I don’t feel like going back to look up the standard right now, but the standard goes something like a page that is vital, then a page that is important, and so on to a page that is off topic. That would be the other end of the spectrum. To at most make a passing mention of, say, the election, and then try to pass it off as a page about the election. You need to mention the keywords/keyphrases often enough to signal that is the main focus of the page so that it can be rated as vital or important (Or whatever the terms are).

Furthermore, it would be poor copywriting to write about a topic, and barely ever mention the keywords. So, in summary. It’s a balance between garish overuse, and under usage, but the best way to determine the right keyword density is probably to just go with what feels right.

As for me, my natural style is to avoid vague words like “it” and “they” and as a result, my writing tends to be so dense that I actually go back and edit IN those vague references just to tone it down. I want to be sure that my message is concise, and I think that words like “it” and “they” can create confusion in the message.

Point #2 Search engines are designed to serve people. There are flaws, of course, but I get really tired of hearing “write for visitors, not search engines.” Write for both, because they are the same thing 95% of the time.

“Your main audience is not the search engines but your readers.” I agree with this very strongly. If you write for search engines, I think many people would be just glancing through as your post would probably not catch their attention. Ultimately this would bring less traffic.

That’s extremely important. This is really all about design, and good design is focused on the user!

Great comments, thanks!

It’s true that adding keywords to copy can dramatically increase rankings. We work with publisher sites doing exactly what you mentioned – and you are exactly right. It can make a huge difference. I certainly didn’t meant to imply that adding targeted keywords makes little or no impact….it really does.

However, I still maintain that targeting (and/or obsessing, as you mentioned) a particular density percentage isn’t useful. And for some people, they may not know *where* to place the keywords in their copy – instead, they focus on sticking them somewhere to fit a percentage. The end result is copy that doesn’t sound the best. I’m sure you’ve seen it too – it’s like good SEO copy gone bad.

However, when you take that pressure away and work with people on how to write good content and leverage keyword opportunities, they will naturally add keyphrases where they “fit” within the copy. The end result is often a more relevant (read: higher ranking) page that keeps the conversion and informational flow.

Awesome comment. Thanks so much!

Finding a good keyword density -is not- crap. I’ve spoke with and watched customers who had pages that did not rank, who turn around and optimize based on some density ranges. The engines revisit a page and boom, they rank. No additional content elsewhere on a site. No additional links. No additional anything.

I think that the better advice would be to not obsess about keyword density. There is not a “golden” number to hit. As you and others mention, conversions are key. Writing content that is compelling is key. While I don’t think we should be slaves to density numbers, they should be some where in the back of the mind when writing.

In the case of many newspapers… content that was published in their deadmedia version, is often re-written to take kw placement and other factors into consideration. The content is largely the same, the thrust of the information is largely the same, but the density is not. This does not guarantee an particular ranking but it can certainly have meaning to an engine when evaluating content for rankings. To say that KD is complete crap is to over simplify imho.

Yes, certainly research your keyphrases and include them within your copy. But don’t get hung up on a density percentage. It’ll just drive you nuts.