Steve Rubel is a pretty well known dude. As a popular blogger and PR firm Edelman's EVP of digital strategy, if Steve does something radical on the web, people will take notice. And that's exactly what happened when
he decided to trade the two blogs he'd maintained over several years for a new Tumblr blog
, deleting the hundreds of his blog posts he'd created along the way.
That's right -- he deleted all of the content he'd created and started with a clean slate. Um...what?
Discussing his reasoning for his use of the scorched earth policy in a recent blog post, Steve said he moved his digital presence to Tumblr because, with Google's increasing focus on social signals, it was the best social platform available. So why delete his old posts, too? Steve says it's because he wanted to centralize his web presence, and he didn't want to confuse Google with multiple sources of content and a scattered web presence.
Only time will tell whether this was the right move for Steve, but he still admits that while the move to Tumblr and adoption of the scorched earth policy might make sense for thought leaders' personal brands, it might not be the best strategy for businesses. Here's why...
Why Deleting Blog Posts Is Stupid for Businesses
1. You'll lose all that coveted SEO juice you built. If you're a regular blogger, you like understand and value the SEO benefits of blogging frequently. You know that every new blog post you create is more real estate for your business to rank in search engines, and that each new piece of content affords you some extra SEO juice for the keywords you want to get found for. And if you've been blogging for a while, chances are you are actually experiencing those benefits and generating more traffic to your website. Chances are, you also remember all of the time and hard work you put in to get your blog where it is now. If the thought of losing all of that previous SEO authority you've generated and starting from scratch scares the bejesus out of you, congratulations -- you're a sane human being.
2. You'll sacrifice a whole lot of inbound link love. While blogging is a great way to boost your on-page SEO, off-page SEO and inbound links to the content you create are even more powerful influencers for your website's authority and its ability to rank in search engines. By deleting your blog posts, any inbound links you've generated will disappear. If someone linked to an article on your blog in their own blog post, that link will essentially be worthless (it won't work!), and it will ultimately affect referral traffic to your website.
3. You'll miss out on valuable lead generation opportunities. Steve argues that being in a social platform like Tumblr is more important than having old blog posts, but this is definitely not a best practice for businesses. Old content, or " evergreen content " as we like to call it at HubSpot, can be a valuable lead generation tool. In fact, HubSpot still generates leads today from blog posts we published three years ago. Some of these posts have risen to the top of search engine results and are found via searches every day. Each article includes a call-to-action that leads visitors to a landing page with a lead generation form, and we still collect leads from those pages. Just because content is evergreen, doesn't mean it's still not useful or that it can't continue to generate leads for your business .
4. You'll be retroactively wasting a lot of time (and burning a library of resources!). Particularly in the world of inbound marketing, time and brainpower is money. While blogging may not cost anything besides the platform or tools you've built your blog on, creating, nurturing, and maintaining a successful blog still takes a lot of valuable time and effort. Think about all the time you spent creating the content that has built your blog up to what it is today. Throwing away all that content would be like throwing away money and burning a library of resources. What a waste!
5. You'll limit social media mentions and content sharing. Ironically, Steve made his move to Tumblr in an effort to be more social, but let's face it, the content people share in social media isn't always brand new. Just like businesses can still generate leads from evergreen content, they can also generate traffic and get found in social media through the sharing of that content, too. Eliminating old content altogether will severely limit social sharing and negatively affect social media referral traffic to your website.
In Steve's case, his dramatic change is only affecting his personal brand, not a business. And because he is already so well known, he can afford to take the risk. That said, for small businesses that are trying to make a name for themselves and beat out their competitors on the web, such a radical move would be ridiculous.
What do you think of Steve's adoption of the scorched earth policy?
Photo Credit: Sharat Ganapati
chris windley 8:22 AM on June 10, 2011
Brave man !! all that work ...... like throwing all your notebooks in the fire ;-)
James Koole 8:25 AM on June 10, 2011
A couple of other have noted it as well, but if Steve Rubel thought deleting the content was no big deal, then it speaks to the value he gave to his own content. Apparently it was worthless in his eyes.
Janet Aronica 8:31 AM on June 10, 2011
The other day, I was writing a blog post, and I went to link to a blog post of Steve's and realized his stuff was gone so I couldn't .... :( #Justsayin ...
Mike Weber 8:55 AM on June 10, 2011
Rather than deleting old content I have found it very useful to update and repurpose the posts. It's easy to do in Wordpress by viewing the last page of your posts and updating the content or even as simple as just changing the post date to bring it to the top. It's the same methodology as making the same FB post at different times of day to refresh the position on your friend's wall.
Dan Tyre 8:56 AM on June 10, 2011
would he have been better off migrating the blog articles rather than deleting them?
Jonathon Frampton 10:31 AM on June 10, 2011
WOW! I can understand wanting a fresh start, and it sounds like Steve is in a place (branding wise) that he can do whatever he wants. Totally agree this is not for us SMBs though, I need all the content I can get!
Mike Ogden 10:46 AM on June 10, 2011
Nice piece!
Info Note 1:03 PM on June 10, 2011
Remember that Google itself recommended to remove content that was not performing since it affects the whole site.
For more info, refer to Google Panda update.
Stephanie 1:34 PM on June 10, 2011
I can't imagine deleting an entire blog while keeping the business itself going. It's one thing to delete an old post that you have a specific reason to no long want on your site, but the whole thing? I'd like to think my blog posts have more value than that.
Susie Blackmon 1:45 PM on June 10, 2011
I can't help but believe in Mr. Rubel's decision as, in his case, it was certainly an educated decision.
Girl Friday 2:20 PM on June 10, 2011
@Mike Weber: I do the same thing for a restaurant blog I built for a client. They have a Daily Special that I post every morning. Rather than create brand new posts and have hundreds of outdated posts, I simply edit the posts (I do have a Monday, Tuesday, Wednesday, etc. post set up for each day of the week) and re-publish. I also change the post date so that that day's special comes to the top. I'm hoping this strategy is not hurting me SEO-wise,but it was the only option I could think of. I also post the specials on the client's Facebook page with links back; I include recipes, videos, other content to create interest on Facebook for the website...hope it's working! I can't imagine deleting an entire blog, either!
Tom Collins 2:26 PM on June 10, 2011
Wow! What made Steve (or HubSpot) think the decision was all about the impact on him?
Deleting that content instantly broke all the links other bloggers have created to Steve's posts over the years. One of the major bits of blog etiquette baked into the concept of a "permalink" is that others can depend on the links they create staying valid.
As Janet Aronica mentions, he also deprived her of the opportunity to draw on her knowledge of great content to cite in her post. (Maybe it's still there in the Internet Archive?)
But potentially the biggest impact on Steve's social network could be the fact that he's presumably deleted all the comments and trackbacks that others have created on his platform over the years.
Seems to me, Steve, that you lost sight of the "social" part of social media in making this choice.
Jamie 2:48 PM on June 10, 2011
Just because a decision is "educated" doesn't mean it is "smart."
#facepalm
Richard 2:57 PM on June 10, 2011
Susie Blackmon said it best, but I think "un" should be added to her use of the word of "educated" with her comment.
A grave oversite to the integrity
of any long-term archival benefits. But then, maybe he doesn't want to leave a trial after he's gone? Who could blame him? Clearly it was not worth all that much to him, but to the many others - how selfish - but his choice.
Info Note 3:05 PM on June 10, 2011
Posting again just to add one thing.
What type of information did his blog have? If it was about gadgets for e.g. I doubt a gadget that is 5 years old will still generate any traffic for him.
Steve Rubel 3:58 PM on June 10, 2011
Good, thoughtful comments. A few thoughts...
First, on SEO value. The dirty little secret, with respect to team Hubspot, is that a lot of the Google traffic that comes to individual blogs is truly low value. It's a lot of people quickly looking for content and then moving on. That's less true for business blogs since they are funnels to the mother ship, which has a much higher return.
Second, with respect to the community, I understand "the code" but how is this different than when a restaurant closes and moves to a new location?
Finally, the big point here is that - in a world with too much content and not enough time - no site can be an island anymore. That's why companies are spending billions to build their brands on Facebook and Twitter and focusing less on-domain. The same holds true for me on Tumblr because of the way the media uses the platform. If you don't evolve, you die.
You may all disagree and I respect that but I stand by my choice.
steve
Brent Logan 4:08 PM on June 10, 2011
If you focus on the now, deleting the past is no big deal. Yesterday's news is trash. Throw it out.
On the other hand, whatever you say could be of value in the future, if only for understanding how people talked about and adopted new technology.
Throwing it away is a tragedy.
AainaA 7:07 PM on June 10, 2011
After 60 months of blogging, I decided to do the same. Sometimes, it is WISE to let go of the past and start anew.
Rajeev 10:43 PM on June 11, 2011
hard to comment when two sides have a valid point... have also torched a lot of work in the past - either on an impulse or for what seemed to be practical reasons at that point in time... but now when i look back, have lost a lot of good content cos of that
hopefully Steve has a backup of everything :)
Don Martelli 6:21 PM on June 12, 2011
I'd disgree. Yes, he's missing out on SEO juice but by virtue of writing this post, you've proven why he doesn't need is old content. His reputation is carrying him. People read his stuff because of the brand he's build for himself. He's living in the present based on the hard work he put in to build his reputation. That'll carry him. he doesn't need the old stuff anymore. At the end of the day, that's what this is all about: reputations.
Karen 7:14 PM on June 12, 2011
Not only does this post tout the benefits of not deleting a post, but it certainly makes one realize the benefits of putting up a blog in the first place. Thanks for the great overview.
Tamal Anwar Chowdhury 5:03 AM on June 13, 2011
Hi I feel it's Steve's choice to delete the whole blog; I wouldn't do it for my blog. My blog has 300+ posts now that gets 300+ search hits every single day, if I delete it, I will lose the juice. This is why I pay money to host the content and take backups.
One big reason why people would remove their past work is they are not comfortable with it, just go with it, that was your past self through time capsule.
Koozai Mike 12:04 PM on June 15, 2011
When I thought Squidoo was the next big thing I moved lots of my blog posts to the platform. Then along came the Panda update and suddenly the best place for my blog posts was once again Wordpress. You can't always assume one platform is better than the other - scorched Earth policy or not.
Michael Martinez 1:31 PM on June 15, 2011
"You'll lose all that coveted SEO juice you built."
"You'll sacrifice a whole lot of inbound link love."
"You'll limit social media mentions and content sharing."
It's a rare blog post that generates social media mentions 3 years after it's written.
These are horrible reasons to keep old content on the Web. If you're done with it you're DONE with it. There is no need to tie an albatross around your neck because you're afraid of losing "SEO juice".
He made a business decision. His SEO strategy must support that decision.
That makes him more right and you more wrong on these points.
"You'll miss out on valuable lead generation opportunities."
Maybe -- but today's media environment is so dynamic that generating leads off of old content may not be as productive as it seems attractive.
"Throwing away all that content would be like throwing away money and burning a library of resources."
There is more monetizable value in one contemporary relevant blog post that touches 1 million people than there is in 1 million old blog posts that no one cares about any more.
Ralph Vugts 2:42 AM on June 16, 2011
I hope he setup some 301's!!!
Vegar 5:40 AM on June 16, 2011
Having a clean start is always nice, but I do not really understand the reasoning behind this action.
Alex Holliman 5:57 AM on June 16, 2011
301's would definately be the way forward :)