No.

There are many skeptics when it comes to SEO, stating that poor content can be promoted through effective Search Engine Optimization meaning that valuable content falls down the ladder on search listings. To some extent this is also true, but who would want to invest time and money in poor content? Search Engines try to evaluate content, to the extent that is permitted by robots and algorithms, punishing poorly written and illogical articles.

You might think that we need to take the perspective of pro SEO because we live in the world of delivering such services. So trying to remain neutral we will also present some of the benefits of SEO. First and foremost organizations investing resources in their web affairs should likewise be rewarded if they adhere to a high standard of information value. SEO's are actually vastly contributing to others problems online. How? Through forum participation, SEO'ers are able to generate more and more links for their projects through signatures on their posts. No, the posts are not SPAM, the general forum spirit and guidelines in the web community ensures that practices are maintained focusing on solving these problems.

Secondly, companies offering the best prices on certain products that have done effective SEO are more than welcome by skeptics. Hmmm. That is a bit hypocritical but the fact is that SEO is benefitting is in many ways that we do not consider on a day-to-day basis.

What are your thoughts on the benefits/problems of SEO?

It seems that the Google Algorithm will change slightly in 2010 to incorporate a "speed" dimension. More specifically, Google will be looking to give sites that load quickly a credit or two in upcoming search results. According to Matt Cutts, Page Speed could easily be something that will become more important. The logic behind it seems reasonable as Google wants to present the "best" search results for the end-user and fast loading sites are definitely something that can be valued. With an increase in mobile browsing, this may also send webdesigners a clear message that they may as well design "lite" sites that are few in images and that load quickly for users.

The question however becomes whether a lack of images and graphics that are often needed to illustrate key points will be punished in search results - if so then will there be a decrease in the overall quality of search results?

If you want to read more and see the live interview with Matt Cutts click the following link: WebProNews