Meta Descriptions Stir Controversy Among SEO Experts: Data vs. Strategy
A fiery debate has ignited in the SEO community over the value of meta descriptions. Mark Williams-Cook, a prominent SEO strategist, shared recent test results showing that pages without meta descriptions saw a consistent 3% uplift in organic traffic. He now advises clients to skip writing them altogether, claiming Google rewrites around 80% anyway and often does a better job by dynamically adjusting snippets based on user queries.
“We’re not recommending meta descriptions anymore,” Williams-Cook posted on LinkedIn. “If you’re writing them manually, it’s a waste of time. Even using AI offers little value.”
His position hinges on the belief that omitting meta descriptions increases the chances that Google will inject more relevant, query-specific snippets into search results, ultimately improving click-through rates.
But not everyone agrees.
Technical SEO consultant Jono Alderson offered a sharp rebuttal in his article “Stop Testing. Start Shipping,” criticizing the SEO testing trend as “performative theater.” He argues that real-world SEO environments are too complex, volatile, and uncontrolled for clean A/B testing to yield reliable conclusions.
“SEO doesn’t operate in a lab,” Alderson wrote. “Search results fluctuate, user behavior is unpredictable, and countless external variables—like weather or news events—affect outcomes. Most SEO tests oversimplify the ecosystem and distract from impactful work.”
While both experts make compelling arguments, the conversation underscores a deeper divide in SEO: the tension between measurable micro-optimizations and broader, harder-to-quantify improvements like better content and user experience.
So, is ditching meta descriptions a best practice or a risky shortcut? The answer may not be binary. What works for one website may not apply universally. SEO remains part art, part science—and a whole lot of experimentation.
