LSI and Article Writing

Yesterday an the author was encouraging his readers to consider LSI (Latent Semantic Indexing) when writing articles. *yawn*

In a 500 word article, he went on that you should repeat a key phrase approximately 15 times to get the LSI SEO advantage. *more yawning*

If you follow his advice, we will ban your account for keyword or keyphrase stuffing. Heck, we get jumpy seeing the same keyword or keyphrase more than 3-4 times in any article length. The funny thing is that he didn’t follow his own advice, probably because he knows it would create a spammy low-value garbage article that we’d have rejected.

Bottom line: Write for the end reader (instead of the search engines) and don’t keyword or keyphrase stuff your articles — as that’s a credibility buster.


Albert Hallado writes:

Hi Chris,

I agree with you Chris readers don’t want to read an article that don’t make sense and bunch of keyphrase stuffing anyways! also good job for implementing this. thanks’

Albert Hallado

Comment provided October 17, 2007 at 9:54 AM


John J. Alquist writes:

It’s hard to believe that coneheads who can’t write well, or will do anything for an extra ounce of SEO enhancement, pontificate in an obtuse, convoluted manner using terms like LSI.

Perhaps it’s this person’s writing skill which is latent or, better yet, not existent.

Comment provided October 17, 2007 at 9:55 AM



Wow… 15 times… is that even legible?

Comment provided October 17, 2007 at 10:58 AM


Carl Pruitt writes:

I don’t have the most experience at this, but I have never given any thought to keywords except in the title. I just write the rest of it however it spills out of me to make the point.

My profession (mortgages) just happens to be one of the most competitive in terms of keywords and searches but after writing just a few articles I find them coming up frequently when people do searches based on my local area just because the articles are in EzineArticles. Not trying to suck up, but I haven’t had the same experience with other article directories.

Comment provided October 17, 2007 at 11:13 AM



If you think about the top 10 or 15 words or phrases that are keywords for your niche, you can easily write articles that use each keyword only once or twice. This makes the articles more readable and natural sounding. The article needs to flow well or no one will read it through to the end.

Comment provided October 17, 2007 at 11:30 AM



Hi Chris!

I never care about the keywords when I write and almost all my articles are in Google’s first page if we type only two or three basic keywords because the content is very good.

In the beginning I even wondered: how can the robot know I write so well? How can it know the knowledge I’m giving is so precious?

The functionalism of the search engines is a mystery for me when I see an article somehow abstract, where the keywords rarely appear, in the first page, and sometimes even in the first paragraph.

I only observed the phenomenon, without being able to explain it due to lack of knowledge concerning this matter.

So, Google, Yahoo!, etc are not based on keywords as you imagine!
There is something else that counts more.

Chris, can you explain this phenomenon?

Comment provided October 17, 2007 at 12:03 PM


Ann L. writes:

Oddly, I was taught all ‘this stuff’ on keywords and how to use them correctly (certainly not in line with the LSI writer cited by Chris). Yet, searchers come to my articles by every other keyword and keyword phrase EXCEPT the ones I specified. Heck-I appeared at #8 on a search for ‘fly fishing statistics’ by using it for an illustration. The article only had the term listed once.

Comment provided October 17, 2007 at 5:58 PM


Peter Cutforth writes:

The whole point of LSI, as far as I understand, is that a strict keyword density approach does NOT work, and is old hat now anyway. 15 uses is a 500 word article is WAY to high anyway, for Google in my view.

Use a phrase in the title and once or twice throughout the article, which is what you would naturally do anyway. LSI is all about having a natural usage of related terms as well as any particular keyword phrase if you have one.

Christina, Google particularly is still influenced by the quality, authority and number of incoming links, and also obviously is “influenced” by the fact that a site is growing organically with great, genuine content.

Thats why EzineArticles articles tend to get ranked by Big G better than any other article directory.


Comment provided October 18, 2007 at 4:21 PM



Thank you Peter!

Comment provided October 18, 2007 at 4:45 PM


Dianne Lehmann writes:

I totally agree. I have read in many places that you should write for the end reader and not the search engines. Sometimes, if I have had to use a certain word several times in the body of my article, I will purposely leave it out of my list of keywords even though I might like to include it. Unfortunately, there are some technical terms that have no alternative and must be used over and over. Thanks for once more confirming it is best to write for the readers.

Comment provided October 20, 2007 at 11:56 AM


Lance Winslow writes:

This is so funny, I made some money last year on the LSI Company Stock – I sold it around this time last year. You can look up the one year chart for LSI, as it had a good run in 2006, but Cramer is not touting a “buy, buy, buy” right now. The company is run pretty well and has some upside potential. Nevertheless, today it is well: “Yawn” also.

Comment provided October 21, 2007 at 12:20 AM


Vern writes:

I really have to say that good writers
get no credit nowadays and most
of the articles which appear on the top
page mainly are just “stuffed” by so called
top marketers.

I can see this because even in seeing other
articles on a certain keyword phrase the
article is not really content driven as much as
keyword stuffed.

Probably we will see in the long term who really
are the honest and ethical writers.


Comment provided October 22, 2007 at 2:27 AM


Lance Winslow writes:


I have noticed the same thing and all the debris on the Internet when searching. One interesting thought on this subject is that the worse the search results are the more people will click on ads to get to what they want. Thus, search engines stand to make more money by allowing this, than doing anything about it. Just thinking outloud of course on this topic

Comment provided October 22, 2007 at 3:19 AM



Don’t automatically point the finger at writers and assume they’re to blame. Many web content writers work for other people and freelance their services. Some may not feel they have a choice but to take whatever comes their way. Some may need the money *that* badly. Some may not even realize keyword stuffing is unethical.

Kind of funny that writers are always supposed to chose the high ground of absolute, positive morality… there are people who pay writers too – what about them? What about bosses lording over copywriter employees? What about new writers who think this is standard internet practice (trust me, it happens) and get taken advantage of?

Don’t get me wrong – there are *all sorts of people* around the world who do unethical things, and in no way am I defending keyword stuffing. But to say, “We’ll see in the long term who are the honest, ethical writers,” is a comment that I have to react to. That sentence should have read, “We’ll see in the long term which PEOPLE are honest and ethical.”

Comment provided October 22, 2007 at 5:21 AM



I agree with you James!

Comment provided October 22, 2007 at 11:59 AM


Vern writes:

Hi Everyone,

Nice discussion.

After that review, I think I need to
rephrase my statement.

In the long term, we will
see which “People” are honest
and ethical ones.

Thanks for the comment James.


Comment provided October 23, 2007 at 3:55 AM



Christina said:

“So, Google, Yahoo!, etc are not based on keywords as you imagine! There is something else that counts more. Chris, can you explain this phenomenon?”

Well, Chri$tina, I gue$$ it’$ a my$tery. Who know$ how $ome people get to the top of the $earch engine$.

Comment provided October 26, 2007 at 4:54 PM



Hi Dina!

I guess you didn’t read all this thread. I was talking about my articles, which are not paid.
I don’t care for the keywords and almost all my articles appear in the first page of Google and Yahoo! because the search engines are not based only in keywords. I don’t know how they can evaluate the content when it is abstract. This is what I was wondering!

Peter answered saying that ‚¬“Google particularly is still influenced by the quality, authority and number of incoming links, and also obviously is ‚¬“influenced‚¬ by the fact that a site is growing organically with great, genuine content.‚¬

I know that if you pay you can be the first one, no matter what kind of work you present to the public. This is why I said that I agree with James when he says that ‚¬“there are *all sorts of people* around the world who do unethical things‚¬ ! because they want to be in the top.

I’m glad the search engines can evaluate the content’s quality, even though I have no idea of how it can be done. This is too abstract for robots. Keyword counting is mathematic, but text interpretation is not.

Comment provided October 26, 2007 at 6:16 PM


garth meaney writes:

I am about to embark on an internet marketing career direction as a way of using my interest in writing. I have discovered that writing articles and submitting them to directories such as ezine is a very good way of promoting my site. We have search engines which work in a particular way and I am encouraged to understand this and use that peculiar process of keywords to become noticed. I am informed that I wouldn’t be noticed if I didn’t.
Now I have to run the gauntlet of those who think that keywords are not it. What is it is the wonder of words and their purity. Write novels if you want to be pure. This place (it seems to me) is mostly used by writers wishing to promote their interests.

Comment provided January 21, 2008 at 12:38 PM


Carl Pruitt writes:

What you have to keep in mind is that you are promoting your site to people. Customers don’t want to read your keyword over and over. They want information so they can believe that you know what you are talking about.

Check up on what some of the SEO “gurus” are telling you. Keywords are not as important as links to your site. You only need your keyword in your article a couple of times to get it indexed for that term. To get to the top of the list you need to write more articles and get more links. Not try to dominate Google with one article full of the same word over and over. Just my 2 cents.

Carl Pruitt

Comment provided January 21, 2008 at 1:14 PM


Garth Meaney writes:

Thanks Carl. I apologise for my outburst above. Keywords are a complete confusion to me now. The problem is that it’s difficult to tell the difference between the gurus and the acolytes. Every time I think I’m getting a handle on the subject I find comments like the numerous ones above that blow the whole thing out of the water! However, I’ll get back to writing confusing articles about keyword mysteries just like everybody else.
It’s fun though. Regards. Garth

Comment provided January 23, 2008 at 6:10 AM


Meratol writes:

I love your site, and the high value content you provide, but the reason I don’t submit articles to EzineArticles is because every time I write for the reader and provide high value content, you reject it based on this keyword rule.

Now, I want you to remain successful, but if I need to dumb down an article in order for you to publish it, I would rather publish it on my site, where readers read, subscribe, and stay very active.

Comment provided February 15, 2011 at 2:57 PM


RSS feed for comments on this post.

Leave a comment

Please read our comment policy before commenting.