy medium that needs to be found ... yes, the title needs to be something interesting and attention-grabbing, but it also needs to adequately describe the page contents. This thread is a good example – "Content is the king, title is the queen" sounds far more interesting than "Why title tags are important (but not quite as important as content)", but is also a good and accurate description of the discussion here. Sure there will always be people who over-promise and under-deliver, who go for outlandish titles that bear little relation to the dull and dreary content that follows, but these sites will quickly be seen for what they are ... and if they give people no reason to link to them then they won't be anywhere near the top of the SERPs, so it really doesn't matter what their <title> is.
I thought that when we spoke about titles we were not talking about elements. I don't considere the <title> element to be the queen at all.
@9dotstrategies; I don't consider design to be the queen although at least I can understand why some would. I would say that it takes a third place. For me content is always first and I consider the title to be part of the content
Well, If you take a look again, I did put Content as King and as someone did say, title is really part of the content. But I would still consider promotion/SEO more important in driving traffic than the titles you choose. This may just be because the title doesn't have the power to determine ongoing traffic but it can convince small percentages of people to read your page who otherwise may not. It's a factor for sure, but not a huge factor in my mind. It's easy to balance using keywords and still keeping it interesting as others have said.
Domain = Ace, title = king, h1 = queen, content = jack, links = 10, site usability/appeal = 9
SEO = Joker ...
Yes,content is always king.On site content influences user experience – bounce rate, time on site, conversion and also increases trust in your website and your company as a whole.
Well,I totally agree that Title plays a key role to open the door
The very strange thing about Google's indexing is that pages with irrelevant (and little) content, but with the keyword in title, description and h1 tag is index high up. I've never understood this...
As smart as the Google bot is, it is still doing some things wrong. That is one reason your quality is so very important, including the page description of your content, which is what Google will show to searchers if you have it. If you don't have a decent (or any) description, you are leaving your fate in the bot's hands (and it probably doesn't have hands!).
according to seomoz guys, we need to have this,
7 Ingredients of a Click Worthy Title
next page →