The 300-word article experiment that failed quietly
Pretoria freelancer Amahle Zungu took on a project for a B2B logistics company that wanted rapid content output. To meet the turnaround targets, she produced 25 articles averaging 320 words each. The client had read somewhere that short-form content ranked well on mobile. After five months, none of the articles ranked in the top 50 positions. Google Search Console showed crawling activity but minimal impressions, which pointed to a thin content classification.
Thin content is about substance, not just length
The issue was not specifically word count — Google does rank short content when it fully satisfies a narrow query. The problem was that Amahle's articles covered broad, competitive topics like freight forwarding services and customs clearance documentation without providing meaningful detail, data, or specific guidance. Competing pages answered sub-questions within those topics comprehensively, covering 10-15 related points per article. Her content covered two or three points at surface level.
What the content audit flagged specifically
- No internal links to related service pages or deeper resources
- Zero external references to credible logistics industry sources
- No structured data or FAQ sections that could capture featured snippet positions
- Headings that mirrored the title without adding new information layers
When Amahle revised six of the worst-performing articles — expanding each to 900-1,100 words with added data points, sub-topic coverage, and proper internal linking — four of them reached page two within eight weeks. The lesson here is that matching the depth of the competing content matters more than hitting an arbitrary word count target.
A practical benchmark for competitive topics
Before starting any article, check the average word count of the top three ranking competitors using a free tool like Word Counter or SEOquake. Use that as a floor, not a ceiling, then add detail your competitors missed.