Google using descriptions from other websites instead of site's own meta description
-
In the last month or so, Google has started displaying a description under links to my home page in its search results that doesn't actually come from my site.
I have a meta description tag in place and for a very limited set of keywords, that description is displayed, but for the majority of results, it's displaying a description that appears on Alexa.com and a handful of other sites that seem to have copied Alexa's listing, e.g. similarsites.com.
The problem is, the description from these other sites isn't particularly descriptive and mentions a service that we no longer provide.
So my questions are:
- Why is Google doing this? Surely that's broken behaviour.
- How do I fix it?
-
I (finally) see the confusion - a good reason for me to be careful in word choice. I didn't say "duplicate content" I said "duplicated" content. What I meant was "repetition" not duplicated but I guess because we see "duplicate content" every day as SEOs I chose the wrong phrase. What I meant was the duplication / repetition that can happen in the title, as in my example:
"Brisbane SEOs and digital marketing services in Brisbane | SEO | Marketing"
I have many times seen replaced title/description if keywords are repeated in the titles. I have always cleared it up with noodp and noydir. In this case I stated that I didn't think that was the real issue but it is one that causes problems.
So the examples I copied in didn't have to do with "duplicate content" as it relates to rel=canonical but it has to do with "duplicated" title keywords. Obviously I wasn't clear enough in the original post and I'm glad to know that. I still think my advice will work and for the reasons I stated, just with better phrasing. I definitely didn't mean to be confusing so thanks for pointing it out.
Hope that clears up the misunderstanding and thanks for helping me give better advice - appreciate it.
~Matt
-
brisbane web development may get more searches but I also don't rank nearly as well for it as I do for terms with freelance in it.
Most of the enquiries I get follow on from searches that contain freelance and brisbane in the query, whereas brisbane web development is the only one of about 30 keyword phrases that I've been tracking that is showing the correct description.
As far as changing over time: it's only in the last month that these incorrect descriptions have shown up; everything's been fine up until now.
-
If you look at the conversation between Matt and I, you will see that your meta you do not want is showing in dmoz and a few directory sites. Since the query, freelance web design brisbane is a low volume query, and brisbane web development is getting 2400 searches per month, I would not worry too much about it.
Every search I did that I was able to find you had corrected meta. The one you don't like was last used on your site in mid 2011 it appears. I think over time it will change, but putting too much into it is not worth the time.
All the best.
-
Matt,
This info from google doesn't have anything to do with duplicate content.
The first one is about title tags and even that says they (Google) may try to improve the title. Nothing about the meta.
The second is from a Google forum in 2008 and says to first check dmoz to see if the meta is appearing there. If you just say, hey use noodp, noydir, you are making an assumption that is problematic.
The third where you have John Mueller, it is again about Titles and not using keyword stuffing.
Here is the issue Matt: When you state something like that (and I have made the same mistake) and leave a lot out, someone who doesn't do this day to day, assumes something that is simply not true. Frankly, I know of no instance where duplicate content has caused a SERP snippet to change.
Yes, you can use noodp, noydir, but you need to explain why and not say its because of duplicate content. The snippet he gives says "Provides a range of web design and print design services." If you put that search on Google.com.au, there is no duplicate content issue.
Yes, that does appear on dmoz, not on Yahoo Directory. But, it also appears on several directory type sites. Will using noodp keep it from happening? Only if that is the source.
So, I have thumbed you up for the courtesy of a reply to me (evens out the thumb down). Thanks for the reply and, feel free to let me know if I stray or if you believe something here is incorrect. I am open to being wrong and having it pointed out.
All the best,
Robert
-
Robert, if you do a search for freelance web design brisbane (result is on the first page for me in google.com.au), you'll see the sort of thing I'm referring to. This is what's coming up for most of the keywords I'm tracking for my site.
If you do a search for brisbane web development (result on page 9 although a few days ago it was page 15), you'll see the snippet saying what my meta description tag for the home page says, i.e. what I want it to say.
-
http://support.google.com/webmasters/bin/answer.py?hl=en&answer=35624
"Avoid keyword stuffing. It's sometimes helpful to have a few descriptive terms in the title, but there’s no reason to have the same words or phrases appear multiple times. A title like
"Foobar, foo bar, foobars, foo bars"
doesn't help the user, and this kind of keyword stuffing can make your results look spammy to Google and to users."If we’ve detected that a particular result has one of the above issues with its title, we may try to generate an improved title from anchors, on-page text, or other sources.
Google's suggestion is basically what I said above:
If you're concerned about content in your title or snippet, you may want to double-check that this content doesn't appear on your site. If it doesn't, try searching Google.com for the title or snippet enclosed in quotation marks. This will display pages on the web that refer to your site using this text. If you contact these webmasters to request that they change their information about your site, any changes to their sites will be recognized by our crawler after we next crawl their pages.
In addition, John Mueller gave this advice in a post on one of Google's blogs:
"In general, when we run across titles that appear to be sub-optimal, we may choose to rewrite them in the search results. This could happen when the titles are particularly short, shared across large parts of your site or appear to be mostly a collection of keywords. One thing you can do to help prevent this is to make sure that your titles and descriptions are relevant, unique and compelling, without being "stuffed" with too much boilerplate text across your site."
---------------------------------
(Pretty much sounds like what I said but you thumbed me down for.)
-
Matt,
Where are you getting: **Usually it's duplicated content that gets your meta replaced **
I cannot find any reference to it anywhere in GWMT, etc.
Thanks,
Robert
-
I think I understand, but want to be sure. The first img attached is my listing in SERPs here in US with my homepage drumbeatmarketing.net/ Below the SERP link for the query are sitelinks.
The next is your Home Page meta per SEOmoz tool
The next is your About Page meta per SEOmoz tool
The last is your SERP page from Google.com.au showing ABOUT page as the first page to show. Note query was Tyssen design australia
Note that the SERP snippet and the meta you have are the same for that ABOUT page. This would mean that Google is showing precisely what you are asking for it to show.
If this was recently changed, it may not yet have been reindexed hence the need to resubmit sitemap or do a fetch as google on that page as I previously gave you.
I thought this might be a site link issue originally and should have done a bit more investigating and asked you more. If what you are seeing and what I am seeing is the same, then the issue is that you are assuming your homepage is what is first in SERP and it is About page. Short of that, I would need to know what meta you have for homepage, what query gives wrong result, etc.
Hope this helps you out.
Robert
-
Hi Robert, no they're definitely not site links, can verify that they're search results snippets.
-
John,
I would be curious to see if this changes anything for you. I have sites that are listed with the Open Directory Project (aka dmoz) and with Yahoo (we paid for the listings in Yahoo for our client). I do not see Google grabbing those descriptions any longer for use in the SERP snippet.
One thing I would suggest if you believe the noodp, noydir (both good links) change will make a difference is to resubmit your sitemap and/or run a couple of Fetch as Googles on some of your site url's like your home page where you are seeing this. I doubt anything will change.
Also, it sounds as if what you are talking about are site links as opposed to the search snippet that draws from the meta description. With site links, you can turn those off (demote them) for ninety days if incorrect. Go into WMT and on your site you will see: Configuration. Click and you will see sitelinks. Note that if you are doing this for your home page you add nothing to the url that you see first.
Here is info straight from GWMT:
Demote a sitelink URL:
- On the Webmaster Tools Home page, click the site you want.
- Under Site configuration, click Sitelinks.
- In the For this search result box, complete the URL for which you don't want a specific sitelink URL to appear. (How to find the right URL.)
- In the Demote this sitelink URL box, complete the URL of the sitelink you want to demote.
I think you will find this much more effective.
Best
-
Thanks, I've just done both of those.
-
You should include a noodp, noydir tag to try to prevent this. I saw your title & description and they look fine. Usually it's duplicated content that gets your meta replaced (say Brisbane SEOs and digital marketing services in Brisbane | SEO | Marketing" That would get you replaced in a heartbeat.
For yours, I don't see that - but they must think the Alexa is more relevant.
-
Change Alexa and ping those changes to Google.
-
Add noydir and noodp to your meta tags.
Hope that helps!
-
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 google bot see's two the same rel canonicals?
Hi, I have a website where all the original URL's have a rel canonical back to themselves. This is kinda like a fail safe mode. It is because if a parameter occurs, then the URL with the parameter will have a canonical back to the original URL. For example this url: https://www.example.com/something/page/1/ has this canonical: https://www.example.com/something/page/1/ which is the same since it's an original URL This url https://www.example.com/something/page/1/?parameter has this canonical https://www.example.com/something/page/1/ like i said before, parameters have a rel canonical back to their original url's. SO: https://www.example.com/something/page/1/?parameter and this https://www.example.com/something/page/1/ both have the same canonical which is this https://www.example.com/something/page/1/ Im telling you all that because when roger bot tried to crawl my website, it gave back duplicates. This happened because it was reading the canonical (https://www.example.com/something/page/1/) of the original url (https://www.example.com/something/page/1/) and the canonical (https://www.example.com/something/page/1/) of the url with the parameter (https://www.example.com/something/page/1/?parameter) and saw that both were point to the same canonical (https://www.example.com/something/page/1/)... So, i would like to know if google bot treats canonicals the same way. Because if it does then im full of duplicates 😄 thanks.
Technical SEO | | dos06590 -
How do we keep Google from treating us as if we are a recipe site rather than a product website?
We sell food products that, of course, can be used in recipes. As a convenience to our customer we have made a large database of recipes available. We have far more recipes than products. My concern is that Google may start viewing us as a recipe website rather than a food product website. My initial thought was to subdomain the recipes (recipe.domain.com) but that seems silly given that you aren't really leaving our website and the layout of the website doesn't change with the subdomain. Currently our URL structure is... domain.com/products/product-name.html domain.com/recipes/recipe-name.html We do rank well for our products in general searches but I want to be sure that our recipe setup isn't detrimental.
Technical SEO | | bearpaw0 -
Site removed from Google Index
Hi mozers, Two months ago we published http://aquacion.com We registered it in the Google Webmaster tools and after a few day the website was in the index no problem. But now the webmaster tools tell us the URLs were manually removed. I've look everywhere in the webmaster tools in search for more clues but haven't found anything that would help me. I sent the acces to the client, who might have been stupid enough to remove his own site from the Google index, but now, even though I delete and add the sitemap again, the website won't show in Google SERPs. What's weird is that Google Webmaster Tools tells us all the page are indexed. I'm totally clueless here... Ps. : Added screenshots from Google Webmaster Tools. Update Turns out it was my mistake after all. When my client developped his website a few months ago, he published it, and I removed the website from the Google Index. When the website was finished I submited the sitemap, thinking it would void the removal request, but it don't. How to solve In webmaster tools, in the [Google Index => Remove URLs] page, you can reinclude pages there. tGib0
Technical SEO | | RichardPicard0 -
My beta site (beta.website.com) has been inadvertently indexed. Its cached pages are taking traffic away from our real website (website.com). Should I just "NO INDEX" the entire beta site and if so, what's the best way to do this? Please advise.
My beta site (beta.website.com) has been inadvertently indexed. Its cached pages are taking traffic away from our real website (website.com). Should I just "NO INDEX" the entire beta site and if so, what's the best way to do this? Are there any other precautions I should be taking? Please advise.
Technical SEO | | BVREID0 -
Will syndicated content hurt a website's ranking potential?
I work with a number of independent insurance agencies across the United States. All of these agencies have setup their websites through one preferred insurance provider. The websites are customizable to a point, but the content for the entire website is mostly the same. Therefore, literally hundreds of agency sites have essentially the same content. The only thing that changes is a few "wildcards" in the copy where the agency fills in their city, state, services areas, company history, etc. My questions is: will this syndicated content hurt their ranking potential? I've been toying with the idea of further editing the content to make it more unique to an agency, but I would hate to waste a lot of hours doing this if it won't help anything. Would you expect this approach to be beneficial or a waste of time? Thank you for your help!
Technical SEO | | copyjack0 -
Google not showing my website ?
The website is medicare.md. if you search for term "medicare doctors PG county maryland" it is #1 in bing and yahoo but not even showing on google.com first TEN pages, although not banned. Interestingly if you do that search on google.co.pk it is #4. Quite Puzzuling !! Would appreciate any help or advice . Sherif Hassan
Technical SEO | | sherohass0 -
Should we include ANY generic product descriptions on our site?
Until recently all of our product pages (we run an eCommerce site) had product descriptions copied directly off the manufacturer's sites. Obviously this isn't good from an SEO perspective, so we were planning to write our own original copy. My question is: should we keep the manufacturer's copy too? This is often good, useful content from a customer's perspective, but obviously it's not original. Any help appreciated! Alex
Technical SEO | | reddogmusic0 -
Partial Site Move -- Tell Google Entire Site Moved?
OK this one's a little confusing, please try to follow along. We recently went through a rebranding where we brought a new domain online for one of our brands (we'll call this domain 'B' -- it's also not the site linked to in my profile, not to confuse things). This brand accounted for 90% of the pages and 90% of the e-comm on the existing domain (we'll call the existing domain 'A') . 'A' was also redesigned and it's URL structure has changed. We have 301s in place on A that redirect to B for those 90% of pages and we also have internal 301s on A for the remaining 10% of pages whose URL has changed as a result of the A redesign What I'm wondering is if I should tell Google through webmaster tools that 'A' is now 'B' through the 'Change of Address' form. If I do this, will the existing products that remain on A suffer? I suppose I could just 301 the 10% of URLs on B back to A but I'm wondering if Google would see that as a loop since I just got done telling it that A is now B. I realize there probably isn't a perfect answer here but I'm looking for the "least worst" solution. I also realize that it's not optimal that we moved 90% of the pages from A to B, but it's the situation we're in.
Technical SEO | | badgerdigital0