Welcome to the Q&A Forum

Browse the forum for helpful insights and fresh discussions about all things SEO.

Your browser does not seem to support JavaScript. As a result, your viewing experience will be diminished, and you have been placed in read-only mode.

Please download a browser that supports JavaScript, or enable it if it's disabled (i.e. NoScript).

Seperate Blog vs Blog in Site

Algorithm Updates

778

BobGW last edited by

Hello,

When is it useful to have a blog as an external entity, versus a blog embedded in an ecommerce site.

My thoughts lean towards making it part of the site to build new content, but I'm open to suggestions.
1 Reply Last reply
Reply Quote 0
David_ODonnell @DavidKonigsberg last edited by

Agreed, building authority on one site trumps trying to work on multiple - otherwise you are doubling your efforts and splitting your results.
1 Reply Last reply
Reply Quote 1
DavidKonigsberg last edited by

Best is to do site.com/blog so the links to the main site helps the blog otherwise you need to get links for 2 domains
1 Reply Last reply
Reply Quote 4

Got a burning SEO question?

Subscribe to Moz Pro to gain full access to Q&A, answer questions, and ask your own.

Start my free trial

Browse Questions

View

From

Sorted by

With category

Explore more categories

Related Questions

Is "Author Rank," User Comments Driving Losses for YMYL Sites?

Hi, folks! So, our company publishes 50+ active, disease-specific news and perspectives websites -- mostly for rare diseases. We are also tenacious content creators: between news, columns, resource pages, and other content, we produce 1K+ pieces of original content across our network. Authors are either PhD scientists or patients/caregivers. All of our sites use the same design. We were big winners with the August Medic update in 2018 and subsequent update in September/October. However, the Medic update in March and de-indexing bug in April were huge losers for us across our monetized sites (about 10 in total). We've seen some recovery with this early June update, but also some further losses. It's a mixed bag. Take a look at this attached MOZ chart, which shows the jumps and falls around the various Medic updates. The pattern is very similar on many of our sites. As per JT Williamson's stellar article on EAT, I feel like we've done a good job in meeting those criteria, which has left we wondering what isn't jiving with the new core updates. I have two theories I wanted to run past you all: 1. Are user comments on YMYL sites problematic for Google now? I was thinking that maybe user comments underneath health news and perspectives articles might be concerning on YMYL sites now. On one hand, a healthy commenting community indicates an engaged user base and speaks to the trust and authority of the content. On the other hand, while the AUTHOR of the article might be a PhD researcher or a patient advocate, the people commenting -- how qualified are they? What if they are spouting off crazy ideas? Could Google's new update see user comments such as these as degrading the trust/authority/expertise of the page? The examples I linked to above have a good number of user comments. Could these now be problematic? 2. Is Google "Author Rank" finally happening, sort of? From what I've read about EAT -- particularly for YMYL sites -- it's important that authors have “formal expertise” and, according to Williamson, "an expert in the field or topic." He continues that the author's expertise and authority, "is informed by relevant credentials, reviews, testimonials, etc. " Well -- how is Google substantiating this? We no longer have the authorship markup, but is the algorithm doing its due diligence on authors in some more sophisticated way? It makes me wonder if we're doing enough to present our author's credentials on our articles, for example. Take a look -- Magdalena is a PhD researcher, but her user profile doesn't appear at the bottom of the article, and if you click on her name, it just takes you to her author category page (how WordPress'ish). Even worse -- our resource pages don't even list the author. Anyhow, I'd love to get some feedback from the community on these ideas. I know that Google has said there's nothing to do to "fix" these downturns, but it'd sure be nice to get some of this traffic back! Thanks! 243rn10.png
Algorithm Updates | | Michael_Nace

1
If we have all products on-site for indexing, do we get dinged by Google for not transacting on-site?

I am trying to do research on the SEO impact of having an off-site transactional website. For example, Pepsi.com lists all product information on their site but guides visitors to transact on Amazon or Walmart. What impact, if any, does guiding the customer to a separate transactional site have on SEO? In short, if we have all products on-site for indexing, do we get dinged by Google for not transacting on-site?
Algorithm Updates | | KaylaV

0
Will Google penalize 2 sites for targeting "like" keyword phrases?

I own (2) different websites, one an HTML site that has been live for 20 years and a ecommerce site that has been live for 7 years. We sell custom printed (branded) tents for use at trade shows and other indoor and outdoor events. While our ecomm site targets "trade show" tents our HTML site targets "event" tents. I believe that the keyword phrases are dissimilar enough that targeting "trade show tents" on one site and "event tents" on the other should not cause Google to penalize one or the other or both sites for having similar content. The content is different on both sites. I'm wondering if anyone has experience with, or opinions on, my thoughts... either way. Thanks,
Terry Hepola
Algorithm Updates | | terry_tradeshowstuff

0
Would 37,000 footer links from one site be the cause for our ranking drops?

Hey guys, After this week's Penguin update, I've noticed that one of our clients has seen a dip in rankings. Because of this, I've had a good link at the client's back link profile in comparison to competitors and noticed that over 37,000 footer links have been generated from one website - providing us with an unhealthy balance of anchor terms. Do you guys believe this may be the cause for our ranking drops? Would it be wise to try and contact the webmaster in question to remove the footer links? Thanks, Matt
Algorithm Updates | | Webrevolve

0
Branded vs non-branded query

So there's an obvious difference between a branded and non-branded search term, but I'm interested in the SERPs that are shown as a result. Branded search only results in 7 listings on the first page - obviously because branded search is generally more navigational in nature and the lower results get minimal CT. Are their any technical differences beyond this? Also, how does google define a branded search term? Because a search for Vodafone or Dell show reduced results, but Coca Cola does not. Thanks guys 🙂
Algorithm Updates | | underscorelive

0
How to optimise a news site? - tomorrows chip paper terms

Are there any specific tips to how to gain traffic from very short lived search terms? If the site you are SEO/SEMing want to go for search related to things like the latest celebrity breakup, or a fashion event that lasts less than a week The onsite stuff seems pretty good as SEO onsite tools generally give it an A grade Is it just a case of doing the same stuff as normal, but faster? 😉
Algorithm Updates | | Fammy

0
Does Google do domain level topic modeling? If so, are off-site factors such as search traffic volume taken into account?

80% of my site's organic traffic is coming through a resource that is only somewhat related. Does Google think the main topic of my site is terms this resource targets thus bumping the terms I care about to a sub-topic level of sorts? If this is the case, would putting the resource information into a sub-domain help to solve the problem?
Algorithm Updates | | tatermarketing

0
Are the latest Ranking Reports counting the new large format site links as positions?

Received my weekly ranking report this morning and noticed a specific keyword that I've been ranking in the 3rd or 4th spot has dropped a significant amount of positions. I tested the results myself and it appears the site links of the manufacturer are being counted as positions? My keyword has me in the 3rd position (although it is much lower on the physical page now because of the new format). I'm really wondering how this will affect organic listings going forward - this new format could be a game changer.
Algorithm Updates | | longbeachjamie

2