Back in June, I stated in a post about defining mutually agreeable language, “It’s important for an agency and a client to understand each other’s language when discussing search engine optimization efforts.”

Though we all make slips in language, generally speaking, is there really such a thing as “naturally search engine friendly?”

A site with poor copy could be on a server free of problems, on a content management system that doesn’t generate session ID’s and parameters, but it still wouldn’t be naturally search engine friendly because the copy was poor.

A content management system that creates clean URLs is not “naturally search engine friendly” if it can’t pick and choose the right keywords to display in the URL (and why would you want a CMS that automates your titles? Yuck!)

A blog, frequently updated with great content and copywriting, sitting on the best blog engine could still be designed with the worst template for spidering by the search engines.

Is being “naturally search engine friendly,” something to aspire to? Shouldn’t our aspiration be to build our web presence for users?

Filed under: Agency, SEO on Friday, November 9th, 2007 by Jacob Wolfsheimer |
You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.