Could we run into issues with duplicate content penalties if we were to borrow product descriptions?
-
Hello,
I work for an online retailer that has the opportunity to add a lot of SKUs to our site in a relatively short amount of time by borrowing content from another site (with their permission). There are a lot of positives for us to do this, but one big question we have is what the borrowed content will do to our search rankings (we normally write our own original content in house for a couple thousand SKUs). Organic search traffic brings in a significant chunk of our business and we definitely don't want to do something that would jeopardize our rankings.
Could we run into issues with duplicate content penalties if we were to use the borrowed product descriptions?
Is there a rule of thumb for what proportion of the site should be original content vs. duplicate content without running into issues with our search rankings?
Thank you for your help!
-
I think Alan and EGOL have summed it up nicely for you.
I have looked at a lot of Panda hit sites and one of the most common issues were e-commerce sites that consisted of primarily of stock product descriptions. Why would Google want to rank a site highly that just contains information that hundreds of other sites have?
If you've got a large chunk of your site containing duplicate descriptions like this then you can attract a Panda flag which can cause your whole site to not rank well, not just the product pages.
You could use the duplicate product descriptions if you had a large amount of original and helpful text around it. However, no one knows what the ratio is. If you have the ability to rewrite the product descriptions this is by far the best thing to do.
-
Just adding a point to this (and with reference to the other good points left by others) - Writing good product descriptions isn't actually that expensive!
It always seems it, as they are usually done in big batches. However on a per product basis they are pretty cheap. Do it well and you will not only improve the search results, but you can improve conversions and even make it more linkable.
Pick a product at random. Would it be worth a few £/$ to sell more of that item? If not remove it from the site anyway.
-
Adding a lot of SKUs to your site in a relatively short amount of time by borrowing content from another site sounds more like a bad sales pitch than a good "opportunity". If you don't want to put in jeopardy a significant chunk of your business, then simply drip the new sku's in as you get new content for them. The thin content's not likely to win you any new search traffic, so unless their addition is going to quickly increase sales from your existing traffic sources and quantities in dramatic fashion, why go down that road?
-
adding emphasis on the danger.
Duplicate product descriptions are the single most problematic issue ecommerce sites face from an SEO perspective. Not only are most canned descriptions so short as to cause product pages to be considered thin on content, copied/borrowed descriptions are more likely to be spread across countless sites.
While it may seem like an inordinate amount of time/cost, unique quality descriptions that are long enough to truly identify product pages as being worthy will go a long way to proving a site deserves ranking, trust.
-
You can hit Panda problems doing this. If you have lots of this content the rankings of your entire site could be damaged.
Best to write your own content, or use this content on pages that are not indexed until you have replaced with original content.
Or you could publish it to get in the index and replace as quickly as possible.
The site you are getting this content from could be damaged as well.
-
You definitely could run in to trouble here. Duplicate content of this type is meant to be dealt with on a page level basis. However if Google think it is manipulative then then it can impact on the domain as a whole. By "think" I really mean "if it matches certain patterns that manipulative sites use" - there is rarely an actual human review.
It is more complex than a simple percentage. Likely many factors are involved. However.. there is a solution!
You can simply add a no index tag to the product pages that have non-original content. That;ll keep them out of the index and keep you on the safe side of dupe issues.
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
-
Mobile Usability Issues after Mobile Frist
Hi All A couple months ago we got an email from google, telling us - Mobile-first indexing enabled for https://www.impactsigns.com/ Ran the test on MOZ, Mobile usability shows 100% Last week got an email from google - New Mobile usability issues detected for impactsigns.com Top new issues found, ordered by number of affected pages: Content wider than screen Clickable elements too close together I can not seem to figure out what those issues are, as all content is visible. How important are these 2 issues? Since we are now on the mobile first side?
Algorithm Updates | | samoos0 -
Product pages - should the meta description match our product description?
Hi, I am currently adding new products to my website and was wondering, should I use our product description (which is keyword optimised) in the meta description for SEO purposes? Or would this be picked up by Google as duplicate content? Thanks in advance.
Algorithm Updates | | markjoyce1 -
Duplicate Content on Product Pages with Canonical Tags
Hi, I'm an SEO Intern for a third party wine delivery company and I'm trying to fix the following issue with the site regarding duplicate content on our product pages: Just to give you a picture of what I'm dealing with, the duplicate product pages that are being flagged have URLs that have different Geo-variations and Product-Key Variations. This is what Moz's Site Crawler is seeing as Duplicate content for the URL www.example.com/wines/dry-red/: www.example.com/wines/dry-red/_/N-g123456 www.example.com/wines/dry-red/_/N-g456789 www.example.com/wines/California/_/N-0 We have loads of product pages with dozens of duplicate content and I'm coming to the conclusion that its the product keys that are confusing google. So we had the web development team put the canonical tag on the pages but still they were being flagged by google. I checked the of the pages and found that all the pages that had 2 canonical tags I understand we should only have one canonical tag in the so I wanted to know if I could just easily remove the second canonical tag and will it solve the duplicate content issue we're currently having? Any suggestions? Thanks -Drew
Algorithm Updates | | drewstorys0 -
Condensing content for web site redesign
We're working on a redesign and are wondering if we should condense some of the content (as recommended by an agency), and if so, how that will affect our organic efforts. Currently a few topics have individual pages for each section, such as (1) Overview (2) Symptoms and (3) Treatment. For reference, the site has a similar structure to http://www.webmd.com/heart-disease/guide/heart-disease-overview-fact. Our agency has sent us over mock-ups which show these topics being condensed into one and using a script/AJAX to display only the content that is clicked on. Knowing this, if we were to choose this option, that would result in us having to implement redirects because only one page would exist, instead of all three. Can anyone provide insight into whether we should keep the topic structure as is, or if we should take the agency's advice and merge all the topic content? *Note: The reason the agency is pushing for the merging option is because they say it helps with page load time. Thank you in advance for any insight! Tcd5Wo1.jpg
Algorithm Updates | | ATShock1 -
Losing rank to Scholarly Articles and Keyword Description Stuffing
I began reviewing the rankings this week and noticed that many of our #1,#2, etc rankings had been bummed down as a whole. After reviewing many of the search terms it seems Google has begun to rank a group named Scholarly Articles in the #1 position. Has anyone else noticed this change? Secondly, many of the rankings we have lost are due to some competitors stuffing their descriptions with keywords. #1 Rank Description Failure Analysis; Scanning Electron Microscopy & EDS Analysis. Paint Chip Analysis and Evaluation; Paint Tests Physical Testing of Paints. #1 Rank Description NACE certified coatings inspector, paint inspector, coating inspector, coatings inspector, lining, failure analysis, survey, corrosion, rust, evaluation, testing, expert Is this a possible glitch occurring with the new humming bird release and has anyone else noticed an issue like this? It dropped our #1 ranks from 37 to 23 overnight. Thanks
Algorithm Updates | | ChazSztroin0 -
Meta description & Meta keywords
Good morning, One of our HTML experts, just told me that Google is not reading meta keywords or meta description - and they (or one of them) are no longer part of my website SEO ranking Do you know where can i read about it? Are other SE do look at these parameters? Thank you SEOWiseUs
Algorithm Updates | | iivgi1 -
Videos increase ranking of products in SERPS from Ecommerce Website
Just noticed something I've never seen before..and I just wanted to see if anyone else experienced this. I work for a 15000+ item eccommerce website, and today I noticed that on a few brand searches, several individual product pages were coming up. This is actually unusual because most of our individual item pages (including these) aren't ranked well enough to show up well in a brand search (and don't try to target brand terms either), but a correlation here was that both items contained videos referenced within. These were not videos hosted on our YouTube brand page either..these were videos done by separate manufacturers - one was hosted on their site, one on ours. Google actually pulled the snapshot of the video to the SERP as well... even though it was embedded within other product copy. Has anyone else noticed any preferential treatment given to effectively random items on your eCommerce website because it was augmented by video? I can assure you there was nothing otherwise unique about these products and they're not really that sought after. Neither item or url was new, and neither were the videos within. Also, this was a Universal Google search, not one for videos. (Sorry, I'm not allowed to reference directly). Thanks.
Algorithm Updates | | Blenny0 -
What is the critical size to reach for a content farm to be under google spot?
We're looking for building a content farm, as an igniter for another site, so there will be some duplicate content. Is it a good or a bad strategy in terms of SEO.
Algorithm Updates | | sarenausa0