The score placed at the top right of the publication is a plus that some authors will hate or love.
wow-score
I bet you anything that, as a reader or follower of a blog, you have looked at the level of interaction of a post to determine whether it is good or not, that is, how many times it was seen or shared on social networks.
Previously, I would go by “most popular articles” list of phone number in philippines although that was no guarantee that the content was good.
At least it gave me a signal about what I could get there, I mean, I thought: “if it's in the most popular posts, there must be something good about it.”
And I assure you that it is not a guarantee because it could have happened that the post was very well optimized and positioned organically in search engines, bringing a lot of traffic to that post.
Or am I wrong?
What I mean is that the score is an indication of how good the content is and it encourages more people to read it.
Other metrics can tell you how long a user spends on a specific page, but what we don't really know is whether that user is actually interacting with the information on the page or whether they entered, left the browser open, and left.
On the contrary, the fantastic thing about this tool is that it analyses the speed at which the user follows the reading, that is, it measures the time in which the person is active within the page, so it is very difficult to cheat the wow effect score.
As the metric is designed to measure the quality of the content, another aspect that is measured is the length of the text.
For years, I have read that the length of an article is key to its positioning in search engines.
The point is not to create a 3,000-word text, for example, and have 50% of that text be filler content or pure garbage.