Content decay: updating articles that lose visibility

Falling article traffic is a reason to investigate, not a diagnosis. Before rewriting, we compare measurement conditions, the subject, information freshness and reader behaviour.

Find what actually changed

We distinguish fewer impressions from fewer clicks and problems with subsequent actions. Comparisons use similar periods, devices and query groups. Technical changes that may have affected access are recorded too.

Review the answer to the reader's question

Does the article still address the current problem? Does it link to an available offer? We identify outdated instructions, missing examples and paragraphs that add nothing. Changing the date alone does not resolve these issues.

Choose a specific improvement

An update may correct a fact, add an example, simplify the structure or cover an important variation. We do not change everything merely to make the article look new. The scope should follow the diagnosis.

Example: updating a guide

If a guide describes an old configuration step, we replace it with a checked account of the current process. We also review the related image, search description and instruction link. Useful sections that still answer the reader's questions remain.

Keep a baseline

We record the URL, the change and its previous performance. After publication, we assess the same data set while considering timing and observation conditions. If results do not improve, we revisit the hypothesis rather than add more general paragraphs.