How can a writer write headlines that satisfy a search engine spider sees and a human reader? These two audiences may seem different, but are they in reality?
The search engine spider has no means of interpreting humor, sarcasm - and cannot draw out analogies. Whereas there is always a danger in writing that the human reader won't understand these nuances in the manner desired by the writer. There is a middle ground, or perhaps a strategy that works for both types of readers.
The New York Times writes about the "boring headlines" required for search engine optimization (SEO), in an April 9th column by Steve Lohr. However, I believe that the extra thinking that writers and editors must now go through for their web based publications delivers a better product for the readers; human or otherwise. Relevancy is the central pinnacle of SEO. If the headline reflects the article, then there is a strong relevancy. Word the headline with both fact and some level of promotion (attract the reader to dive in) makes for a better overall experience.
Then there is the strategy devised by editors, whereas the main web page has a promotional headline, yet the actual story is much closer to the point (factual). The human reader is motivated to click the story from the main page, whereas the spider picks up the actual story page.
Although this strategy is sound, perhaps there is more common ground. In one example cited in the New York Times article:
Another headline meant to lure the human reader: "Tulsa star: The life and career of much-loved 1960's singer." One click down: "Obituary: Gene Pitney."
The first headline has very little perceived relevancy, and the second is mundane and yet highly factual. A common ground exists for both readers. On line headlines need not be boring. For instance:
Gene Pitney, a Tulsa Star; The life and career of a much-loved 1960's singer.
At the least, the offline world is trying, as they recognize the power of on-line publishing and the need to produce their writing with relevancy.
Comments