What is your experience so far, with the new Google's Meta Description length up to 320 characters?
-
I updated a few home pages and some landing pages, so far so good!
Although, I wish to know about other experiences, before continue updating. Thanks for your comments!
-
Hi Brooks,
Thanks for the input. It is great to know that it is also working in your ecosystem.
-
Agreed, and sometimes there can be power in a one word title - both for optimization and communication.
-
Agreed.
I don't have any data to prove it's usefulness, but there's something really nice and satisfying about a solid, short, and effective meta description.
-
"really just didn't need to be any longer than 160ish characters"
Thanks!
That's a very interesting thought. Especially if you can do effective "short and punchy" descriptions. If you ramble too long it stinks it up.
-
My agency just launched a new website and in the process updated many of our meta descriptions. Though in optimizing, we realized some really just didn't need to be any longer than 160ish characters.
However, for other pages, such as our services pages, the additional characters gave us a chance to introduce the page, detail what the user can find, and sort of "preview" the call to action.
We've already seen a little increase in CTR for some of our services pages.
Best of luck!
-
Hello William,
Thanks for the input.
I noticed that sometimes Google chooses text randomly. Till now I cannot find a pattern, sometimes from the first paragraph, others from the middle of the page. Although, regarding the pages already SEO optimized, I mean with adecuate page title, meta description and h1, it is showing the written meta description.Best regards
-
Hello,
I am in the process of updating Meta tags and top of page content to try and get relevant text and description tags to show in Google listings. On some of my pages Google uses my Mets "Description" tags and on many others, Google is using the content from the top of the pages. I am not sure how or why which one gets used so I am working on both tags and top of page content.
Best Regards
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
-
Moved brand's shop to a new domain. will our organic traffic recuperate?
Hello, We are a healthcare company with a strong domain authority and several thousand pages of service related content at brand.com. We've been operating an ancillary ecommerce store that sells related 3rd party products at brand.com/shop for a little over a year. We recently invested in a platform upgrade and moved our site to a new domain, brandshop.com. We implemented page-level 301 redirects including all category pages, product detail pages, canonical and non-canonical URLs, etc.. which the understanding that there would not be any loss in page rank. What we're seeing over the last 2 months is an initial dive in organic traffic, followed by a ramp-up period of if impressions (but not position) in the following weeks, another drop and we've steady at this low for the last 2 weeks. Another area that might have hurt us, the 301 redirects were implemented correctly immediately post launch (on a wednesday), but it was discovered on the following Monday that our .htaccess file had reverted to an old version without the redirect rules. For 3-4 days, all traffic was being redirected from brand.com/shop/url to brandshop.com/badurl. Can we expect to recover our organic traffic giving the launch screw up with the .htaccess file, or is it more of an issue with us separating from the brand.com domain? Thanks,
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | eugene_p
Eugene0 -
Pages excluded from Google's index due to "different canonicalization than user"
Hi MOZ community, A few weeks ago we noticed a complete collapse in traffic on some of our pages (7 out of around 150 blog posts in question). We were able to confirm that those pages disappeared for good from Google's index at the end of January '18, they were still findable via all other major search engines. Using Google's Search Console (previously Webmastertools) we found the unindexed URLs in the list of pages being excluded because "Google chose different canonical than user". Content-wise, the page that Google falsely determines as canonical instead has little to no similarity to the pages it thereby excludes from the index. False canonicalization About our setup: We are a SPA, delivering our pages pre-rendered, each with an (empty) rel=canonical tag in the HTTP header that's then dynamically filled with a self-referential link to the pages own URL via Javascript. This seemed and seems to work fine for 99% of our pages but happens to fail for one of our top performing ones (which is why the hassle 😉 ). What we tried so far: going through every step of this handy guide: https://moz.com/blog/panic-stations-how-to-handle-an-important-page-disappearing-from-google-case-study --> inconclusive (healthy pages, no penalties etc.) manually requesting re-indexation via Search Console --> immediately brought back some pages, others shortly re-appeared in the index then got kicked again for the aforementioned reasons checking other search engines --> pages are only gone from Google, can still be found via Bing, DuckDuckGo and other search engines Questions to you: How does the Googlebot operate with Javascript and does anybody know if their setup has changed in that respect around the end of January? Could you think of any other reason to cause the behavior described above? Eternally thankful for any help! ldWB9
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | SvenRi1 -
Incorrect Spelling Indexed In Meta Info - Can't Change It
Hi,It would be great if a member of the community could help me to resolve this issue.Google is indexing an incorrect spelling on of our key pages and we can't identify the reason why.- The page in question: https://newbridgesilverware.com/jewelleryAs you can see from the attached image, the Meta Title is rendered to contain the keyword "jewelry" (the American spelling.) We want this to read as "jewellery" - the British-English spelling. Yet in the page source the word is given in the meta title as "jewellery". Nowhere in the page source or on the page itself does the American spelling appear - yet Google still renders it in the Meta Title.Can anyone identify why this is happening and offer any possible solutions?Much appreciatedDhqJp
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Johnny_AppleSeed1 -
Community Discussion: Are You Optimizing Your Brand's Content for Featured Snippets?
My latest post on the Moz Blog, Featured Snippets: A Dead-Simple Tactic for Making, explores how to keep Featured Snippets once you have them. I'm curious to know how many brands are actively working to get in the answer box, and for those who are, what's been the results?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | ronell-smith2 -
Baffled by this site's inability to rank
Hi guys, I've been working on a site for quite a while and it has a really good link profile, excellent content, no errors or penalties (as far as I can tell) but for some reason it consistently ranks below a lot of thin poor quality websites with spammy EMDs and a few obviously paid links from old-skool business directories etc. It has a significantly higher DA and linking root domains that almost all of them. Also it just bounces around from #40 to #28 to#35 to #40 to #28 on a weekly basis for many of our primary keywords. There just seems to be no logic to this and it goes against everything I know and everything we're taught. (I should probably point out that I've been doing this quite a while and have a number of other sites ranking extremely well in quite a few different verticals), Has anyone ever experienced anything like this and what did you do? Before I throw in the towel it would be good to hear from others and try and understand why this happens and if there is anything else I can try to help my client and fix it. Many thanks in advance.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Blaze-Communication0 -
Google's 'related:' operator
I have a quick question about Google's 'related:' operator when viewing search results. Is there reason why a website doesn't produce related/similar sites? For example, if I use the related: operator for my site, no results appear.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | ecomteam_handiramp.com
https://www.google.com/#q=related:www.handiramp.com The site has been around since 1998. The site also has two good relevant DMOZ inbound links. Any suggestions on why this is and any way to fix it? Thank you.0 -
How to find all of a website's SERPs?
Was wondering how easiest to find all of a website's existing SERPs?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | McTaggart0 -
Create new subdomain or new site for new Niche Product?
We have an existing large site with strong, relevant traffic, including excellent SEO traffic. The company wants to launch a new business offering, specifically targeted at the "small business" segment. Because the "small business" customer is substantially different from the traditional "large corporation" customer, the company has decided to create a completely independent microsite for the "small business" market. Purely from a Marketing and Communications standpoint, this makes sense. From an SEO perspective, we have 2 options: Create the new "small business" microsite on a subdomain of the existing site, and benefit from the strong domain authority and trust of the existing site. Build the microsite on a separate domain with exact primary keyword match in the domain name. My sense is that option #1 is by far the better option in the short and long run. Am I correct? Thanks in advance!
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | axelk0