Hmm. I've read the articles and I think it's the opposite of what you're saying. The articles are about inflation / economic crisis in GB. The article URL includes what seems to be the author of the article + search terms people most affected by inflation might be typing into search engines like "cheapest supermarket" or "money saving tips". In theory, those would be the people most interested in what the article has to say, who may scroll through the whole article (and all ads). Since the keywords are hidden in the URL, it's an easy way of getting the article to your intended audience when they're not specifically looking for it.
It seems to me that they are distracting the search engine from their critique of government by using innocuous keywords like supermarket. Not saying sneaky is a bad thing, just interesting that it's happening in the Express which is all bots.
Yeah, I disagree. It's not "supermarket" it's "cheapest supermarket". The articles aren't that critical or amazingly written that they'd need to be hidden. No one searches by URL on Google anyways. We search by title, author which will still show up. The sneaky part is the addition of "tags" like cheap supermarket, money tips etc. Think of a YouTube video about dogs getting hurt but the tags also include "dog food, funny dog meme, cats" or other more unrelated topics. You do this to get a wider audience of people who are not looking for your content, not the other way around.
I think avoiding censorship and drawing a wider audience are not in conflict with each other. I'm surprised to see mainstream media acknowledging there is a censorship problem and to see them avoiding it..
Hmm. I've read the articles and I think it's the opposite of what you're saying. The articles are about inflation / economic crisis in GB. The article URL includes what seems to be the author of the article + search terms people most affected by inflation might be typing into search engines like "cheapest supermarket" or "money saving tips". In theory, those would be the people most interested in what the article has to say, who may scroll through the whole article (and all ads). Since the keywords are hidden in the URL, it's an easy way of getting the article to your intended audience when they're not specifically looking for it.
It seems to me that they are distracting the search engine from their critique of government by using innocuous keywords like supermarket. Not saying sneaky is a bad thing, just interesting that it's happening in the Express which is all bots.
Yeah, I disagree. It's not "supermarket" it's "cheapest supermarket". The articles aren't that critical or amazingly written that they'd need to be hidden. No one searches by URL on Google anyways. We search by title, author which will still show up. The sneaky part is the addition of "tags" like cheap supermarket, money tips etc. Think of a YouTube video about dogs getting hurt but the tags also include "dog food, funny dog meme, cats" or other more unrelated topics. You do this to get a wider audience of people who are not looking for your content, not the other way around.
I think avoiding censorship and drawing a wider audience are not in conflict with each other. I'm surprised to see mainstream media acknowledging there is a censorship problem and to see them avoiding it..