Google’s Answer on Ideal Content Length
Google’s John Mueller answered a question on LinkedIn about the ideal content length for performing well on Google. Participants in the discussion pressed for specifics, raised concerns about being SERP-blocked by Reddit, and suggested that Search Console should offer content feedback. Mueller’s response challenged SEOs to rethink their approach to content.
What’s The Best Length Of Content For SEO?
The Search Engine Journal is reporting that the underlying problem is the question itself which is asking what should be done in order to make better content for Google, which is the opposite of what Google’s algorithms are set up to identify.
Yet, there is some merit to the question because maybe some people are new to publishing and don’t really understand what the best length is for content. On the other hand, publishing content that’s so long that it veers off topic is a mistake that many people, regardless of experience level, commonly make.
This is the question asked:
“Hi John, is there an ideal content length that performs better on Google search results? Should we focus on creating longer, in-depth articles, or can short-form content rank just as well if it’s concise and valuable?”
There are a lot of ideas about how to make content so it’s understandable if someone is confused about it.
Google’s John Mueller answered the question and it was a good answer. However others had concerns about the ranking choices that Google makes that can block good content from ranking.
Mueller answered:
“There is no universally ideal content length. Focus on bringing unique value to the web overall, which doesn’t mean just adding more words.”
Mueller’s suggestion to focus on bringing “unique value” with published content is good advice. Adding unique value doesn’t necessarily mean adding more images, more content, less content, more graphs, or step-by-steps. All of those things could be helpful but only if it’s relevant to a user and their query.
Yet, as someone pointed out in that discussion, a site with good content could still lose out in the SERPs due to Google’s “preference” for showing sites like Reddit.
A person with the user name SEOBot _ wrote that Google should offer more information and feedback about what “unique value” content means in relation to their own content. While it might seem strange that a publisher is unclear about what constitutes “unique value” content, the question calls attention to the confusion that some publishers feel about how sites are ranked by Google.
This is the follow up question asked by that person:
“…do you have any example of content on the website that follows this and is able to get the Google love. Focus on bringing unique value to the web overall, which doesn’t mean just adding more words.” This is a very vague and unrealistic ask if the GSC can start pinpointing this content/section as not making any sense or not adding any value.
We really eager to learn and know how the content is actually generating value to the web. If all the value is being generated by top publishers/brands then what exactly the small publishers/niche site owners suppose to write to survive?”
Mueller responded:
“SEOBot _ If you’re looking for a mechanical recipe for how to make something useful, that will be futile – that’s just not how it works, neither online nor offline. When you think about the real-world businesses near you that are doing well, do you primarily think about which numbers they focus on, or do you think about the products / services that they provide?”
What Mueller seems to be saying is that focusing on site visitors, not Google, is the way to understand what “unique value” content is.
I recently presented at a search marketing conference on the topic of seven things publishers can focus on to improve their content. There’s a lot to say about optimizing content but really, publishers and SEOs can get pretty far by taking Mueller’s advice about thinking about how you would approach selling to people in an actual store or focusing on writing for people (like I’m doing right now).
Others joined the conversation to essentially ask the same thing, looking for specifics on what Google is looking for in content. Mueller had said all there is to say about it.
Mueller advised:
“If you count the words in best seller books, average the count, and then write the same number of words in your own book, will it become a best seller? If you make a phone that has the same dimensions as a popular smartphone, will you sell as many as they do? I love spreadsheets, but numbers aren’t everything. “
What are We to Take from this Exchange?
If everything a person has learned about SEO centers around strategies for keywords, worrying about “entities” and whether articles are interlinked with the right anchor text then what Mueller is saying will sound confusing. We’ve been doing SEO for over 20 years and remember a time where SEO was about creating content and links for Google. But this isn’t 2004, it’s 2024 and we’ve reached a time with SEO where it’s increasingly not about creating content for Google.
