Encouraging users to "like" or "+1" our pages
-
Do you think its "bad" SEO or maybe google might penalize if we encourage users to like or pages or give us +1 for google?
-
On my big traffic pages I have "Do us a favor, if you like our tools give us a "+1" or a "like"
" -
With emphasis supposedly shifting more on social signals as the year progresses I would suggest asking users to act this way will have positive effects for SEO (especially the Google interaction).
It depends how you do it though. If you are just getting people to like you in returning for you liking them etc it will build an un-natural profile (same with purchasing +1's) which won't have any benefit to you. I don't know if G algo recognises these types of profiles, but I wouldn't be surprised if it does at some point.
If you capture an engaging/relevant audience to your social media portals then it will have numerous benefits (with SEO gains potentially sitting here).
However be careful of competitions on G+. As far as I am aware it goes against their guidelines.
-
By encouraging them do you mean placing the relevant social sharing buttons in a prominent position on your site? If so, that's fine, a lot of companies do that.
Give your users a reason to like/follow/+1 you and they will, just don't shove it down their throat.
-
Hi Cezar,
One famous campaign that you can use is: Pay with a tweet/like/share/etc.
I have only seen positive movement around similar campaigns, so no sign of Google dislike-ing it (but they will probably +1 instead of a like ;).
Gr.,
Istvan
-
How do you propose to encourage your users to like or +1 your pages?
I've seen many companies encourage tahier website visitors to Like their pages by making the social share a requirement for entry into a competition. Ive also seen the same with tweets and getting people to retweet a URL for entry.
I suppose as long as your not forcing the user to so it, no click jacking and not buying the likes, you should be ok. Depends on your strategy.
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
-
How happy should we be about a Page 1 “See results about” SERP?
A site fell off Page 1 organic listings but now regularly appears in the right-side “See results about“ SERP. How valuable are such results, especially compared to the 1-10 organic result listing? And, are “see results about” SERPs national?
On-Page Optimization | | PKI_Niles0 -
"Google-selected canonical different to user-declared" - issues
Hi Moz! We are having issues on a number of our international sites where Google is choosing our page 2 of a category as the canonical over page 1. Example; https://www.yoursclothing.de/kleider-grosse-groessen (Image attached). We currently use infinite loading, however when javascript is disabled we have a text link to page 2 which is done via a query string of '?filter=true&view=X&categoryid=X&page=2' Page 2 is blocked via robots.txt and has a canonical pointing at page 1. Due to Google selecting page 2 as the canonical, the page is no longer ranking. For the main keyphrase a subcategory page is ranking poorly. LqDO0qr
On-Page Optimization | | RemarkableAgency1 -
Moving from Bigcommerce to Woocommerce on WP. Should we redirect size pages into one page?
We are moving from Bigcommerce to Woocommerce on WP. On Bigcommerce, due to some bizarre reasoning the previous developer had 3 separate URLS for the same product in different sizes - S, M and L. Now we plan to have one product page where the sizes can be selected and 301 redirect the 3 urls to the new one. Is this advisable? Or should we just have 3 separate pages. OR should we have one of the sizes pages as the new page and then redirect the other 2 to this one? I ask this because the site has a LOT of ranking power and we do not want to jeopardise that.
On-Page Optimization | | MashBonigala0 -
Duplicate Page Content
Hey Moz Community, Newbie here. On my second week of Moz and I love it but have a couple questions regarding crawl errors. I have two questions: 1. I have a few pages with duplicate content but it say 0 duplicate URL's. How do I know what is duplicated in this instance? 2. I'm not sure if anyone here is familiar with an IDX for a real estate website. But I have this setup on my site and it seems as though all the links it generates for different homes for sale show up as duplicate pages. For instance, http://www.handyrealtysa.com/idx/mls...tonio_tx_78258 is listed as having duplicate page content compared with 7 duplicate URLS: http://www.handyrealtysa.com/idx/mls...tonio_tx_78247
On-Page Optimization | | HandyRealtySA
http://www.handyrealtysa.com/idx/mls...tonio_tx_78253
http://www.handyrealtysa.com/idx/mls...tonio_tx_78245
http://www.handyrealtysa.com/idx/mls...tonio_tx_78261
http://www.handyrealtysa.com/idx/mls...tonio_tx_78258
http://www.handyrealtysa.com/idx/mls...tonio_tx_78260
http://www.handyrealtysa.com/idx/mls...tonio_tx_78260 I've attached a screenshot that shows 2 of the pages that state duplicate page content but have 0 duplicate URLs. Also you can see somewhat about the idx duplicate pages. rel="canonical" is functioning on these pages, or so it seems when I view the source code from the page. Any help is greatly appreciated. skitch.png0 -
Can you 301 redirect to a page that has other pages 301 to it?
Two years ago updated url page to include better keywords and used a 301 redirect from the old page to the new. so www.example.com/keyword-1st-generation.html now points to ... www.example.com/keyword-2nd-generation.html That moved the pages up in ranking, but now have better kw for the url, so is it okay to redirect the /keyword-2nd-geration-html to www.example.com/keyword-3rd-generation.html And what is a good length of time before removing the 1st-generation url? It's been 3 years and there is no chance of using it again. Plus, no sign of it in analytics.
On-Page Optimization | | AllIsWell0 -
Can somebody help me with a "Grade F" report
My Seomoz account tells me i've got a Grade F for my on-page optimalisation. The report said there's no single "on page keyword" usage at the whole page. Can somebody tell me what went wrong? If you take a look at my website: www.oceandrivers.nl, you'll see that i've used the keyword "prive chauffeur huren" everywere. In the URL, the H1 etc. (See image)
On-Page Optimization | | OceanDrivers
So i don't get it?! Thanks in advance! [
](<a href=)" target="_blank">a> visWA visWA
0 -
Page Title
My website was hacked last November and then again last week. Prior to the hacking we were at number one in Google.co.uk for our main search term "nile cruises' for years. After last November's hacking we dropped to about position 4 and after last week we are at position 7. Ima rebuilding the lost data and I am having to create new Title and Description meta data for each of the indexed pages. I am taking the opportunity to try and ensure my titles and descriptions are good and the correct length, etc but wondered about the best title format. I set our home page title over the weekend as: Nile Cruise | Leading ABTA & ATOL Bonded UK Nile Cruise Specialist I was going to try and cover 3 keyphrases in the title like this: Nile Cruise | Nile Cruises | Nile Cruise Bargains But I thought that might look a bit spammy because the 3 phrases are very similar. I wondered what anyone else might suggest? Thanks, Colin
On-Page Optimization | | NileCruises0 -
Is On Page SEO Dead?
Hey Guys, Search Engine Roundtable has published a short post about this a few days ago, quoting senior member at WebmasterWorld forums who said: "The way I see it, on-page text today is for the "relevance" part of the total algorithm. The whole algorithm is, in broad strokes, "relevance + connectedness + quality". After you've clearly stated the relevance of the page, then the rest of your ranking power comes from elsewhere. I've added on-page bold tags with no effect. I've added or changed h1 elements with no effect. Not too long ago, those might well have done something, but that's not the game anymore. And moving from a table layout to a CSS-P layout today might get you nowhere, too. It all depends how deeply complicated the table layout was, I think." http://www.webmasterworld.com/google/4408395.htm Is it true? Is on-page SEO really dead? What do you think?
On-Page Optimization | | ShivaS0