HOW I DID IT
How I Ranked on Page #1 Without Any SEO Tools
Experience-based articles can beat even the best research
To get started, I have to first show you the article. Instead of taking a picture of it on Google’s first page or linking it here, I would ask you to see for yourself. Here is what to do:
- Open a new tab or go into your browser.
- If your new tab doesn’t have Google search on default, go to Google.com. And if you have the search widget on your device, that’s better.
- Search for “Telegram VS WhatsApp.”
- You’ll find “Telegram VS WhatsApp — By David O. — Hackernoon.”
Yep, that is it. I hope it’s still there.
And if you check the article, you’ll see that I wrote it over a year ago. I have updated it a few times after then, though.
And yes, the amount of research I had to do to write the article was zero. Why? You’ll know soon enough.
Last time I checked, it had 60K views.
It just really dawned on me to make a post of how that came about and how I believe it got to Google’s first page on such a widely searched keyword.
“Have you been able to replicate this feat?”
That’s the thing. I didn’t write it so that it could rank on Google’s first page. In fact, I didn’t know it did until sometime this year. I noticed it was the article that gave me the most traffic on Medium. I haven’t bothered with whether my articles rank on Google’s first page.
The only time I have is when writing for a client with all the SEO tools. (I don’t use SEO for my Medium articles, I just let it flow). Those client articles rank well for their keywords, sometimes first page and other times second page. But those are with all the SEO tools.
The Telegram vs WhatsApp Backdrop
I thought of writing this article because I wanted to create a perfect and concise comparison between these two messaging apps. I use both apps, so it was easy for me to understand the differences and similarities. This is why I did no research.
Both apps were already part of my life. I use them every single day. And I probably use those two apps more than 80% of the people who have both apps. I didn’t even try to see what other articles about the subject looked like. I just got in the flow.
Also, I wanted to prove to myself I can write this kind of content, to make the article something any regular person can read and get clarity about choosing between the two apps.
In the article, I went into a lot of user-experience details, which was easy. And then I made it a bit fun to read by keeping score. And I also added some of my opinions as a user of both apps. Of course, I do not work for either of the two companies (or companies related to them), so it was easy to be unbiased.
And perhaps this is what the Google algorithm was looking for. Here’s what I did right that you can try in your next article.
1. Title
I got the title so right. It’s exactly what people type on Google whenever they want such information. If you title your article with exactly the keyword people search for when looking for information about your content, it’ll do much better. I didn’t even think about the title, it was just the natural thing that came to me.
2. Keyword details
If you’re writing about something, you’re expected to know a lot about it. And from all the other articles that are written, the Google algorithm has an idea of the industry-specific terms that are used within such articles. Have enough of those terms and Google will assume you know what you are saying (even if you don’t).
I didn’t intentionally do this, I just made sure I covered every area I could think of in the comparison.
3. Readers are prone to finish it
I think this is also important. You know there are some pages you get into and you back out fast or you just skim through? While we do that for many articles (and some are even doing that for this article), it’s important that the piece of writing is hot till the end.
I don’t know whether the system tracks how much time is spent on each article, but I know that the more people who see your article (and see it through), the more it’ll be exposed for more people to see it.
4. Zero links, zero promotions, and publishing in the right publication
I did nothing of the usual stuff I later heard is important for Google’s first-page ranking. Link (in your article) if you see it’s necessary, but if it isn’t necessary, don’t do it. I honestly think the Google algorithm looks at links but to a limited extent. How many articles link to your page is the really important stuff. However, that is only possible when your content is so good.
I didn’t ask anyone to promote the article for me. I didn’t even share it anywhere. I guess some articles linked back to it, but I have no way of knowing how many. The only people I sent the article to were those who were asking me for writing samples when I sought writing jobs.
And of course, the publication where it was published was perfect for that kind of content. The importance of the right publication cannot be overemphasized.
5. Good content from the reader’s perspective
This is the most important. It’s not just about making good content, it has to be good content from the perspective of the readers. If the readers are looking to find a piece of specific information, and all you did was beat around the bush throughout the article, it’s not going to do well.
And also, beware of reported speech. You want to present yourself as an authority on the subject you’re writing on even if you’re reporting. Journalists are pro at this.
Your reader must find what they’re looking for in your article. Your article must be the end of their search. That is the way you want it to be.
Where Do I Begin?
If you want to write a post that ranks on Google’s first page, the place to start is with knowing the keyword people are searching for that you’re qualified (by experience) to write about.
Then you move to the next step: understanding what people really want to see or hear when they open an article with that keyword.
With that, you can go ahead to craft. But pay attention to the points here. And as a final tip, I hear that the average article on Google’s first page is over 2,000 words.





