WebAIM - Web Accessibility In Mind

E-mail List Archives

Re: MSc Research - Does making a Website Accessible compromise Search Engine Optimisation?

for

From: Karlen Communications
Date: Nov 18, 2009 5:40AM

I think you should also consider whether the site has paid for access or
click through/ads on other pages. I'm not sure, but can't you also pay to
improve your ranking?

This sounds like a great project. It also sounds like a lot of filtering to
find a usable answer. Have fun!

Cheers, Karen


-----Original Message-----
From: <EMAIL REMOVED>
[mailto: <EMAIL REMOVED> ] On Behalf Of Karl Groves
Sent: November-18-09 6:38 AM
To: 'WebAIM Discussion List'
Subject: Re: [WebAIM] MSc Research - Does making a Website Accessible
compromise Search Engine Optimisation?

Richard,

One thing to be cautious of, when processing the results of your survey, is
that while your respondents may certainly be well informed on the topic of
accessibility they may not actually be qualified to speak on the topic of
SEO. I think that there are a lot of rather outdated opinions out there
among the web accessibility community regarding the SEO benefits of an
accessible site. There was a time when I could put up a site that was
"search engine friendly" and I would dominate my target keywords in a matter
of weeks. As the internet has grown and as Google PageRank has become
more important in the ranking of results, having a "search engine friendly"
website is really a secondary (or even tertiary) concern.

At the risk of getting people on this list up in arms, I'd say that if one's
sole goal was SEO/ SEM, their time & effort would be best spent on keyword
density and inbound links. The objective-proof-in-the-pudding on this
would be to perform an A/B test using identical content. Spend x amount of
hours ensuring the site is accessible for one version and spend that same
amount of hours generating high quality inbound links[1]. I would argue
that organic traffic from Google will be higher on the version where your
time was spent on building inbound links - and that the payoff for this
level of effort will be immediate. The Google patent itself will back me up
here.

1 - There is one caveat to this: If a site is produced in a way that puts up
barriers to search bots, then there will be obvious tangible benefits to
accessibility. I once did a site fix on a client's site that broke every
rule in the book. It was frames-based. It had a flash-based menu bar across
the top and a JavaScript "fly-out" menu on the left. They also had scores of
articles that were actually scans of articles written about them in
magazines. I took the site out of frames, fixed the navigation, added a site
map, got their content into actual HTML and made all the other sensible SEO
changes you can think of. When I started with that client, they had an Alexa
ranking of 1,450,000+. They went to just under 450,000 in under 3 months.
As well, on Google, Yahoo, and MSN searches previous to the changes made,
their website was ranked on the 3rd+ page. Now they are on the top 10 for
all of their target keywords and are often in the top 3.



Karl


> -----Original Message-----
> From: <EMAIL REMOVED> [mailto:webaim-forum-
> <EMAIL REMOVED> ] On Behalf Of Richard Evans
> Sent: Wednesday, November 18, 2009 5:04 AM
> To: Webaim
> Subject: Re: [WebAIM] MSc Research - Does making a Website Accessible
> compromise Search Engine Optimisation?
>
>
> Hi Allen,Thanks very much for your comments in relation to my survey.
> As part of the project I am considering technical issues, but as Margit
> later commented, this poll is aimed at trying to get a flavour of
> current peer opinions on both activities and their compatibility.
> All the best,Richard
> > Date: Tue, 17 Nov 2009 19:46:46 -0500
> > From: <EMAIL REMOVED>
> > To: <EMAIL REMOVED>
> > Subject: Re: [WebAIM] MSc Research - Does making a Website Accessible
> compromise Search Engine Optimisation?
> >
> > I think Richard can ask his questions anyway he feels appropriate for
> > HIS dissertation. :O)
> >
> > cheers
> >
> > Geof
> >
> > At 03:13 PM 11/17/2009, you wrote:
> > >I think the opinion poll is not intended to answer a question (i.e.,
> whether
> > >accessibility compromises search engine ranking), but it is meant to
> provide
> > >insight into how different people approach this topic.
> > >
> > >If your opinion is that accessible web content increases search
> optimization
> > >then that's one of many possible responses to the poll. Others would
> > >probably argue from the opposite end and point out that paid SEO
> services
> > >often try to trick search engines by abusing the title attribute and
> hiding
> > >text on a page and so on. Taking these misleading elements out of
> a page
> > >or making them work as intended (e.g. title attributes that focus on
> true
> > >semantic value and not their techniqual potential to sneak in
> keywords)
> > >would certainly increase accessiblity, but potentially negatively
> affect SE
> > >ranking. The author of the opinion poll simply wants to get a feel
> for these
> > >different points of view, thus the name opinion poll.
> > >
> > >On Tue, Nov 17, 2009 at 1:41 PM, Hoffman, Allen
> < <EMAIL REMOVED> >wrote:
> > >
> > > > I'd like to know how an opinion poll for this topic would
> possibly be
> > > > useful as knowledge to answer this technical question. If you
> examine
> > > > how search optimization functions technically, then explore the
> usual
> > > > variations on correctly coded Web content for accessibility, you
> can
> > > > determine if the requirements have technical conflicts. Just
> going by
> > > > opinions and experiences is certainly not a real answer to this
> > > > provocative question. My opinion is that making Web content
> accessible
> > > > increases search optimization since text and semantic
> relationships are
> > > > programmatically determinable from accessible, structured
> content, and
> > > > may not be from unstructured, not intentionally coded content.
> In fact,
> > > > by intentionally encoding semantic meanings and text attributes
> in to
> > > > content, the overall information content generally rises,
> increasing
> > > > search systems ability to correctly find and classify content,
> exactly
> > > > the opposite to your question.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > A more interesting question is if there are technical conflicts
> between
> > > > search optimization and accessibility requirements, what are
> they, and
> > > > how can they more effectively be reconciled, or how best can a
> Web
> > > > content producer encode for best results for both sets of
> requirements.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > From: Richard Evans [mailto: <EMAIL REMOVED> ]
> > > > Sent: Tuesday, November 17, 2009 5:09 AM
> > > > To: Webaim
> > > > Subject: [WebAIM] MSc Research - Does making a Website Accessible
> > > > compromise Search Engine Optimisation?
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Dear Webaim List Member,
> > > >
> > > > I am currently completing a Research Dissertation into Web
> Accessibility
> > > > and Search Engine Optimisation for an MSc Degree in E-commerce at
> > > > Swansea Metropolitan University - University of Wales.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > The basis of the research is that it is vital to make websites
> > > > accessible to as wide a range of users as possible, but do
> > > > "accessibility" design actions conflict with those actions taken
> to
> > > > optimise websites so that they reach the top of search engine
> ranking
> > > > pages (SERPS)?
> > > >
> > > > I have already written directly to a number of you and attached
> an MS
> > > > Word questionnaire - unfortunately, this presented some
> accessibility
> > > > issues.
> > > >
> > > > Therefore, I have now placed the questionnaire on SurveyMonkey
> and have
> > > > hopefully overcome these issues.
> > > >
> > > > I would be grateful if anyone who has not already received/
> replied to
> > > > my survey could provide input to the project by completing the
> online
> > > > questionnaire which can be accessed at the following address:
> > > >
> > > >
> http://www.surveymonkey.com/s.aspx?sm=S5SSS22U01WZbOj7Lm3mxw_3d_3d
> > > >
> > > > The questionnaire is designed specifically to allow me to reach
> > > > objective conclusions on the above question and I trust that you
> will
> > > > feel able to assist me with this important research.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > I would like to thank you in anticipation for your contribution
> and I
> > > > would be grateful to receive your completed questionnaire on
> > > > SurveyMonkey by Friday 20 November.
> > > >
> > > > With Best Regards,
> > > > Richard Evans
> > > >