Facebook Like button issue
-
In looking through my top pages in Google Analytics, my #2 page (oddly enough) looked like this "/?fb_xd_fragment=". Apparently, this is because we added the Facebook Like button to many of our pages. But I'm worried these show very skewed PageView data and lower Time Spent on each page. The average time on this page is 5 seconds whereas the average sitewide time is much higher.
Further, it shows 9,000 pageviews coming from only 250 Unique Visitors. I'm sure this is messing with our SEO. Is there a fix for this? Should I even be worried about it?
I heard that I can remove it from my GA stat reporting, but I don't want it to be causing problems in the background. Please advise..my boss wants to keep the Facebook Like button the pages as it has brought us some good response.
The page that this is on is: www.accupos.com
Maybe there's an alternate version of the Facebook Like that we don't know about...
I would appreciate any help on this
DM
-
It looks like you've changed this to the regular Facebook like button?
-
I had this problem too. Try visiting one of these urls. What I found was that the ones with the Facebook fragment in the url would end up giving a blank page to the reader. So the reader kept refreshing and this is why the page views went up. I tried to find a solution including editing htaccess but couldn't. The answer for me was to remove the Facebook fan page widget from these pages.
-
Try to use the original Facebook Like button - it uses javascript - this way it won't index any urls - you can generate it here: http://developers.facebook.com/docs/reference/plugins/like/
You will only have to change the data-href attribute value for each page to provide its own url.
I hope this helps.
-
Page views are a waste of time. Focus on what is driving conversions.
Swap out ShareThis for AddThis and see if there are changes. I use Addthis and have no problems in GA
-
I think you should not worry about it as long as you don't have any warning messages in Google Webmaster's panel and you play on a good side.
Got a burning SEO question?
Subscribe to Moz Pro to gain full access to Q&A, answer questions, and ask your own.
Browse Questions
Explore more categories
-
Moz Tools
Chat with the community about the Moz tools.
-
SEO Tactics
Discuss the SEO process with fellow marketers
-
Community
Discuss industry events, jobs, and news!
-
Digital Marketing
Chat about tactics outside of SEO
-
Research & Trends
Dive into research and trends in the search industry.
-
Support
Connect on product support and feature requests.
Related Questions
-
Google Cache issue
Hi, We’ve got a really specific issue – we have an SEO team in-house, and have had numerous agencies look at this – but no one can get to the bottom of this. We’re a UK travel company with a number of great positions on the search engines – our brand is www.jet2holidays.com. If you try ‘Majorca holidays’, ‘tenerife holidays’, ‘gran canaria holidays’ etc you’ll see us in the top few positions on Google when searching from the UK. However, none of our destination pages (and it’s only the destination pages), show a ‘cached’ option next to them. Example: https://www.google.com/search?q=majorca+holidays&oq=majorca+holidays&aqs=chrome..69i57j69i60l3.2151j0j9&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8 This isn’t affecting our rankings, but we’re fairly certain it is affecting our ability to be included in the Featured Snippets. Checked and there aren’t any noarchive tags on the pages, example: https://www.jet2holidays.com/destinations/balearics/majorca Anyone have any ideas?
Technical SEO | | fredgray0 -
Responsive Code Creating Duplicate Content Issue
Good morning, Our developers have recently created a new site for our agency. The site is responsive for mobile/tablets. I've just put the site through Screaming Frog and I've been informed of duplicate H2s. When I've looked at some of the page sources, there are some instances of duplicated H2s and duplicated content. These duplicates don't actually appear on the site, only in the code. When I asked the development guys about this, they advised this is duplicated because of the code for the responsive site. Will the site be negatively affected because of this? Not everything is duplicated, which leads me to believe it probably could have been designed better... but I'm no developer so don't know for sure. I've checked the code for other responsive sites and no duplicates can be found. Thanks in advance, Lewis
Technical SEO | | PeaSoupDigital0 -
Home page canonical issues
Hi, I've noticed I can access/view a client's site's home page using the following URL variations - http://example.com/
Technical SEO | | simon-145328
http://example/index.html
http://www.example.com/
http://www.example.com/index.html There's been no preference set in Google WMT but Google has indexed and features this URL - http://example.com/ However, just to complicate matters, the vast majority of external links point to the 'www' version. Obviously i would like to tidy this up and have asked the client's web development company if they can place 301 redirects on the domains we no longer want to work - I received this reply but I'm not sure whether this does take care of the duplicate issue - Understand what you're saying, but this shouldn't be an issue regarding SEO. Essentially all the domains listed are linking to the same index.html page hosted at 1 location My question is, do i need to place 301 redirects on the domains we don't want to work and do i stick with the 'non www' version Google has indexed and try to change the external links so they point to the 'non www' version or go with the 'www' version and set this as the preferred domain in Google WMT? My technical knowledge in this area is limited so any help would be most appreciated. Regards,
Simon.0 -
Change e-commerce platform and domain name SEO issue.
Hi, We are looking to switch from Bigcommerce to either Magento or Shopify, but we have some concern about the redirecting of all URL and not sure where to help. Also, we are looking to remove "hyphen" www.ide-home.com.au in our domain name, again it is all about 301 redirecting. We need SEO expert to help us with all changes that minimize the effect on Google. Does anyone can suggest which company or who we can ask for help? Thanks very much.
Technical SEO | | ide-home020 -
Penguin update: Penalty caused from onsite issues or link profile?
Back in April before the Penguin update, our website home page ranked in the #1 position for several of our keywords and on page 1 for dozens of other keywords. But immediately after the Penguin update in April our rankings dropped immediately to below #100 for nearly all keywords. The sharp drop was obviously a penalty of some kind. We worked on removing some bad back links that were questionable. Over the past 7 months many of the bad links have dropped off and our link profile is improving. Our rankings, however, have not improved at all. In Yahoo and Bing we remain strong and rank on page 1 for many of our keywords. I joined SEOmoz because I’ve heard about their great tools and resources for SEO. The first thing I learned is that I had a lot of errors and warnings that need to be addressed and I’m optimistic that these items once addressed will get me out of that dreadful penalty box we’ve been in for 7 months now. So with that quick summary of our SEO problems I have a few questions that I hope to get some direction on. 1. Crawl Diagnostics for my site in SEOmoz reports 7 errors and 19 warnings including missing meta description tags, temporary redirects, duplicate page content, duplicate page title, 4xx client error, and title element too long. Could these errors and warnings be what has landed my website in some kind of penalty or filter? 2. A couple of the errors were duplicate page title and duplicate page content. So there appears to be a duplicate home page. Here are the two pages: howtomaketutus.com/ howtomaketutus.com/?p=home They are the same page but it looks like Google is seeing it as duplicate content. Do I need to do a 301 redirect in the .htaccess file? I’m not sure how that would work since they are the same page. If that is possible how would I go about doing that? 3. Finally based on what I’ve described above is it more likely that the penalty we are experiencing is because of onsite issues or because of our link profile? We would really appreciate any help or direction anyone can offer on these issues. Thanks
Technical SEO | | 123craft0 -
HTTP Compression -- Any potential issues with doing this?
We are thinking about turning on the IIS-6 HTTP Compression to help with page load times. Has anyone had any issues with doing this, particularly from an SEO or site functionality standpoint? We just want to double check before we take this step and see if there are any potential pitfalls we may not be aware of. Everything we've read seems to indicate it can only yield positive results. Any thoughts, advice, comments would be appreciated. Thank-you, Matt & Keith
Technical SEO | | MWM37720 -
How to handle this specific duplicate title issue
Part of my website is a directory of companies. Some of the companies have mane locations in the same city. For these listings titles and url's are like this: 1. Company ABC - Miami, FL http://www.website.com/florida/miami/company-abc-10001 2. Company ABC - Miami, FL http://www.website.com/florida/miami/company-abc-10002 What is the best way to fix this problem? Thank you
Technical SEO | | Boxes0 -
Facebook Comments
Hello, We get tons of comments on Facebook about our blog. We get no comments on our actual blog. So I'm really leaning towards putting facebook comments to replace my blogs comments - http://techcrunch.com/2011/07/13/series-a-whopper-benchmark-invests-33m-in-new-bi-company-domo/ I was looking at techcrunch's code and it looks like none of that information is actually being consider content on their site. The code looks like: Even with tons of comments. So I am thinking that a huge amount of facebook comments does nothing for your onsite SEO. You get no more content and nothing is changing on your page, despite even an unprecedented amount of conversation. Perhaps the only thing you would get from this is the off site SEO - which would be traffic and exposure on facebook. I'm not asking if I should do this or not. I'm really asking: do you agree with what I said above. Thanks Tyler
Technical SEO | | tylerfraser1