I thought META KEYWORDS tag was dead?
-
http://www.wpkube.com/wordpress-seo-plugin/ this article just came out as a one of the many guides to Yoast's Wordpress SEO. I am surprised it mentioned:
- Use meta keywords tag: Google reportedly doesn’t use the keywords that your enter for your posts but as Google isn’t the only show in town, you might want to check this box.Recommendation: check
-
I stopped using meta keywords tag because Google doesn't use it any more, plus if you are in a competitive field by using keywords you are giving free keyword research to your competitors? Does any one still use meta keywords here? If so why?
-
Google doesn't use keyword tags, has anyone experienced a dis-benefit to meta-keywords tag from Google ie. dropped rankings etc.?
-
I read that Bing looks at the keyword tag to make sure there's nothing spammy going on. Ignore it and you'll avoid raising any red flags.
Mike
-
"I'd have to quit my job and just drink full-time."
You say that like it's a bad thing?!
Paul
-
Dr. Pete,
"at least one major search engine used META keywords as a spam signal in the past" - I heard that some where as well, that is partly why the question was asked
...Safe to assume some search engines still use it as a spam signal?
-
Oh meta keywords, curse you and your inevitable betrayal.
-
OK, now I am confused... Scientist vs sense of humor (and a good one at that). But, how can this be???? For he is the Kwisatz Haderach!!!
Good one Pete.
-
Pete, you crack me up:)
-
That's the kind of study I don't do because I'm secretly afraid it might work and then I'd have to quit my job and just drink full-time.
-
Dr. Pete,
While I agree with what you have here, I am disappointed that you are unwilling to set up a single variable study of some type focusing on the aftereffects of putting the wrong keyword meta tags in to trap the lazy, unrepentant, claimers of SEOdom, etc.
I would love to see how many cosmetic surgery sites that do liposuction would end up ranked for Saw2 barbequed ribs! as a long tail keyword!!!
If anyone can do it, you can do it. We believe in you!
Best to you and the team!
-
One warning - not to derail the discussion, which is amazing - I'm as sure as is reasonably possible that at least one major search engine used META keywords as a spam signal in the past, and I'd bet it's still corroborating evidence for Google. Probably goes without saying, but if you use it - use it well. Just because it's not a positive ranking factor doesn't mean it's not a negative ranking factor.
I agree that the competitor aspect never bothered me. Hopefully, you also use your keywords in your actual content. Otherwise, what's the point?
-
I'm working from home today and trying not to wake up my husband because I'm laughing so hard. Time to move downstairs before I read any more replies!
-
I read somewhere that BING use the keyword tag as a spamming signal. Anyone else see that?
EDIT: Read that here:
http://www.semrush.com/blog/tips/the-myths-behind-meta-keywords/
-
Thanks for your input Tom, that sounds right. Now just curious, has anyone experienced a benefit?
-
I have seen no drop in placement with my projects that have no kw tags on Google, Bing or yahoo.
-
They don't call you clever for no reason
-
@Ron and others,
I am just looking for some evidence from those that use keywords to see if they help. Example maybe someone has found that some search new search engine, like duckduckgo, topsy, etc that uses meta keywords for example and they see keywords helping them get traffic from those places. Otherwise why not is not a good enough reason for me, as its extra work to add keywords without benefit, plus it looks SEO 1.0 (think html tables, static pages) vs SEO 2.0 to me.
Thanks for adding bit of FUN to this thread BTW
-
one of the first things I look at to judge an SEO on is whether or not they have 50 keywords per page with meta tags.
--Yup that's one of the things I look at as well
-
The keyword meta tag is alive and well, they just call it the meta title nowadays
-
I put key words in as it cannot hurt. If it gets a few more leads per year why not :). As far as the previous string goes I think these comments are truly silly as there are many good tools to figure out the key words you are targeting without the meta key words. So if "why not" is a good enough justification then you should do it.
-
UPDATE: wordpress all in one seo pro has the same thing keyword siggestion.......
-
Funny thread!
how would you respond to this?
Customer "Q#1" why didn't you write keyword tags for my website.....? " give proper answer"
Q#2... If Google does not care about my keyword tags than why is it listed here "cache:domain. com" ?
-
Actually, I laughed my a__ off when I wrote it.
-
barbequed ribs
OMG! Oh, I am laughing so hard I will have to wash my glasses.
-
Uh?
-
I am going to start putting the wrong keywords in. So on a physician site for lipo, my keywords will be: Saw 2, barbequed ribs, Halloween 3, Dexter, cannibals, etc.
Can't wait to see that competitor rank now!
Thanks EGOL!
-
Well........ if you are ranking well, they are going to try to use what you are using. Again, they are lazy and they are certainly not smart so kudos to EGOL.
-
**Anybody who is lazy enough to harvest that info is lazier than smart. Not a threat. And, I believe in the theory that imitators come in second. **
Bravo. A competitor is gonna look at those 5-20 meta keywords and do what?
-
We prefer to make our client's competitors do their own work and break a sweat.
I fill that tag with BS. That'll fix those lazy weasels.
No, honestly... I still use meta keywords.
When I write an article I write the title tag first.... "Begin with the end in mind." Then I write the meta keywords. Makes me think about where I am going.
Anybody who is lazy enough to harvest that info is lazier than smart. Not a threat. And, I believe in the theory that imitators come in second.
..... and.... I bet Google is using meta keywords and counting those nofollow links it's their "reverse psychology" algo to screw SEOs. (Of course they are not counting blog and forum spam and sitewides... but nofollow links that appear to be editorially given - such as wikipedia citations - are counted at 5x the normal rate)
-
Vadim
As to using it there is no negative effect re Google. The reason most do not use it is that since Google does not, why would you put the keywords in and make it easy on those who want to know what you are targeting?
We prefer to make our client's competitors do their own work and break a sweat. (Also, if I am honest, one of the first things I look at to judge an SEO on is whether or not they have 50 keywords per page with meta tags.)
Hope that helps,
best
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
-
Primary keyword in every page title of website
Hi all, We can see many website page titles are filled with "brand name & primary keyword" at suffix. Just wondering how much this gonna help. Or can we remove "primary keyword" from other non-relevant pages and limit the same to important pages to rank well? Thanks
Algorithm Updates | | vtmoz0 -
The importance of meta keywords?
Hello, Is adding meta keywords still worth doing nowadays? I have been reading and hearing some different opinions about it. For a ' beginner ' in this field it is hard to find a definite answer to this questions.. Thank you for reading(and answering) my question!
Algorithm Updates | | EPPD0 -
New Website Old Domain - Still Poor Rankings after 1 Year - Tagging & Content the culprit?
I've run a live wedding band in Boston for almost 30 years, that used to rank very well in organic search. I was hit by the Panda Updates August of 2014, and rankings literally vanished. I hired an SEO company to rectify the situation and create a new WordPress website -which launched January 15, 2015. Kept my old domain: www.shineband.com Rankings remained pretty much non-existent. I was then told that 10% of my links were bad. After lots of grunt work, I sent in a disavow request in early June via Google Wemaster Tools. It's now mid October, rankings have remained pretty much non-existent. Without much experience, I got Moz Pro to help take control of my own SEO and help identify some problems (over 60 pages of medium priority issues: title tag character length and meta description). Also some helpful reports by www.siteliner.com and www.feinternational.com both mentioned a Duplicate Content issue. I had old blog posts from a different domain (now 301 redirecting to the main site) migrated to my new website's internal blog, http://www.shineband.com/best-boston-wedding-band-blog/ as suggested by the SEO company I hired. It appears that by doing that -the the older blog posts show as pages in the back end of WordPress with the poor meta and tile issues AS WELL AS probably creating a primary reason for duplicate content issues (with links back to the site). Could this most likely be viewed as spamming or (unofficial) SEO penalty? As SEO companies far and wide daily try to persuade me to hire them to fix my ranking -can't say I trust much. My plan: put most of the old blog posts into the Trash, via WordPress -rather than try and optimize each page (over 60) adjusting tagging, titles and duplicate content. Nobody really reads a quick post from 2009... I believe this could be beneficial and that those pages are more hurtful than helpful. Is that a bad idea, not knowing if those pages carry much juice? Realize my domain authority not great. No grand expectations, but is this a good move? What would be my next step afterwards, some kind of resubmitting of the site, then? This has been painful, business has fallen, can't through more dough at this. THANK YOU!
Algorithm Updates | | Shineband1 -
Traffic, CTR AND AdSense eCPM Down ... Keyword Rankings Unchanged
Since the last week in March, one of our sites with ~ 1 million high quality page-views per month has had a 25% drop in traffic, CTR drop from 4% to 3%, and AdSense eCPM has dropped from $8 to $5 ... however, all of our keyword rankings have remained unchanged. Also, it is an extremely consistent niche with no drop in relevant searches ... The only thing that we KNOW for sure has changed is the removal of the separator and indentation from the Google search ads to our #1 ranking positions. Could such a simple alteration in the Google search results UI have such a significant impact on our numbers? Is anyone else experiencing a similar revenue drop without a rankings drop in the past two weeks? Besides punching up the titles to make our search results more appealing to users, is there really anything that can be done about Googles new paid results placement? Your thoughts and suggestions are invited. Thanks guys and gals 😉
Algorithm Updates | | Humanovation0 -
Google's spell check recognize a keyword with volume
When the keyword "acls recertification" (an important keyword for our client) is typed into the Google search box, the word "recertification" is underlined in red. Note that you only need to type "acls rec" to make the red underline appear.BUT, Google does not underline the word "recertification" when it is typed into the search box alone, nor does Google underline the word "recertification" when the following keywords are searched: cpr recertification bls recertification pals recertification ^These are all closely related to the keyword "acls recertification," so this spell check behavior is very inconsistent.Why does this matter? Because no matter how close you come to typing "acls recertification," Google's autocomplete suggestions never include "acls recertification" (because of the perceived misspelling?).BUT, Google does suggest "acls recertification online" in the dropdown menu. If you select the "acls recertification online" suggestion then backspace until the word "online" is gone, the red underline disappears, and "acls recertification" becomes an autocomplete suggestion. VERY strange behavior...I have replicated this issue on various depersonalized browsers and devices, so I am confident that this is not related to my personal settings.This keyword contributes to a large portion of our client's business (they specialize in acls certification and recertification), so you can imagine how concerning this is for us. Note that until very recently (3-4 months ago), this keyword did NOT have any spell-check issues. This keyword averages 2400 searches per month according to AdWords which should be enough volume to allow Google to recognize the correct spellingI posted this issue in the Google product forums, where I was advised to submit feedback directly on the search results page via Google's "feedback" link. I have submitted this feedback to Google, but I thought I would bring this to the MOZ community as well to see if anyone has experienced a similar issue, or has any ideas as to what could be causing this issue.
Algorithm Updates | | RyanKent0 -
Who's doing canonical tags right, The Gap or Kohls?
Hi Moz, I'm working on an ecommerce site with categories, filter options, and sort options – teacherexpress.scholastic.com. Should I have canonical tags from all filter and sort options point to the category page like gap.com and llbean.com? or have all sort options point to the filtered page URL like kohls.com? I was under the impression that to use a canonical tag, the pages have to have the same content, meaning that Gap and L.L. Bean would be using canonical tags incorrectly. Using a filter changes the content, whereas using a sort option just changes the order. What would be the best way to deal with duplicate content for this site? Thanks for reading!
Algorithm Updates | | DA20130 -
Will we no longer need Location + Keyword? Do we even need it at all?
Prepare yourselves. This is a long question. With the rise of schema and Google Local+, do you think Google will now have enough data about where a business is located, so that when someone searches for, a keyword such as "Atlanta Hyundai dealers" a business in Atlanta that's website: has been properly marked up with schema (or microdata for business location) has claimed its Google Local+ has done enough downstream work in Local Search listings for its NAP (name, address, phone number) will no longer have to incorporate variations of "Atlanta Hyundai dealers" in the text on the website? Could they just write enough great content about how they're a Hyundai dealership without the abuse of the Atlanta portion? Or if they're in Boston and they're a dentist or lawyer, could the content be just about the services they provided without so much emphasis tied to location? I'm talking about removing the location of the business from the text in all places other than the schema markup or the contact page on the website. Maybe still keep a main location in the title tags or meta description if it would benefit the customer. I work in an industry where location + keywords has reached such a point of saturation, that it makes the text on the website read very poorly, and I'd like to learn more about alternate methods to keep the text more pure, read better and still achieve the same success when it comes to local search. Also, I haven't seen other sites penalized for all the location stuffing on their websites, which is bizarre because it reads so spammy you can't recognize where the geotargeted keywords end and where the regular text begins. I've been working gradually in this general direction (more emphasis on NAP, researching schema, and vastly improving the content on clients' websites so it's not so heavy with geo-targeted keywords). I also ask because though the niche I work in is still pretty hell-bent on using geo-targeted keywords, whenever I check Analytics, the majority of traffic is branded and geo-targeted keywords make up only a small fraction of traffic. Any thoughts? What are other people doing in this regard?
Algorithm Updates | | EEE30 -
Google changing the casing in SERPs of our domain name in Title tag!
I've added NOODP and NOYDIR metas to our pages... but Google is still somehow showing the correct title tag that is on the page, but is changing the CASING of the | Domain.com portion. In some instances, they are still showing a different title tag all together. Why would they be ignoring the <title>tag on the page and placing an uncased version of our domain name at the end?</p> <p> </p> <a download="MxQjo" class="imported-anchor-tag" href="http://imgur.com/MxQjo" target="_blank">MxQjo</a></title>
Algorithm Updates | | CareerBliss0