What is considered "good" content and what is "bad" content

After reading "How you will change the world with social networking" by Deanna Zandt and "How to create compelling content that ranks well in search engines" by Brian Clark, both authors share similarities in that they both stress the values of sharing authentic content with other users and optimizing your content that is organized and contains links to other "quality" sources.
Clark evaluates the best SEO strategies that can improve a website. Clark emphasizes different strategies of gaining more traffic and building a website that ranks highly on search engines. Some key points that Clark talks about is compelling content, content landing pages, speaking the language of the audience and enhanced readability. One particular website that seems to follow these points is Yahoo Sports. Yahoo has it's own team of analysts and writers. The different stories and topics are somewhat biased but the content alone is very easy understand. The language used is very much the same as the users and sometimes the writers write as if they are speaking directly to the reader. In addition, they always relate and includes links in the articles to past written articles or other relevant websites for more in-depth information about the different topics.The also website allows users to comment and generate sharing with different social media sites such as Twitter and Facebook. On top of the written articles, there are also sometimes videos that engage the readers more into the topic, which provides additional perspective in another form of media. An example of good writing in a Yahoo Sports page is this article about the latest NBA sensation, Jeremy Lin.

Another good example of a website with "good" writing is The New York Times. This site is very well organized with different categories and sub-categories. It provides information from all around the world and related topics readers can definitely relate to. The difference with The New York Times articles and articles from a website like Yahoo Sports is probably Yahoo's use of images, videos and colors on the pages.This may simply mean that both websites have a different targeted audience and attract their own different group of readers.

An example of a website with "bad" content is Worldstarhiphop. The site focuses on the latest R&B and Hip-Hop news. Whether is be the new latest music videos or the latest "beef" in the music industry, they will cover it. However,  what makes the content "bad" is the lack or organization and restrictions to certain videos that may be inappropriate to children. Given that the internet is used by all ages at this point, it should be known that is it important to put certain limitations and regulations on specific content that is not age appropriate. But then again, most sites have no regulations or restrictions that are strongly implemented.  A second example of a website with "bad" content is Kixclusive.com. This is website that sells sneakers. With little to no content at all, the website will barely receive any traffic. The images used in the site do not look authentic, and in fact looks like images that are found all over the internet.Compared to big corporations that also sell sneakers online like Nike or Eastbay, Kixclusive does not allow for customer reviews, which can be a key factor in attracting more visitors to the site.

Similarly, in the other article I read, Zandt expresses the importance of participating in social media like Facebook and Twitter users can communicate all sorts of information, particularly personal experiences. Zandt explains how overtime, people start learning about other people just by simply reading and following their daily status updates or latest tweets. She calls this "ambient awareness". Like Clark's article, Zandt's article also sheds light on the importance of having compelling content and language that speaks to the audience. These are the points that continue to drive social media to expand.