A common strategy in SEO is creating long, detailed articles that are keyword optimized and cover topics thoroughly. I’ve been in SEO for almost two decades and have noticed a trend since 2018 where users seem to prefer quick, direct answers to their queries.
It seems like people are searching for questions and expecting fast, clear answers, which is why tools like ChatGPT are gaining traction for basic inquiries. From an SEO standpoint, long articles can still make sense, especially since Google now often highlights a short sentence as the answer to a query.
I’ve been applying this approach to our forum and seeing positive results. What are your thoughts on this?
Note: I get that this works well for queries typed into Google, but not every kind of search fits this pattern. Many seem to miss the questions their audience truly needs answers to.
People often skim through 1000+ word articles, so it helps to have clear headings and highlight key points. But if you condense all the important info into a short format, they’ll skim that too and either find what they need or leave. Having extra, well-organized content helps guide people to the information they want, plus it shows search engines that users are sticking around, which improves engagement scores.
Writing long-form content is still very valuable and can help your growth. People want a complete understanding of a topic, which is why long articles are useful. But the way content is presented matters most because readers typically scan the article first before deciding to dive in.
If you can meet this need, you’ll do well. But SEO is a slow process.
I use ChatGPT daily like everyone else, but I think it’s often overrated when it comes to providing in-depth info. For example, if I ask it about SEO, I’ll get a decent list of tips, but going to trusted sources like Moz gives me a much deeper understanding with explanations that ChatGPT lacks.
I used to write long sales letters, and people still read them. The key is making the content interesting and easy to follow.
At some point, people will get tired of AI-generated summaries. Right now it’s new and exciting, but deep, human-written content will always have a place because AI can’t match the depth and nuance of an expert’s work. That’s why some businesses are hiring copywriters again.
While AI is useful, it’s still not the best at providing rich, engaging content. If you compare AI-generated text with a human-written article, the human version is often more interesting. AI content will eventually blend in with ads—people will stop noticing it, and what will stand out is high-quality, human-created text.
@Isaac
I completely agree with you. Long-form content is still valuable. For instance, I’m working on a detailed article about building an online community. It’s a topic that needs depth and can’t be covered in just one or two sentences.
AI is a great tool, but until it can experience the real world like us, it won’t beat humans. If it ever does, we might have to meet up in a cave!
I’m curious about how you’re applying this in your case, JRK. You mentioned long articles, but Google highlights specific answers. Are you saying people should include one-sentence answers in their 1500-word posts, or that we don’t really need 1500 words?
@Colby
I think most of the comments are missing the point I wanted to make. Anyway, I’m using this by creating a QnA community for my niche, along with long-form content. The combination works well and helps me quickly build authority. DM me if you’d like to learn more about how it works. I don’t want to stray from the discussion here.
I agree with this trend. I’ve been working in SEO for almost 6 years and I’ve noticed the same thing. While long articles help with ranking and provide in-depth coverage, people seem to prefer quick, actionable answers. That’s why I think a mix of both works best: write thorough content to rank and then provide the answers readers are really looking for.