Conclusive proof that content quality doesn't matter

turdface

Elite Member
Joined
Sep 3, 2010
Messages
1,555
Reaction score
304
Last night I needed to separate the audio from an .mp4 file and save it in an .mp3. I wanted to do this in media player so I googled save mp4 to mp3 in media player.

Result number 2 was from ehow that should not seem strange because they rank for most searches.

Read the page yourself:

http://www.ehow.com/how_6707506_convert-mp3-windows-media-player.html

The article says to rename the file as the other type. Like it actually says to open the file, erase the 4, and change it to a 3. As if this isn't incorrect enought, there's a different paragraph at the bottom that says even though you've converted it to an mp3 it will still play the videop. Terrible content.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Aty
How the hell can Google know if the content if full of shit? (if it was possible ehow wouldn't even exist, since 99% of the website is garbage)
The article rank well because its content is relevant to your search.
 
Terrible content from a human perspective, but it looks manually hand written and it's unique. Which is all that matters. Google doesn't seem to care about bad advice.

-ThopHayt
 
This shit is hilarious. Looks like Google is way behind from showing quality and relevant content all the time.
 
How the hell can Google know if the content if full of shit? (if it was possible ehow wouldn't even exist, since 99% of the website is garbage)
The article rank well because its content is relevant to your search.

Exactly. No algorithm can tell if your content is right or wrong, only what it is about. The way Google tells if the content is useful or not is by seeing if people link to it or not.
 
Your search query is just bad because your English isn't fine.
 
It's not proof that content quality doesn't matter.

It's proof that a website that has an authoritative link profile, and is branded, can get away with poor quality content and still rank.

If it were only about the content, then average sites could rank like that -- but they can't.
 
You can rank just about anything, as long as it is now duplicate content detectable through copyscape, nowadays.
 
I always enjoy when "conclusive proof" is contested at length.
 
This is truly hilarious to SEOers!!!

Return to the “File” menu and choose “Save As.” When the “Save As” window opens, click into the box next to “File name” so that the cursor appears at the end of the file extension. Delete the “4” from the end of the extension and replace it with “3.”
 
It's not proof that content quality doesn't matter.

It's proof that a website that has an authoritative link profile, and is branded, can get away with poor quality content and still rank.

If it were only about the content, then average sites could rank like that -- but they can't.

Welcome back man! Haven't seen you're posts in awhile. I miss your old forum bot for the pagerank sculpting lol, was just thinking about that. Would probably still work great for link juiice.
 
you have to make full of research before you say content quality doesnt matter
 
You definitely got very valid result for your search query, which was how to save mp4 to mp3. Guys, check this out, if he wanted a better result, relevant to his intentions, I think the search query should have been, how to convert mp4 to mp3 or other similar terms.

Though content might be poorly written, but it does justify the old saying that says: garbage in, garbage out.
 
Is
How to Convert MP4 to MP3 in Windows Media Player

That hard to rank?
 
Back
Top