What's Moz's Strategy behind their blog main categories?
-
I've only just noticed that the Moz' blog categories have been moved within a pull down menu. See it underneath : 'Explore Posts by Category' on any blog page.
This means that the whole list of categories under that pull-down is not crawlable by bots, and therefore no link-juice flows down onto those category pages.
I imagine that the main drive behind that move is to sculpt page rank so that the business/money pages or areas of the website get greater link equity as opposed to just wasting it all throwing it down to the many categories ? it'd be good to hear about more from Rand or anyone in his team as to how they came onto engineering this and why.
One of the things I wonder is: with the sheer amount of content that Moz produces, is it possible to contemplate an effective technical architecture such as that?
I know they do a great job at interlinking content from one post onto another, so effectively one can argue that that kind of supersedes the need for hierarchical page rank distribution via categories... but I wonder : "is it working better this way vs having crawlable blog category links on the blog section? have they performed tests" some insights or further info on this from Moz would be very welcome.
thanks in advance
David -
1. Right, each post is linked to in the author byline at the top of the post. I don't believe the links there carry much weight either, but there are literally 1000s of them throughout the site for each category, and the links are connected to semantically relevant blog posts, as opposed to a topic-agnostic sidebar link.
4. Whoops, I goofed by calling it a "non-html" pull down (typing too fast). Of course it's HTML. I simply meant we moved them from a static sidebar format into a pull-down, non linking sidebar format.
Cheers!
-
Hi Cyrus,
thanks for taking the time to explain... this comes in as very useful answers at the time where I'm writing directives for some architectural changes at work.
I have just two further questions to get full understanding into your replies:
Re: 1. when you say "each blog post is linked to several juice-passing category links"... do you actually mean within the body of the posts. I have looked at a few and cant see links to categories within the body, but just the ones on top that go: "Posted by Rand Fishkin to Marketing Industry" ... where 'Marketing Industry' is one of the categories... is that the link-juice passing link you refer to?
Re: 4... I guess you meant "when we moved the categories onto the non-html pull down section..." or did you actually mean to write "sidebar"? I asked because as far as I remember the blog categories have always been on the sidebar, just in a different shape?
cheers
David -
Hi David,
Great question. Couple of points I'll go over, and realize the answer only applies specifically to Moz. Others may find different optimal solutions.
1. Crawling categories isn't a problem for us. Each blog post is linked to several juice-passing category links within the body of the post. And we have 1000s of posts all linking to individual categories.
2. Our reason for putting categories in a drop down was simply to save space. We could have made the links crawlable using pure CSS/HTML, but we suspected it really wouldn't make a difference.
3. Sidebar links have diminished value. It's doubtful much link equity was flowing through them in the first place (for other architectures it may be beneficial to have completely robot friendly sidebar category links, but in our case they were so redundant they weren't really necessary)
4. Finally, when we moved categories into the sidebar, we noticed no change to rankings/traffic to category pages, so we left it as is. Had this been different, we would have reconsidered our strategy.
Again, this strategy is outside traditional "best practices" but practically speaking, it works just fine for us, but may be different for newer sites, sites without as much link equity, etc, etc.
Hope this helps! Best of luck.
-
Chris, I am sorry if you think my response was abrupt... I actually got the impression that you hardly read my question, hence my reaction. By all means I didnt mean to diminish or undervalue your efforts to help the community, but perhaps you can consider to cut down your contributions : less but better responses. Things like the TAGFEE mention and "great content" thingies only sound like the usual MattCutts-style patronising responses, I am sorry to say. But hey thanks for trying to help anyhow
@moz - anyone out there to add any insights to my questions ?
david
-
Hi David,
Whilst you could technically sculpt with the canoincal tag main reason you wouldn't be able to (in my first thought) is it redirects any link juice to where it (the tag) is pointing to, having taken a secondary look however my initial thoughts were incorrect ( I only took a very quick look initially) and the canonical tag wouldn't do as i thought. Its currently there for other purposes. The link juice is still flowing via the line e.g.
January 12th, 2015 - Posted by Casey Meraz to Local SEO and Advanced SEO
Did you consider they may have changed their blog category for user benefit rather than sculpting.
Regards to your last paragraph in all respect again I take time out of my day in between projects to help as best I can here whilst I get Moz points they are limited to 20 per month (1 per post) more info here I've already stopped getting Moz point at this point in the month but that doesn't stop me from coming here and trying to help. Everyone here in the Moz community is an "expert" whilst they may be in different fields it is still the case which is why I take a lot of pleasure in being part of this community.
You may find you get better options if you want direct answers from the Moz team via help@moz.com or their twitter (@moz), you can also keep an eye on the Moz dev blog for some insights - http://moz.com/community/mozpoints
I always try hard I hope you find you get a better answer to your question than you seem to think I was able to give.
-
Hi Chris, thank you for the prompt reply,
Excuse me for sounding naive, but could you shed some futher light on the point that you make about the canonical tag? I am not sure I get it. Are you implying that if a page contains a rel canonical then the overall linkjuice for that page cannot be sculpted?The reason why I suggest that they are sculpting PageRank in some way is because they've moved their blog category navigation (on the blog pages) from crawlable (as far as I remember), to non crawlable. So they are 'apparently' making economies on the level of linkjuice that flows out of each blogpost. My question/doubt is simple. Although you may be right that they have not done that with any intention. It'd be good to hear from them.
As for your last paragraph, with all due respect, I'd say well done for earning 3 more moz points on your profile for a very irrelevant reply. I'm not here to discuss the best way to help the users creating "great" content but simply seek input/opinions from experts or the Moz team on a specific aspect of their technical webpage layout and built. Thanks for trying hard anyway
David
-
You're over-thinking this far too much, first thing if you look in the source code you will see there is a canonical tag meaning there is no sculpting as well as this there are other links on the main pages linking to the categories so the drop down list is not the only section to get to the categories. I don't see them trying to sculpt any link juice.
I would think the answer to the question directly would be:
"what's Moz's Strategy behind their blog main categories?"
To create great content thats helpful to the user also all whilst being TAGFEE the catagories are just a way to help users find content more relevant to them e.g. email markeintg, technialy seo, local seo etc. not to gain any rankings. You may find you get a different answer direct however but from most Moz related thing i see the above to be correct in my opinion.
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 to get into Google's Tops Stories?
Hi All, I have been doing research for a few weeks and I cannot for the life of me figure out why I cannot get my website (Racenet) into the top stories in Google. We are in Google News, have "news article" schema, have AMP pages. Our news articles also perform quite well organically and we typically dominate the Google News section. We have two main competitors (Punters and Just Horse Racing) who are both in top stories and I cannot find anything that we are doing that they aren't. Apparently the AMP "news article" schema is incorrect and that could be the reason why we aren't showing up in Google Top Stories, but I can't find anything wrong with the schema and it looks the same as our competitors. For example: https://search.google.com/structured-data/testing-tool/u/0/#url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.racenet.com.au%2Fnews%2Fblake-shinn-booked-to-ride-doncaster-handicap-favourite-alizee-20190331%3FisAmp%3D1 Does anyone have any ideas of why I cannot get my site into Google Top Stories? Any and all help would be greatly appreciated. Thanks! 🙂
Technical SEO | | Saba.Elahi.M.0 -
Google's ability to crawl AJAX rendered content
I would like to make a change to the way our main navigation is currently rendered on our e-commerce site. Currently, all of the content that appears when you click a navigation category is rendering on page load. This is currently a large portion of every page visit’s bandwidth and even the images are downloaded even if a user doesn’t choose to use the navigation. I’d like to change it so the content appears and is downloaded only IF the user clicks on it, I'm planning on using AJAX. As that is the case it wouldn’t not be automatically on the site(which may or may not mean Google would crawl it). As we already provide a sitemap.xml for Google I want to make sure this change would not adversely affect our SEO. As of October this year the Webmaster AJAX crawling doc. suggestions has been depreciated. While the new version does say that its crawlers are smart enough to render AJAX content, something I've tested, I'm not sure if that only applies to content injected on page load as opposed to in click like I'm planning to do.
Technical SEO | | znotes0 -
Duplicate Content - What's the best bad idea?
Hi all, I have 1000s of products where the product description is very technical and extremely hard to rewrite or create an unique one. I'll probably will have to use the contend provided by the brands, which can already be found in dozens of other sites. My options are: Use the Google on/off tags "don't index
Technical SEO | | Carlos-R
" Put the content in an image Are there any other options? We'd always write our own unique copy to go with the technical bit. Cheers0 -
My blog page isn't ranking in Google
Hi, I noticed that my blog page on my site isn't in Google when i search for full URL link http://www.asggutter.com/blog/ instead i see page that isn't even working asggutter.com/sitemap.xml screen shot http://screencast.com/t/6OVFLwL8nTL How i can i fix that. Thanks
Technical SEO | | tonyklu0 -
What's the issue?
Hi, We have a client who dropped in the rankings (initially from bottom of the first page to page to page 3, and now page 5) for a single keyword (their most important one - targeted on their homepage) back in the middle of March. So far, we've found that the issue isn't the following: Keyword stuffing on the page External anchor text pointing to the page Internal anchor text pointing to the page In addition to the above, the drop didn't coincide with panda or penguin. Any other ideas as to what could cause such a drop for a single keyword (other related rankings haven't moved). We're starting to think that this may just have been another small change in the algorithm but it seems like too big of a drop in a short space of time for that to be the case. Any thoughts would be much appreciated! Thanks.
Technical SEO | | jasarrow0 -
Schema Markup and Google's Rich Snippet Tool
Has anyone ever used the snippet tool and gotten the following error "could not fetch website"? When using the tool and placing an url that does not have markup present it will show that as the error. Or if part of markup is wrong, it will diagnose it accordingly. Did a search online and found limited info...one of which someone had this error but when other users tested it, they were not getting the same error.
Technical SEO | | andrewv0 -
Can JavaScrip affect Google's index/ranking?
We have changed our website template about a month ago and since then we experienced a huge drop in rankings, especially with our home page. We kept the same url structure on entire website, pretty much the same content and the same on-page seo. We kind of knew we will have a rank drop but not that huge. We used to rank with the homepage on the top of the second page, and now we lost about 20-25 positions. What we changed is that we made a new homepage structure, more user-friendly and with much more organized information, we also have a slider presenting our main services. 80% of our content on the homepage is included inside the slideshow and 3 tabs, but all these elements are JavaScript. The content is unique and is seo optimized but when I am disabling the JavaScript, it becomes completely unavailable. Could this be the reason for the huge rank drop? I used the Webmaster Tolls' Fetch as Googlebot tool and it looks like Google reads perfectly what's inside the JavaScrip slideshow so I did not worried until now when I found this on SEOMoz: "Try to avoid ... using javascript ... since the search engines will ... not indexed them ... " One more weird thing is that although we have no duplicate content and the entire website has been cached, for a few pages (including the homepage), the picture snipet is from the old website. All main urls are the same, we removed some old ones that we don't need anymore, so we kept all the inbound links. The 301 redirects are properly set. But still, we have a huge rank drop. Also, (not sure if this important or not), the robots.txt file is disallowing some folders like: images, modules, templates... (Joomla components). We still have some html errors and warnings but way less than we had with the old website. Any advice would be much appreciated, thank you!
Technical SEO | | echo10 -
Access To Client's Google Webmaster Tools
Hi, What's the best/easiest way for a client to grant access to his Google Webmaster Tools to me? Thanks! Best...Michael
Technical SEO | | 945010