Rotating Content Concern on Deep Pages
-
Hi there,
I apologize if I'm too vague, but this is a tough issue describe without divulging too much of our project.
I'm working on a new project which will provide information results in sets of 3. Let's say someone wants to find 3 books that match their criteria, either through their organic search which leads them to us, or through their internal search on our site.
For instance, if they're looking for classic movies involving monsters, we might display Frankenstein, Dracula, and The Mummy. We'd list unique descriptions about the movies and include lots of other useful information.
However, there are obviously many more monster movies than those 3, so when a user refreshes the page or accesses it again, a different set of results show up. For this example, assume we have 5 results to choose from. So it's likely Google will index different results shuffled around.
I'm worried about this causing problems down the line with ranking. The meat and potatoes of the page content are the descriptions and information on the movies. If these are constantly changing, I'm afraid the page will look "unstable" to Google since we have no real static content beyond a header and title tag.
Can anyone offer any insight to this?
Thanks!
-
Thanks for the response. The issue of "hiding" the content with the randomization was a fear of mine. Believe me, I don't like the rotating content design, but it's where we're at right now.
3 search results, think specific businesses, but for user experience, only 3 will be shown at once. This is not something to be changed unfortunately. If more than 3 are in that specific business category, we'll be rotating them out (which I don't like) upon refresh.
The only solution I can think of is to have the top 3 remain static and allow the user to click a "Show more" button which loads them beneath (or replaces the original 3). Either way, Google shouldn't have an issue with that, correct?
I know there are "better" ways to accomplish what we're asking, but the site is custom built and nearly 95% complete. We are also taking a unique approach to the way we display results and serve them to our clients, so the most optimal way is not achievable at this point. It's basically finding the most optimal for what we can do, if that makes sense. Thanks for understanding!
-
Sorry been mega busy
First of all, never hide content from Google if a user is unable to view that information. You will get slapped for it. Even if the algorithm does not pick it up, someone will report it at some point. That is a bad foundation to start from.
What you are trying to do is complicated to get the full picture in my head hence the lack of response from others in this forum I think.
You need to describe exactly what will be on the page and why and what will be on others and why those pages need to be indexed. This way we can work out of the strategy you are taking is even the right one. There is likely a better way to do it.
-
Hi Gary,
Were you notified of my follow-up posts? I'd love to hear additional information from you.
Thanks a lot!
-
Hi Gary,
One thing you could try is loading all the matches on to a page and only show the top 3 matches with an option to reveal more and mark all the code up with a schema. This way the content will always be on the page and able to be crawled by Googlebot.
This is the idea I've been toying with. Do you have any idea if we could preload all matches/results and still use the refresh? It'd technically (I think) be different because the user can't load more on command, like with a button, but Google can see them.
I feel like it's a little iffy since Google seems to only approve of hidden text if the user controls when they see it or not. Any idea?
Thanks again!
-
Lesley,
Thanks for the response.
If we scripted the page so Google would ignore the content, I'm afraid we'd be in nearly the same boat we're in now. As in, we'd have no content on the page and wouldn't rank for anything.
While it would effectively "solve" the potential rotating content issues and penalties, we wouldn't have anythign to rank for.
Gary,
Thanks for the helpful response!
1. How would we run into internal duplicate content issues? These 3 results (in full) would only be found on this specific page, they'd just be rotating.
I will say that the way these results pages are structured includes snippets of content that can be found on each results individual page, e.g., a snippet of Frankenstein's plot will show on the results page, and once clicked, will show the full entry. So there's going to be some duplicate content. That shouldn't be a huge deal though?
2. That's exactly the reason I hate this. Even if Google didn't get pissed, we wouldn't have static content (keywords, longtails) to build authority and rank for.
Idea #1: I actually have this prinicple written down, but slightly different. If we had a link at the bottom of the results in Javascript to "shuffle" or "refresh" the content, the user would get the benefit, but since it's not a new page, Google couldn't crawl it. So they'd only randomize on command, but stick with the initial 3 on pageload.
I was also toying with the idea of locking 2 of the results and only shuffling the 3rd, that way there's some semblance of continuity to the indexing and we'd always be working towards that content ranking. Thoughts?
Are you saying with SCHEMA we can "hide" the additional/rotated results initially to the user, but Google sees it immediately? If so, please elaborate or send me a link since this is interesting!
Idea #2: The snippets actually lead/link to their static pages on their own URL (this is the only duplicate content I believe) so that's fine, but yes, we aren't concerned with the static pages ranking, only the grouped together results.
-
You run into a number of issues by having these pages indexed.
1. Lots of internal duplicate content, Google has said this is not a problem and the they will serve up the best result. But it can trigger Panda issues.
2. The content always changes so you will confuse Googlebot and have issues ranking for specific terms for any period of time. (your SERPS would fluctuate like crazy or trigger a quality algorithm)
Some ideas:
One thing you could try is loading all the matches on to a page and only show the top 3 matches with an option to reveal more and mark all the code up with a schema. This way the content will always be on the page and able to be crawled by Googlebot.
Another option is to not index these pages at all and create static pages for each item. But this defeats the object of what you are trying to rank for.
Serving up random content is always going to be an issue for Googlebot, but more and more webmasters have responsive designs that hide and show content based on clickable actions on pages. Googlebot indexes all the content but is smart at working out what is also visible to the user and giving preference to it.
-
In my opinion the safest way to do it would be to have a discrete iframe that loaded the contents. The reason being is that google would ignore it. It would make it on par with twitter widgets and facebook like boxes.
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
-
When serving a 410 for page gone, should I serve an error page?
I'm removing a bunch of old & rubbish pages and was going to serve 410 to tell google they're gone (my understanding is it'll get them out of the index a bit quicker than a 404). I should still serve an error page though, right? Similar to a 404. That doesn't muddy the "gone" message that I'm giving Google? There's no need to 410 and die?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | HSDOnline0 -
Best to Combine Listing URLs? Are 300 Listing Pages a "Thin Content" Risk?
We operate www.metro-manhattan.com, a commercial real estate website. There about 550 pages. About 300 pages are for individual listings. About 150 are for buildings. Most of the listings pages have 180-240 words. Would it be better from an SEO perspective to have multiple listings on a single page, say all Chelsea listings on the Chelsea neighborhood page? Are we shooting ourselves in the foot by having separate URLs for each listing? Are we at risI for a thin cogent Google penalty? Would the same apply to building pages (about 150)? Sample Listing: http://www.nyc-officespace-leader.com/listings/364-madison-ave-office-lease-1802sf Sample Building: http://www.nyc-officespace-leader.com/for-a-new-york-office-space-rental-consider-one-worldwide-plaza-825-eighth-avenue My concern is that the existing site architecture may result in some form of Google penalty. If we have to consolidate these pages what would be the best way of doing so? Thanks,
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Kingalan1
Alan0 -
SEO: How to change page content + shift its original content to other page at the same time?
Hello, I want to replace the content of one page of our website (already indexeed) and shift its original content to another page. How can I do this without problems like penalizations etc? Current situation: Page A
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | daimpa
URL: example.com/formula-1
Content: ContentPageA Desired situation: Page A
URL: example.com/formula-1
Content: NEW CONTENT! Page B
URL: example.com/formula-1-news
Content: ContentPageA (The content that was in Page A!) Content of the two pages will be about the same argument (& same keyword) but non-duplicate. The new content in page A is more optimized for search engines. How long will it take for the page to rank better?0 -
Putting "noindex" on a page that's in an iframe... what will that mean for the parent page?
If I've got a page that is being called in an iframe, on my homepage, and I don't want that called page to be indexed.... so I put a noindex tag on the called page (but not on the homepage) what might that mean for the homepage? Nothing? Will Google, Bing, Yahoo, or anyone else, potentially see that as a noindex tag on my homepage?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Philip-DiPatrizio0 -
HELP! How does one prevent regional pages as being counted as "duplicate content," "duplicate meta descriptions," et cetera...?
The organization I am working with has multiple versions of its website geared towards the different regions. US - http://www.orionhealth.com/ CA - http://www.orionhealth.com/ca/ DE - http://www.orionhealth.com/de/ UK - http://www.orionhealth.com/uk/ AU - http://www.orionhealth.com/au/ NZ - http://www.orionhealth.com/nz/ Some of these sites have very similar pages which are registering as duplicate content, meta descriptions and titles. Two examples are: http://www.orionhealth.com/terms-and-conditions http://www.orionhealth.com/uk/terms-and-conditions Now even though the content is the same, the navigation is different since each region has different product options / services, so a redirect won't work since the navigation on the main US site is different from the navigation for the UK site. A rel=canonical seems like a viable option, but (correct me if I'm wrong) it tells search engines to only index the main page, in this case, it would be the US version, but I still want the UK site to appear to search engines. So what is the proper way of treating similar pages accross different regional directories? Any insight would be GREATLY appreciated! Thank you!
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Scratch_MM0 -
Can a website be punished by panda if content scrapers have duplicated content?
I've noticed recently that a number of content scrapers are linking to one of our websites and have the duplicate content on their web pages. Can content scrapers affect the original website's ranking? I'm concerned that having duplicated content, even if hosted by scrapers, could be a bad signal to Google. What are the best ways to prevent this happening? I'd really appreciate any help as I can't find the answer online!
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | RG_SEO0 -
Is there a way to stop my product pages with the "show all" catagory/attribute from duplicating content?
If there were less pages with the "show all" attribute it would be a simple fix by adding the canonical URL tag. But seeing that there are about 1,000 of them I was wondering if their was a broader fix that I could apply.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | cscoville0 -
High number of items per page or low number with more category pages?
In SEO terms, what would be the best method: High number of items per page or low number with more pages? For example, this category listing here: http://flyawaysimulation.com/downloads/90/fsx-civil-aircraft/ It has 10 items per page. Would there be any benefit of changing a listing like that to 20 items in order to decrease the number of pages in the category? Also, what other ways could you increase the SEO of category listings like that?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Peter2640