Banality of Bananas is not necessarily a bad thing..
January 23rd, 2007
Yes, please excuse the weird title of this post, but, having lived in North Queensland, I must say I think Bananas are Banal, and I don’t mean to misuse the usual meaning of the term banality there, so let’s define it.
I’m simply writing this to prove a point. Keywords, and their density, DO matter. Just like bananas, no matter how banal they may seem, are a source of nutrition and life to thousands.
In this article, I’m going to write about the banality of bananas. What is the banality of bananas? Well, bananas are a fruit, and banal is a word meaning drearily commonplace. So, the phrase the banality of bananas simply means that I’m arguing that bananas are the most banal fruit on the face of the earth.
If I were to write about banal bananas, and I had a PR rating of 0, I’d still rapidly beat other people with a PR of 4 that just happen to mention the words banal and bananas once or twice in their website. I might find myself competing with a few PR7 fruitshops, who knows, but since I’m obviously interested in the banality of bananas, I feel sure you’d agree that google is going to realise that the word banal is not particularly banal at all, especially when combined with the word banana.
So, our keyword density looks a bit like this for this particular post:-
The current top ranker for the term the banality of bananas has a keyword density like this:-
Even though this top ranker has a much higher PR than mine, and has better content, I feel bloody certain that within just a few days, you’ll find that Google identifies that I’m alot more interested in the banality of banaas than the free online dictionary is.
Once I achieve top ranking for the banality of bananas, I’ll write another page on this site that uses virtually the same text, but reduces the keyword density by adding additional fluff, and we’ll see which ranks better. My bet will be on this one.
All the best!
The Banal Banana
Hehe.. well, oops. It looks like this may have attracted the attention of Googlers! Please see below, a quote from Adam Lasnik (Googler) wrt my posts –
“John’s absolutely correct. “Write naturally.”
Our algorithms want to see something that’s a happy medium cleanly
Extreme A: Not listing relevant terms at all on the page.
Extreme B: Focusing on increasing keyword density to the point that
your English/Writing teacher would thwap you with a wooden ruler.
And I’ll let you in on a little algo secret: There is no single magic
number. People who say “The guaranteed optimal keyword density is
[x]%” would ideally meet the same fate from an angry English teacher.
Or Googler or Webmaster.
And lastly, let me respectfully (and pleadingly) reiterate one key
point: The fact that you *can* find sites that rank well for a
particular keyword engaging in “keyword stuffing” is NOT evidence that
such keyword stuffing is an effective SEO tool. I can also show you
many sites that use the letter “Q” exactly three times that also rank
well. And no, this is not an indication of a secret “jump the ‘q’
Thanks Adam, and please, please reinclude me..