SEO vs SEO 2: Top 15 Differences
What is SEO 2? You may not even know what SEO is yet! I don’t blame you!
Yet here we are talking about the next level of SEO – or as I refer to it SEO 2!
How do SEO and SEO 2 differ actually? Do they at all? Yes, they do!
How does modern SEO differ from old school SEO?
These are the 15 most important differences between SEO and SEO 2!
In other words this is old school and modern SEO or Search Engine Optimization compared.
Yes, SEO has been around since at least 1997 when Adam Audette coined the term. That’s 25+ years!
| SEO | SEO 2 |
| Link building as in manually adding them by submitting static websites to directories, link exchange, paying for links | attracting links organically by blogging, outstanding content, establishing relationships |
| Optimization for search engines. Example: repetitive page titles focusing solely on keywords | Optimization for people. Example: enticing post headlines |
| Competition: you compete with others to be #1 in Google | Cooperation: you cooperate with each other sharing fellow bloggers’ posts on social media, you link out to them |
| Barter: you give me a link and only then I will give you one | Giving: I link you regardless whether you link back, but in many cases you will, more than once |
| Hiding: we’re not practicing SEO, we can’t show our client list publicly, generic SEO company, NDA | Being open: Welcome our new client, we are proud to work together with them, Rand Fishkin, Brian Dean, see the case study |
| keywords | context |
| optimization for links, rankings and traffic | optimization for visitors and engagement of real people |
| clicks, page views, visits | conversions, ROI, branding, customer retention |
| self-promotion | popularization |
| Main traffic sources: Google, Yahoo, MSN | Main traffic sources: Google, Facebook, Pinterest, communities, blogs, direct traffic |
| one way communication | dialog, conversation |
| top down, corporations and old media decide what succeeds | bottom up, wisdom of crowds determines true popularity via participation |
| undemocratic, who pays most is on top | democratic, who responds to popular demand succeeds |
| 50% automated, half of the SEO tasks can be done by SEO software | 10% automated, most SEO 2 tasks are about content and interaction |
| technocratic (as in measuring traffic) | emotional (as in nourishing brand evangelists) |
So here are the changes that took place during the last quarter of a century.
Some of them started out as predictions. Now they are common sense!
Still not sure what SEO or SEO 2 means?
Please also check out these 11 SEO 2 examples from all over the Web.
Also please take a look at my POPULAR framework alias the 7 pillars of SEO 2!
You don’t recognize the “SEO 2” moniker? No problem.
Most people nowadays refer to it as “social SEO” or simply SEO.
Yet the new type of SEO I cherish and preach here since 2007 is different!
At the end of the day modern social SEO is often about
- Sharing
- Engagement
- Outreach
in case you still wonder.
Wow, Tad…. What an amazing post!! You explained the differences between the two perfectly. You never cease to amaze me.
Shana
Who looks for dishwashers on StumbleUpon, niche social news sites or blogs? What’s a kick ass post title for dishwashers? Don’t even know if creating the most helpful user-desired information on dishwashers would get you many links back. I picked dishwashers at random.
Seo 2.0 is good for some sorts of sites, not for others.
Thanks Shana I just blushed!
DFP: You might not be aware of my earlier posts on this topic. This one just shows the differences. What both have in common are the good Google rankings ;-)
Great Post Tad! People definitely need such short and succinct explanations to understand the evolution of SEO — Dev
Tad, great post. I enjoyed it a lot, I wonder if a lot of the old school SEO guys are realizing they need to get involved with social media and quick.
Tad,
Thanks for catering to our demands for the post. I like your point about cooperation, that’s key.
Great post, outlines the differences very clearly. I guess I knew most of the points, but I’d never stopped and thought about it.
Is a great post – no doubt!
I would say SEO and SM should be treated as different strategies which overlap, not a direct comparison.
[…] onreact.com ist ein interessanter Vergleich zwischen SEO und “SEO 2.0″ aufgelistet – oder, wie man es auch nennen k
On target and shows the appeal of Social Media.
[…] Con el auge de las redes sociales, que en los medios de comunicación se lo conoce como web 2.0, y con los cambios que Google ha ido introducido en sus algoritmos en este año para valorar páginas webs, ahora ya no se puede hablar solamente de SEO (Search Engine Optimization) en el sentido clásico. Es decir, concentrarse en palabras claves, metatags, conseguir una gran cantidad de enlaces entrantes, etc. Justamente SEO 2.0 ha una lista muy interesante donde compara 15 diferencias del SEO y SEO 2.0. […]
[…] familiarizando e sendo simpático à terminologia. Segue abaixo minha versão da tabela retirada de onreact mostrando as principais diferenças entre as técnicas SEO atuais e as técnicas SEO 2.0: SEO X […]
I like the idea that we are making the Web a better place by practicing SEO 2.0.
All of the older SEO stuff seems to just throw problems up (and ratfinks), it made me think the Web was being abused/misused.
Also, I have to comment in response to Design for Profit.
Personally, SEO 2.0 is about being creative and fun. Just take a look at what blendtec did. They make blenders.
Like dishwashers, it doesn’t sound too exciting – but – throw a little SEO 2.0 and what do you get?
Born from creativity, fun to watch, made for others, and has the direct effect of attracting traffic – and lots of it.
Check out Will it Blend?
Wow-hoo! I got a real feeling burning with your wonderful info here. Thanks for the unique post you’ve shared. Very informative, indeed.
Thank you Lidija and Michael but I don’t believe you two! You are too biased as you like me too much! ;-)
The Blender example is a great one. It’s SEO 2.0 par excellamce but I’m afraid most people will argue that the accurate term is “viral marketing” here.
Digital Imageer: Are you a robot? You sound like one!
Awesome, Tad. I love the last one the best.
[…] artykułu zainspirował mnie tekst pod tytułem: SEO vs SEO 2.0 z bloga seo2.0.onreact.com należącego do wspomnianego Tadeusza Szewczyka, który jak widzę […]
Great article. I stumbled it, but I was not the first obviously.
However, I wonder why you say that SEO1.0 is 50%automated and SEO2.0 is only 10% automated. I fail to see it.
Thanks for clarifying.
Olivier.
Very detailed comparisons. To do SEO 2.0 you definately need to have more enthusiasm and be more creative.
Hi Tad, thanks for this great list ! :-D
But I didn’t understand the “top down – bottom up” thing…
@ Olivier : 10% means to me that you have to rely more on users and content writers of web pages, both of which aren’t automated factors
SEO vs SEO 2.0: Top 15 Differences…
SEO vs SEO 2.0: Top 15 Differences…
You didn’t mention Digg :)
Great Post.
Yep, I’m biased. ;)
Sure, blendtec is viral marketing – but boy, it just shows you that in every aspect of the Web, if you think about what others want instead of thinking of yourself first – which I think is what SEO 2.0 is all about – good stuff happens…
Olivier: For conventional SEo you can use all kinds of tools and programming skills. In SEO 2.0 you mostly need social skills. You can’t automate those.
Anna: In SEO 1.0 the big companies with the big budgets ruled. With blogging, social media and SEO 2.0 the average user decides who gets noticed.
Nacho: I didn’t on purpose. Funny name ;-)
Lidija: right :-)
[…] Siempre he sabido de la existencia del SEO (Search Engine Optimization, mejoras en el Posicionamiento en Buscadores), pero hasta este momento me entero de la existencia del SEO 2.0. En el Blog SEO 2.0 he encontrado una lista de 15 diferencias entre el SEO y el el SEO 2.0. […]
[…] Fonte Se voc
Hi. If I get it right – SEO 2.0 isn’t SEO at all. You say it’s no longer about Search Engine Optimisation to get more traffic from Search Engines – it’s about having good quality articles and lots of friends on social sites. While I can’t agree more that it’s better way to bring targeted traffic – but I’m afraid most website owners (especially crappy eshops without any real warestores or supply lines) won’t be very keen to invest in writing content and building network. Most of the people would like to be top in Google – fast and cheap. Any way – nice post, Cheers:)
[…] diferencias entre SEO y SEO2.0 → […]
Thanks a lot. That is a good ressource for explaining what to do in the future with SEO to my clients.
How about a list with arguments for convincing clients to change their behaviour?
Robert, these aspcets are just the differences. Of course SEO and SEO 2.0 have also things in common beside the acronym.
Gero, good idea! I try to develop my argument step by step. Also SEO 2.0 is not only abou social media. SMO is a set of practices and methods within SEO 2.0
Most notably you wil still rank in Google with SEO 2.0 or even rank better than before.
Great post tad, keep em comming =)
[…] blog and its content is not search engine […]
[…] In conventional SEO selfishness rules: It’s Selfish Ego Onanism in many cases like saying “Hey, I’m on Digg and got 50.000 visitors”. I’m guilty of that myself sometimes even as a SEO 2.0 but what’s the difference between obsolete SEO and SEO of the 2nd generation? It’s the mindset and thus the approach to the community. In SEO you are plainly selfish, “you against the rest of the world”, in SEO 2.0 you are social, “you with others to reach common goals”. […]
I am a first time webmaster, so i will skip the SEO and go straight to SEO 2.0 hehe.
[…] Estrategias SEO 2.0 Cambia, todo cambia. Las estrategias que se utilizaban hace unos años para el posicionamiento en buscadores, como repetir palabras o poner metatags, han cambiado una y otra vez. Seo 2.0 hace una lista actualizada de las nuevas prácticas de SEO. La traducción al español es de Max Glaser […]
[…] pojawiło się wiele rozważań na temat SEO 2.0. Temat został dostrzeżony najpierw poruszył go Tadeusz Szewczyk, później Cezary Lech. Chociaż artykuły cenne i poniekąd słuszne, uważam, że obaj chcą […]
So is this the start of SEOcial networking?
I think this is rather a pointless post. There really is no difference in SEO and SEO2 apart from social networking help. Getting articles added to delicious or some other bookmarking sites etc. Follow the Google webmaster rules and you cant go too far wrong. Other thing to remember get as many quality links as yuo can to the most important pages of your site. Oh and no follow links on lower level pages of your site.
Nice Post…..
[…] Источник: SEO 2.0 Blog […]
“Most of the people would like to be top in Google – fast and cheap…” :) ..aint that the truth these days?
it’s become the latest “must-have” social status symbol
Dear Tad,
Could you please explain me more exactly, what does the 12th mean?
Thank you in advance
Of course Alexey! Well, you are probably familiar with “top down” (undemocratic) governements. Here the power is within the hands of some leaders who decide behind closed doors what’s good and what’s not.
The same applies to Google and search in SEO 1.0: You never know what “Google wants” exactly and what’s good optimization one day is spam on the next day.
Also large companies are better off just by interlinking their own properties while the average guy can’t compete.
In SEO 2.0 the people decide “bottom up” what becomes popular and what not. It’s a democratic process. It has many flaws like the mobs on Digg and Reddit which will silence everybody writing about SEO e.g. but you also have fascists in real democracies.
So for instance link building is not begging top high pagerank sites to get a link but motivating dozens or hundreds of small time webmasters and social media users to support your cause.
[…] Источник: SEO 2.0 Blog […]
The 15 differences you generalized are really impressive.
And I will make full use of the advantages of SEO2.0 in my blog.
[…] search engine optimizers are still stuck in the past. They practice SEO 1.0 or less. These SEOs fail to adapt to the new Web 2.0 media environment and attempt to apply rules […]
[…] SEO 2.0 | SEO vs SEO 2.0: Top 15 Differences […]
Exactly my opinion! To summarize it, i think: SEO 2.0 = Writing content for users, not for search engines
10% automated? What d you mean?
Brilliant!
Concise and clear.
[…] O post original, em inglês: http://seo2.0.onreact.com/seo-vs-seo-20-top-15-differences […]
This is cutting edge, next level SEO Stuff right here.
Why oh why is there NO mention of content on the list? There ought to be a big mention about content. SEO 2.0 is, I think, largely about content and decent SEO work is about ensuring there is decent content at the site. Without decent content, the site’s relevance and resourcefulness is in question, and then I don’t see why it deserves to get good placement with the search engines. I want sites with good content.
td, in fact you are right, I should add this or better revamp and republish this post.
Wow! I didn’t know, that there’s something like SEO 2.0. It sounds like “Traffic Marketing” – your actions are performed for users, not for spiders. Very interesting article, but I hope SEO will be still efective, because I’m not good at writing “kick ass” articles.
In both ways of SEO there is all about contet (am I right?) but the difference is in how you ‘sell’ this content to people and – by which channels and exact methods. This comparition shows how the SEO 2.0 is more human than average SEO, more pleasant and better. Well done.
I’ll be sure to let all my SEO friends know about this page. One thing is for sure, SEO nowadays is much harder than it used to be. If you have an old site, good for you, but promoting a new site is quite hard.
[…] divulgado y comentado últimamente. La fuente, como casi siempre, ha sido una pagina web en ingles (http://seo2.0.onreact.com/seo-vs-seo-20-top-15-differences).Espero sea de vuestro […]
social ways on seo2.0 have big sense!
Regarding getting excited about dishwashers you could certainly promote special offers, vouchers or run competitions. For example completions will drive traffic from prize fining websites! Or have I got it wrong?
[…] en vrouwen zijn en blijven altijd leuk. Maar ik kwam ook op interessante artikeltjes over web2.0, SEO, crowd sourcing etc. terecht. De nieuwe termen vliegen je om de […]
I can’t agree more that it’s better way to bring targeted traffic – but I’m afraid most website owners (especially crappy eshops without any real warestores or supply lines) won’t be very keen to invest in writing content and building network.
thanks for the tips, these are really useful.
i think that sites should always be built for visitors and optimised for people. search engines should be less important and less emphasis should be given to them
Hi,
Great Insights,
You have nicely describe about seo and seo 2.0.
Thanks for sharing these ideas.
I didn’t really think of SEO as “Optimization for links”, other comparisons are spot on. Especially the “Dmoz vs Delicious” one.
valuable for seo guys!!!!
Nice post which shows the difference between old and new seo tactics perfectly. But there are lots of SEO companies there says that we provide best SEO services, while using same old methods. How can it be possible? I think they are not flexible enough to accept new things, and in this way they are harming customers, themselves and SEO community.
Tad, its really a very nice comparison between seo and seo 2.0. I am using both techniques for the promotion of my sites :P
I found this to be a really useful article, I’d never thought of SEO 2.0 and the differences between what used to happen and what we should be doing are incredibly subtle. This provided some great insight into the differences.
i just read this… WOW Tad! when SEO 3.0 begins to define itself (and we are not that many years away) i know you’ll be one to lay it out so perfectly. great job!
– Jason Nadaf
[…] if it thought you were trying to game the system. Nowadays SEO, or rather an amended version of it (SEO 2.0), has come out into the open and is even actively encouraged by […]
well this means SEO is getting more and more competitive by the likes of your detailed post analysis.
Just like web where now we have web 2.0.
I think Seo 3.0 is just around the corner won’t you agree also?
[…] de la onreact au reusit deja una mai buna asa ca ii voi copia putin pana voi coace niste articole proprii seo […]
about the post you are right, but you forget to mention facebook and viral marketing techniques. also i like to know what do you think about the 3.0.
Most point are very true. Maybe it goes back to hiding for several reasons.
Hmm, I never know if the concept called SEO2.0 is exist. Although I agree that we should build online business focus on visitors first. We also need to ensure that we get top search engine position.
Great comparison list, the most important one is that websites should not be built for one-way communication anymore!
Great comparison and put simply without all the technical details. But I’d say, maybe a mix of both worlds can be effective?
Thanks for keeping it short and sweet. What did you mean by top down and bottom up though?
Hey Mr. Orange,
I’ve explained here already:
http://seo2.0.onreact.com/seo-vs-seo-20-top-15-differences#comment-20522
First of All thanks for having very useful information about SEO and SEO 2.0 on your blog. As I read almost your all articles. Goodluck
Why, what will become of all the SEO practioners and SE monsters out there who earn a living by SEO when all of humanity adapts this new marketing paradigm called SEO 2.0? Looks like I’m going to have to find a new line of work :(
Hey Mike,
it’s not that hard to actually adapt. As SEO practicioners are versatile types most of them will be able to do so. Also the goal is still the same, just the way to get there changes. Btw. I think companies like BlueGlass are currently hiring.
Hi,
great comparison list.
The most important one is that websites should not be built for one-way communication anymore!
Whilst I hope SEO does move into the less spammy version you describe, I do wonder how “Getting links, via blogging, writing pillar content, creating link bait, socializing” can be done by the SEO, rather than having to be done by the client (who presumably understands their industry to be able to productively add to and create blogs, rather than just randomly adding “good post”, as seems to be the norm at the moment)
Cool, Tad…. Really an tremendous post!!
Abhishek:
‘No bot-like “Thank you” comments’ please. In case you “like” my post do it on Facebook or StumbleUpon or retweet them.
Tad….I think I’ll pass on Blue Grass, but thanks for the tip ;)!
You are right about SEO types being pretty versitile. I am sold brother believe me! I think the world in general would be a better place with this practice and I will do my best to tout and use SEO 2.0 as much as I can!
Great post! SEO 2.0 is here to stay! I think it is great, and complements the original SEO very well!
SEO has been changed a lot in recent years, now a days I don’t think lot of webmaster depend upon manually adding links instead they use automation for building links. May be that’s why they fail to rank their pages because Google is too sensitive to catch these spammy links.
Good research, some really good differences and you always comes with something like this. Very innovative.
That is one of the better comparison charts I have seen to summarize the main areas of difference from SEO to SEO 2.0. It is a paradigm shift.
Wow…a lot of food for thought in that post. I’m going to have to take a step back and look at some of what I do as I think I’m only at SEO 1.4 right about now!
I like the DMOZ – Delicious face-off. With Delicious, I can self-leverage, get it in the “directory” and let people find it and link it if they so choose. With DMOZ, I had to be accepted by the group of reviewers at DMOZ. That was garbage.
I think it is a right time to shift from SEO to SEO 2.0 to get traffic from social media networks. Fabulous comparison.
I like how obviously differences between SEO and SEO 2.0 are described. Those wanted to get their website more SEO friendly have to choose SEO 2.0.
Wow.. It amazes me how different seo and seo2.0 really is, some ideas I have already implemented onto my blog could be consider as seo2.0. I must try some of the ideas of 2.0 quick. A great 2 thumbs up for this post. Thanks
how interesting an image you use to differentiate both. today SEO is like 2.0. Nice work
[…] owner of the Blog SEO 2.0 (Tad), says it much better than me for sure. His post “SEO vs. SEO 2.0: Top 15 Differences” explains the fundamental differences between SEO and SEO 2.0 best. Is he being […]
Did my best to try and explain this on my blog :) If you think I need to change something, let me know !
SEO vs. SEO 2.0
Hey Mike: Such a great explanation. You understood SEO 2.0 quite well. Now I know some people really get what I mean.
You made one mistake though, I didn’t coin the phrase SEO 2.0, many people used it before me as early as 2005 but I popularized the term and I attempted to define it.
Before there were many definitions but most people only seemed to guess what it could be.
It’s not always easy to convince clients that they need to publish great/linkable content. Sometimes they don’t want to be involved and prefer you to just “get on with it”. Others are scared of giving their trade secrets away to competitors.
In the 2nd scenario I always stress that Joe Public generally has no where near the same level of knowledge as the client or their competitors and the client can still give gems of information away that will be valuable to the reader without giving away any “tricks”.
Great comparison! I have been pondering and occasionally writing about the convergence of SEO and social media, bookmarking, etc for a while and this is awesome. Sure, there are still some useful old school SEO methods, but thankfully the spammy, shady, soulless side of SEO is losing its relevance.
Awesome post Tad. I am shocked that how I missed that very post. I am agree with you that SEO 2.0 is more natural and so for visitors perspective. You have explained the topic like even a kid can understand easily. It’s more about social media marketing. SEO 2.0 enables targeted and qualified traffic and so business.
Hi there,
Lol. It sounds like SEO 2.0 is about getting back to the original spirit of the web. Not the first time something old has been re-presented as something new. : )
Thanks!
Pete @ Pure FX
web 2.0 social networking i feel is less productive, alsthough it was good to see them directly compared.
I prefer to work with version 2.0 SEO. More white hat!
This is a total new word to me. The sharing is very details. I think SEO 2.0 methods has been applying when the social media had popularized. Is this only the term to describe the method?
It’s great to see information presented in this way, side by side. It makes it so much easier to read and digest. Great post with really good information about SEO and SEO 2.0. Thanks for sharing.
The evolution of SEO summed up perfectly. It’s great to see how things are changing since you first wrote this, particularly with social media.
[…] ha gustado leer esta semana SEO vs SEO 2.0, una curiosa comparativa sobre cómo ha cambiado la profesión. 100% de […]
Nice list of differences between the two. I would just want to ask that how do you see web 2.0 sites for the long term?
Some really good stuff here and I agree with most of it – I think the key factor is Google’s getting so much smarter at picking up spammy sites and automated SEO. But I think for regular businesses, Google will still be the first driver of traffic. I can’t see the day that when you’re looking for a company to provide a product or service, you’d go to facebook.
Great list Tad, Oh how times change, you don’t think about it unless you see it written down in front of your eyes. Cheers
Over several months, I created backlinks to my site. At first, Facebook was the major source of referred traffic. As my site gained traction in Google search results, Google became the dominant source of traffic. I think it is important to use social media (Facebook, Twitter) to bring traffic when there is no Google visibility. Then work the SEO to become visible and relevant in Google search results.
2.0 – thats the way of thinking.
Great post Tad, great illustration for people to look at who are stuck in old ways. 5 years ahead of the game here – still some people are stuck in the mindset of using automated tools for social interaction.
It is amazing how long most of the SEO industry has taken to catch on to this.
I mean, you originally wrote this in 2007/8 – yet if you look at the majority of SEO blogs today, they are writing similar things as if it is all a new discovery they just made.
Can it be so different????
It’s no wonder all the same search is designed for people, not for cars …
Thanks for the article!
Really interesting comparison there. I like the thought that that the people will need to rethink their old black-hat SEO strategies, and start to conduct their marketing activities with more integrity – just like people used to do in the good old days before the internet :)
Thanks for the insight!
Great comparison! I tried to convince my clients two years ago we should focus on valuable content on their sites. Content that will be read and desired by internauts. Unfortunately they don’t listen to me ;-) but now it turns out this was/is great SEO strategy. Currently I combine SEO and SEO 2.0 in my all strategies and it works perfectly. Thank you for this article!
[…] http://seo2.0.onreact.com/seo-vs-seo-20-top-15-differences […]
Excellent side-by-side comparison! Interesting take on if I link to you you are more than likely to link back :)
Ok, but I am using both techniques for the promotion of my sites.
Thank you!
Good Stuff!
Its interesting to look at some of what you listed. I would say that these days directory listings are a great source for getting links. I been around the industry long enough to figure out that the industry sometimes goes back to older methods that sometimes weren’t as effective anymore. I literally laughed out loud when I read the hiding the client list part. I do show a few of my clients as a common courtesy if they ask however I usually deflect that statement because I do rank on the first page for a few different cities so I use that as my “proof”. A few of my clients I never would show but I do feel the majority of the industry hides their client list too much. Great read for sure!
The comparison of Main Traffic from years ago: Google,Yahoo & MSn to what there is available today is light-years of changes. Yoyube, Facebook, LInkedIn………it’s innumerable practically.
Hey Dan!
Thank you for the feedback!
What does “it’s innumerable practically.” mean actually?
I’m not sure I get your point.
Thank you in advance, tad
Showing dfferences clearly. Thanks for sharing the comparisson.
2.0 – thats the way of thinking.
thanks i was confused about seo2.0 . thanks for brief
The SEO 2.0 is the future but my team mixed old seo and seo 2.0. We are working for people and still have linked many sites. This is really effective and stable practice. Cheers!
Hey, but it’s not that SEO 2 is really a natural development of SEO assumptions? Because you know develop, algorithm changes, these things? It is too dynamic an industry to be divided into SEO and SEO 2. Because now we have SEO 1.5 and maybe SEO 1.3 or SEO 1.8.
[…] telah mengalami evolusi yang signifikan dari generasi awalnya hingga saat ini. Perbedaan antara SEO 1.0 dan SEO 2.0 mencerminkan perkembangan teknologi, perubahan dalam perilaku pengguna, dan penekanan yang berbeda […]