From Theory To SEO To Theory

Over the past few months I have come across comments from SEO bloggers and conference panelists that seek to put some distance between the commenters and theory. That is, some SEOs now go out of their way (in different contexts) to tell people, “We engage in practical SEO, not theoretical SEO”.

I infer from these comments that people are trying to imply that they are providing true search engine optimization. A couple of comments that caught my intention went more along the lines of “we don’t focus on theory – we offer you value through keyword analysis, link-building, on-page optimization, metrics analysis, etc.”

I’m not aware of anyone selling their SEO services on the basis of theory (there would be more theorists running around if there were any money to be made in this field). Nonetheless, you cannot divorce the fundamentals from the theory. In other words, without the theory there are no fundamentals.

Theory is not about making up hypotheses and trying to prove them correct (or incorrect). Theory attempts to explain what is going on based on observations. A theory may be correct or incorrect, but it’s nothing more than an explanation. Technically, the only difference between a theory and a myth is that the theory is based on formal or structured observation and analysis whereas the myth is based on informal or unstructured observation and analysis.

There is a sliding scale of formative processes between the two extremes of completely rigid observation/analysis (formal logic) and completely fluid informal observation/analysis (collective belief). Collective belief may be right or wrong. When an idea is popularized or idealized in the popular imagination it doesn’t necessarily lose any of its original value or veracity, but it may accumulate veneers of additional information.

Collective belief is not always wrong any more than formal logic is always right. So what led me to share all these observations? Other than the fact that I thought there might be an angle in talking about how some SEOs are trying to distance themselves from theory, Ryan Caldwell caught my attention with a list of 10 quality indicators for SEOs. I don’t necessarily agree with every point in the list but his premise is interesting.

Suppose we apply that list to every SEO in the industry? Some SEOs may score 10 for 10 against the list and some may score 0 for 10. A whole lot of people will fall somewhere in the middle.

Caldwell opens his article with a discussion of the Sorites Paradox (the “heap” paradox), which asks the question “When does a heap become a heap, or when does a heap stop being a heap?” More precisely, the question may be stated as “is there a threshold point or boundary which separates heaps (of things) from non-heaps (of the same things)?”

Philosophers have struggled with the question for thousands of years and a number of possible solutions have been proposed, but none of them are universally satisfying.

The problem is rooted in the conflict or incompatibility between analog and digital measurement. Digital representations of analog value systems, no matter how miniscule the distances between their data points, invariably omit some of the value of the analog systems. Sound engineers have struggled with this problem for years. So have meteorologists (when does it become too cold outside?) and many other scientists and engineers in a lot of fields (how close is the nearest star and why is it so far away?).

When you try to map an analog value to a digital metric, you must sacrifice some of the signal you’re tracking — and that makes it hard to define boundary points.

Analog signals also tend to occur in waves and curves. I’m not talking about sound waves (although they are one example) but rather data waves and curves. The classic bell-shaped curve, where the bulk of your data falls in the middle between two extremes (that may be either finite or infinite), is an example of an analog signal.

Calculus was developed to help us understand analog values. What is the surface area of a circle? How much graph space is covered by the area beneath the line produced by the function Fn(x) = 45q / e³ – q? What is the total volume of a shrinking ice cube from the time it begins to melt until it is no longer ice?

If you have studied Trigonometry you have studied analog signals. The insanity of trying to measure things on a number line that were never imagined for number lines has driven many students to curse their teachers and the mothers who bore them.

Ryan Caldwell got caught up in the technical details of a particular optimization plan and realized, after finding no consensus on whether he should submit a site to Yahoo!’s directory, that there is no definitive right or wrong answer to the question. The definitive answer, based on my own participation in thousands of SEO forum discussions through the years, seems to be it depends (on criteria unique to your situation).

There is an idealized collective checklist of expectations about what constitutes good search engine optimization behavior. Few if any people will ever hit every point on that (vaguely defined) collective checklist, but Ryan’s point seems to be that the more we aim to complete that checklist for each project, the more satisfying our optimization efforts will be. It’s not about hitting the mark every time but simply getting close to it.

Not because checking off items will guarantee search referral success, but rather because we can at least measure ourselves in some hybrid analog/digital way to help us stay focused on the tasks at hand.

We don’t have to know where the threshold (between good SEO and bad SEO) is as long as we are well to the right side of it when people evaluate us (or our sites).

That’s the theory that SEO is built on.

That’s how most people strive to do their SEO.

And that’s the theory that explains the SEO process.

In summation, I don’t really think it’s a good idea to try to distance yourself from the theory. You don’t have to be a theorist to be a good SEO. You don’t have to try to explain every little process to be competent in the field. You just have to know that the basics and fundamental concepts are based on solid collective experience.

If anyone asks whether there is any science or theory behind the search optimization process, you can say, “Yes.” Just understand you’ll never be able to say exactly how much science and theory goes into it. And at this stage in our industry’s evolution, I don’t think we need any more detailed measurement than that.

But that’s just my opinion.