On the Folly of SEO

My notes don’t rank well on Google because they aren’t optimized. My titles are too short, my paragraphs too long, and I don’t use subheadings. I deliberately avoid keyword placement. It’s not that I don’t want people to find my writing—I do. But I also want it to be worth finding.

Search Engine Optimization (SEO) originated in the mid-1990s with the rise of early search engines like Yahoo and AltaVista. Initially, it relied on simple tactics such as keyword stuffing and basic metadata adjustments. As search engines evolved and Google emerged in 1998, search algorithms became more sophisticated, emphasizing relevance and quality, which drove SEO to become more systemic and strategic. Today, SEO is a well-developed, multi-billion-dollar industry central to digital marketing, encompassing algorithm-driven ranking factors, search intent analysis, content optimization, link building, and technical enhancements.

With regard to long-form online written content, optimization typically works in two overlapping spheres. One is platform-specific—writing on platforms like Medium, Substack, and LinkedIn Articles is optimized for their algorithmic feeds; writing on news and media sites is optimized to outperform other content on those sites. The other context is SEO, which is optimization for the Google search ecosystem, and to a lesser degree, other search engines. This kind of optimization applies to any writing that targets search traffic. It is mainly designed to maximize rank on search results pages and match user search intent.

---

A large share of online content is now shaped by optimization practices, leading us to associate online writing with clear, structured, and highly readable text designed for search visibility. This form of writing favors simplicity and linear organization, which often limits stylistic complexity, layered meaning, and distinctive expression in favor of accessibility and search performance. In other words, qualities like voice individuality, nuance, and unconventional styling are discouraged by platforms and search engines, making them less common in optimization-driven contexts.

For the informed writer, there is a clear choice here. Either simplify your writing, make it more generic, break it into short sentences and short paragraphs with clear subheadings, and incorporate keywords and phrases that people search for, or maintain your unique voice, style, and complexity. Choose the former and lose your individuality; choose the latter, and you may find yourself speaking to an empty room.

The rise of AI is making things worse. SEO goals are shifting from maximizing rankings in search results to being a trusted source that the AI model cites when synthesizing answers for users. The key here is extractability, structuring content into clear, bite-sized chunks that the AI can easily pull into a summary. This discourages long-form narratives in favor of content that can be easily divided into well-defined information snippets—such as bulleted lists.

To be fair, modern SEO, particularly AI-driven optimization, sometimes called GEO (Generative Engine Optimization), does aim to identify and prioritize original ideas from authoritative, trustworthy sources. But at the same time, it incentivizes the presentation and delivery of these ideas in a simple, easily dissected, highly readable format. Form cannot be separated from content; the structure of a written piece determines the weight and flow of its meaning. Try to deliver a serious dissertation in the form of a listicle, and you will likely end up with satire.

Now, let’s talk about the kind of traffic search engines bring. Most people who use Google are looking for quick answers. 60% of Google searches result in zero clicks, evidence that the searchers found what they were looking for in the Google search results themselves. These are users who were possibly looking for a weather forecast, currency conversion, or a factual inquiry and found a quick answer in a knowledge panel, an AI Overview, or a featured snippet. Half of those who do click a search result do so within 9 seconds of searching. 91% of Google searchers don’t reach the bottom of the first page of search results; fewer than half of one percent click on to the second page. These are not people searching for in-depth commentary or analysis. Even if they do stumble upon my writing, they are less likely to find real interest in it. The kind of traffic I am most interested in tends to come from curated sources, word of mouth, and social media, i.e., people following human recommendations. These readers take a genuine interest in my work, read all the way through, and follow it. If you have reached this note through Google and are still reading, know that you are a valued exception.

---

It seems that many people who write and publish online accept SEO practices as the mandatory rulebook of online writing. Platforms like WordPress come with built-in SEO features and robust, popular SEO plug-ins that analyze your text, provide an SEO score, and walk you through how to optimize it, i.e., make it conform to the latest standards set by Google. Substack and Medium are rife with SEO advice. Apparently, the only way to escape SEO is to publish your writing in a book. However, nowadays, even the ecosystem around books is becoming SEO-driven. 65% of new books are published in e-book format. Introductions, sample chapters, occasionally entire books, are published online, behind paywalls or in open access. They are subject to rankings and are being used to train AI models, sometimes aggressively. Avoiding SEO means deliberately resisting over-optimization. Some readability improvements are beneficial, and there is no reason to intentionally write in an obscure manner. However, when you find yourself writing for an algorithm instead of writing for human readers, it is time to ask whether, in writing to be found, you are losing the things that make your writing worth finding.

The real question we should ask ourselves is whether we truly want to surrender to the commodification of our thoughts. Writing for a search engine or an AI model is the antithesis of creative individualism. It is the act of packaging ideas in standardized, generic containers for easy consumption. This is especially objectionable in an age of artificially generated content, in which original, even unconventional, expression should be encouraged and valued.

67 · 1 · Apr. 14, 2026 · Culture, Markets