Content Cannibalism Question with example
-
Hi,
Since I love writing and I write a lot I always find myself worried about ruining for my self with Content Cannibalism.
Yesterday, while looking to learn about diamonds I encountered a highly ranked website that has two pages ranking high on the first page simultaneously (4th and 5th) - I never noticed it before with Google.
The term I googled was "vvs diamonds" and the two pages were: http://bit.ly/1N51HpQ and http://bit.ly/1JefWYS
Two questions:
1. Does that happen often with Google (presenting two lines from the same site on first page)?
2. Would it be better practice for the writer to combine them? - creating a one more powerful page...
Thanks
-
Google will frequently rank two pages from the same site in the same SERP if they feel that both pages serve the user intent of the query. Often this will happen, as is the case with these two pages, when they are two pages that are on the same topic, but answer slightly different questions - either of which could be what the user is really asking, if that makes sense. In your example, the two pages that Google is serving up are answering closely related, but slightly different questions: "What is VVS diamond clarity" and "what is the difference between VS and VVS diamond clarity."
It might be advisable for this site to combine the two pages, if (for example) the wrong page was ranking for the query or one page was getting all the traffic and the other wasn't getting any. Another solution would to make them more different from each other, rather than tackling two long-tail variations on the same overall topic.
I would not recommend creating two pages on long-tail variations of the same topic on purpose to try to lock down two spots in a SERP; your time would likely be better spent researching what specific long-tail topics people are searching on, and creating content to serve those users' needs. Umar does have a good point that a SERP with two results from the same domain often present an opportunity to take one of those spots.
-
Hey,
I agree, this site could combine these both pages not only to rank better but to get a very good response from users and attract links. I am not sure but seems they might did it intentionally to rank better on different keywords. Though, the idea is bit old but it's still working
I suppose that in this scenario, when Google (presenting two lines from the same site on first page) is easy to outrank at least one result by producing something more powerful and interesting. I did that in past once and it's worked out.
Umar
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
-
Copied Content - Define Canonical
Hello, The Story I am working on a news organization. Our website is the https://www.neakriti.gr My question regards copied content with source references. Sometimes a small portion of our content is based on some third article that is posted on some site (that is about 1% of our content). We always put "source" reference if that is the case. This is inevitable as "news" is something that sometimes has sources on other news sites, especially if there is something you cannot verify or don't have immediate sources, and therefore you need to state that "according to this source, something has happened". Here is one article of ours that has a source from another site: https://www.neakriti.gr/article/ellada-nea/1503363/nekros-vrethike-o-agnooumenos-arhimandritis-stin-lakonia/ if you open the above article you will see we have a link to the equivalent article of the original source site http://lakonikos.gr/epikairothta/item/133664-nekros-entopistike-o-arximandritis-p-andreas-bolovinos-synexis-enimerosi Now here is my question. I have read in other MOZ forum articles that a "canonical" approach solves this issue... How can we be legit when it comes to duplicate content in the eyes of search engines? Should we use some kind of canonical link to the source site? Should the "canonical" be inside the link in some way? Should it be on our section? Our site has AMP equivalent pages (if you add the /amp keyword at the end of the article URL). Our AMP pages have canonical to our original article. So if we have a "canonical" approach how would the AMP be effected as well? Also by applying a possible canonical solution to the source URL, does that "canonical" effect our article as not being shown in search results, thus passing all indexing to the canonical site? (I know that canonical indicates what URL is to be indexed). Additionally, does such a canonical indication make us legit in such a case in the eyes of search engines? (i.e. it eliminates any possible article duplication for original content in the eyes of search engines?). Or simply put, having a simple link to the original article (as we have it now) is enough for the search engines to understand that we have reference to original article URL? How would we approach this problem in our site based on its current structure?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | ioannisanif0 -
HTTPS - implementation question
Hello, I am looking at a site on which they haven't 301'd http to https, so each URL is there whether you have http or https at the beginning. Why would a site owner not 301 to https? Is there any logical reason not to use 301? This particular website is simply using a canonical tag to point to the https version of each URL.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | McTaggart0 -
Potential keyword cannibalization?
Hi, I'm doing an audit of a site for a very competitive term (project management software). The site ranks for its root domain on the second page. They have a lot of other non-blog pages that are geared towards longer tail versions that include that term (project management software pricing, project management tool comparison, etc). My question is: are those pages cannibalizing potential search traffic? Should they just stick to the one page (root domain) and include those longtail keywords on the page instead of creating various pages that seem to possibly be cannibalizing traffic? Is this a fair conclusion that these other pages is causing them to rank lower for the main head term?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | jim_shook0 -
Canonical questions
Hi, We are working on a site that sells lots of variations of a certain type of product. (Car accessories) So lets say there are 5 products but each product will need a page for each car model so we will potentially have a lot of variations/pages. As there are a lot of car models, these pages will have pretty much the same content, apart from the heading and model details. So the structure will be something like this; Product 1 (landing page) Audi (model selection page)
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | davidmaxwell
---Audi A1 (Model detail page)
---Audi A2 (Model detail page)
---Audi A3 (Model detail page) BMW (model selection page)
---BMW 1 Series (Model detail page)
---BMW 3 Series (Model detail page) Product 2 (landing page) Audi (model selection page)
---Audi A1 (Model detail page)
---Audi A2 (Model detail page)
---Audi A3 (Model detail page) BMW (model selection page)
etc
etc The structure is like this as we will be targeting each landing page for AdWords campaigns. As all of these pages could look very similar to search engines, will simply setting up each with a canonical be enough? Is there anything else we should do to ensure Google doesn't penalise for duplicate page content? Any thoughts or suggestions most welcome.
Thanks!0 -
A question of rankings (with actual domains)
Working with the main site featured in this Open Site Explorer comparison (you'll need a pro account to view this), and have been for quite some time. Recently we've slid behind Ebay (huge brand, I get it), but the other competitors don't really make sense to me. Main phrase is pontoon boats, and maybe I'm too close to this, but we seem to be in the best shape overall in terms of the domain, the page itself, and even our social media is pretty successful (we're closing in on 5,000 likes and have a pretty engaged audience). More internal linking is an opportunity, but I'd like another set of eyes (or several for that matter) to weigh in on opinions. I'm a bit stumped. Thanks Mozzers!
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | NetvantageMarketing0 -
SEOMOZ Diagram question
Hi, On this SEOMOZ help page (http://www.seomoz.org/learn-seo/internal-link) the diagram explaining the optimal link structure (image also attached) has me a little confused. From the homepage, if the bot crawls down the right-hand link first, will it not just hit a dead end where it cant crawl any further and disappear? OR... will it hit the end of the structure and then crawl backwards to the homepage again and follow down another link and then just repeat the process until all pages are indexed? Cheers pyramid.jpg
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | activitysuper0 -
Question | Blogger, Godaddy, HostGator
If I buy a new domain and do forwarding with masking to my blogger post URL what would happen to the backlinks that were pointing to my blog post exactly? Will the power link back to this new domain or will it stay there? I have a blogger account, a domain from godaddy, and hosting? People are telling me that forwarding with masking is bad for <acronym title="Search Engine Optimization">SEO</acronym> so I should set blogger with godaddy or something like that I don't know. I need a hosting though in order to do that and free ones don't offer changes to the CNAME records? so I got hostgator. I am up to the part where I need to set the records in the CNAME for hostgator but every time I try to list ghs.google as the whatever, it won't work! It keeps telling me the record is already there when this is my FIRST time using this! How can it be there when I haven't even touched it? Please help me
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | 678648631264
This is the tutorial im using : http://support.google.com/blogger/bi...381&page=ts.cs
I get stuck here:
Find the control panel on your domain registrar’s website, and locate your DNS (Domain Name System) settings. In order to link your blog to your custom domain, follow the instructions below to enter your "CNAME" and "A-records."
CNAME
Where it says Name, simply enter "www" and list ghs.google.com as the Host Name. See our detailed instructions on providing CNAMEs for various registrars. If yours isn't listed, or if you run into other difficulties, contact your registrar directly and they can help you out.
A-records (optional)
The following action links your naked domain (example.com) to your actual site (www.example.com). If you skip this step, visitors who leave off the "www" will see an error page.
Enter your domain name in the format example.com, and list the I.P. addresses shown below in the "A" section. You'll need to create four separate A-records which point to four different Google IPs. 216.239.32.21
216.239.34.21
216.239.36.21
216.239.38.21 Could I just leave my forwarding with masking on with my domain + blogger to make everything easier or what? And, is there any benefit in SEO if I don't have an EMD but it's something like this www.General.com/Keyword 1 www.General.com/Keyword 2/Posts/etc0 -
Ask a Question
We use DNN and we have case studies ran from our CMS. This is so we can have them in lists by category on service/market pages and show specific ones when needed. Then there is the case study detail page, (this is where the problem exists)to where you read out the case study in full detail and see the images and story. We enter our Case Studies into the CMS and this determines which website they show, and it creates URLs from the titles. However, on the detail page, the case studies all share the same page, Case Study.aspx, and they resolve to that page with their respected URLs in place. As seen here, http://www.structural.net/case-study/1/new-marlins-stadium.aspx Because they all share the same page they are being pulled as duplicate pages. They do show in the SERPS with the right title and URL and it all looks great, but they get errors for having duplicate page content and titles. Is there a way to solve this, or is this something I should even worry about?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | KJ-Rodgers0