seo research Archives • Aaron Weiss

There’s a good reason why this blog post’s featured image says something very negative. I need it to be unquestionably unique because it’s a test.

Almost a year ago, I came across a Chrome extension called Project Naptha which allows you to highlight and extract text from an image. I was floored by the possibility. Then I saw that SnagIt from TechSmith – my go-to screen capture software – also was now able to grab text from a screenshot.

Surely if a Chrome extension and a screen capture program could read and extract text from an image, Google should be able to as well. Right?

History and Context

Knowing what has come before gives a clue on what to expect in the future. Below are some technologies that have been reasonably within the consumer’s hands in the last few decades.

Optical Character Recognition (OCR)

First, we already know there is some precedent for this. Optical character recognition (OCR) is a technology found in many consumer-level scanners and software. This allows you to scan a document and have the text extracted to a word processing program. However, the source needed to be printed text, and the fonts could not vary widely. Additionally, accuracy wasn’t high, requiring review and cleanup.

Text Verification

You might be familiar with Google’s reCAPTCHA tests to validate human input and deter SPAM and automated form submissions. Every time a user successfully passed validation, it helped Google’s own OCR software to become smarter. Having a human recognize words or phrases that the OCR software couldn’t, increased the accuracy of the software. This helped Google capture the entire New York Times archive.

Image Verification

More recently, Recaptcha now has us picking out buses, cars, chimneys, store fronts, bridges, etc. This version of Recaptcha is called No CAPTCHA, reCAPTCHA reduces the friction from used frustration in entering the wrong text. Instead, the user simply clicks on one or more images that match the requested image. Here, Google is now increasing it’s image recognition software, which increase it’s image search capabilities and Street View.

Mobile Check Cashing

Cashing your Grandma’s birthday check has never been easier thanks to mobile check cashing. Take a picture of the back and front of your check and boom, money in your account. This is just an instance of OCR benefiting consumers.

Image to Chart

Microsoft Excel’s mobile app now has the capability of capturing data from a picture of a chart and importing it to an spreadsheet. This feature is in beta, and the reviewed on Lifehacker states it’s not perfect.

Research

So we know that there are precedents for such software, but can Google actually read, understand, and leverage text within images in it’s search results?

Google has stated that it’s bots and index cannot read images, but SEO Roundtable explains Google does have a patent that can read text in images. So they state they have the technology, just they aren’t using in a certain fashion.

Hold on there for a second.

Some quick Googling can provide some more insight. There are many articles explaining that evidence suggests that they can and do, and might have for some time:

The Method

Can I replicate these findings? I’m gonna try. That is how you discover new SEO research. Therefore, the blog post featured image in this post has something that I would not normally write about myself in order to have something unique.

To be clear, the text in the image will not appear anywhere else. This includes the filename, ALT text, embedded data, etc. It will only appear as text in the image. My WordPress installation, like many, will generate a few variant images for specific use-cases (.i.e. thumbnails, etc.) so there may be a few different versions that are found and indexed, but I’m uncertain which version will rank, although I believe that primary featured image will.

I’m going to give it about 3 months before I report back my findings. I feel that, since this website is still pretty new in the eyes of Google, I’m sure that the algorithm is still sorting out where this website belongs.

Have you read a new article showing new SEO research about why and how a new SEO strategy or trick can boost your rankings? Might want to re-consider those results and conclusions.

SEO is not an exact science. Search engines are applications developed by humans with a monetary profit motive, and therefore, cannot truly be a viable platform for subjective tests. This post will describe why many articles about studies and tests regarding SEO may not be what they seem.

To clarify, this article will not be shitting on keyword research, competitor analysis, link analysis, and other research that is performed for SEO campaigns and strategies. Instead, this article describe why those who are sharing a new “trick,” maybe either be disingenuous or out-right wrong. To double-down on my thesis: You should even be mindful of what you read on this website. I too could be wrong.

Lots of “SEO Research” is Anecdotal Evidence

Deep within the thinly veiled spam, the Black Hat World community will occasionally have an article describing how a user was able to boost their website’s rankings with various tricks. You could replace that forum with many others or any other dime-a-dozen SEO agencies out there. The issue with articles like these are the motives behind these posts are suspect.

First, there is no honor among thieves. I’m not going to say that all users publishing their findings have ill intentions. However, your vibe attracts your tribe. I have little trust in any community that boasts itself has a black hat or even a black-hack collective.

“Evidence” can also be manufactured. Are these users willing to provide access to their analytics and data? Can it be replicated? I’ll get into that more later.

Lastly, these results can be fleeting and short-term. Search engine algorithms are updated constantly, and the technologies behind them evolve.

Scientific Method Is Inapplicable to SEO Research

In order for one to make a conclusion regarding an observation, the test should be have a process that can be replicated. In short, the age-old Scientific Method would need to be applied:

The scientific method is an empirical method of acquiring knowledge that has characterized the development of science since at least the 17th century. It involves careful observation, applying rigorous skepticism about what is observed, given that cognitive assumptions can distort how one interprets the observation. It involves formulating hypotheses, via induction, based on such observations; experimental and measurement-based testing of deductions drawn from the hypotheses; and refinement (or elimination) of the hypotheses based on the experimental findings. These are principles of the scientific method, as distinguished from a definitive series of steps applicable to all scientific enterprises.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_method

Since duplicate websites are already considered low-quality, that immediately rules out SEO research.

Additionally, algorithms have updates with minor and major changes throughout the year, both announced and unannounced. This makes it nearly impossible to produce a controlled environment.

Different Industries Have Different SERPs

Ask Google a question about “the best pizza near me” and “what’s this thing on my foot”, the search engine result pages (SERP) will look vastly different. In short, what works for a Dentistry website looking to improve their visibility will differ from a beauty blogger.

Consider your industry and the intent of the user. SEO “tricks” that worked for one industry are not always viable for your industry.

User Experience

User intent, personalization, and localization are factors. Whether the user is logged into the search engine’s platform, searched for the query before, and where they are located geographically all have factors on a what is displayed in a SERP.

This is where search gets tricky, a website owner might feel as if their efforts are geared toward how the results appear on their own computer.

A search for “the best Pizza near me” will ideally give the user in Tampa, Florida a result closer to Tampa, Florida, than, say, Chicago. However, a search for “best Chicago style pizza near me” from someone in a North Tampa should ideally provide a narrower search as the amount of pizza stores diminish as you move further away from Tampa’s downtown. Although, I’d like to think such a search would lead to a 404 – file not found error – because Chicago-style pizza is trash.

Conclusion

The common advice is pretty simple: be careful what you read. Information is widely available, but just as widely inaccurate.

Foundational SEO strategies such as optimizing meta descriptions, page titles, writing unique and emotion-rich content with keywords, are among the most important aspects.

If you’re ever unsure about an article, pay attention to the urgency of their writing. A wise writer will be cautious and disclose caveats to their process. A fool will make groundless observations.

Can Google Read Images?