Content available only on log-in/ sign up - how to optimise?
-
Hi Mozzers.
I'm working on a dev brief for a site with no search visibility at all. You have to log in (well, sign up) to the site (via Facebook) to get any content. Usability issues of this aside, I am wondering what are the possible solutions there are to getting content indexed.
I feel that there are two options:
1. Pinterest-style: this gives the user some visibility of the content on the site before presenting you with a log in overlay. I assume this also allows search engines to cache the content and follow the links.
2. Duplicate HTTP and HTTPS sites. I'm not sure if this is possible in terms of falling foul of the "showing one thing to search engines and another thing to users" guidelines. In my mind, you would block robots from the HTTPS site (and show it to the users where log in etc is required) but URLs would canonicalise to the HTTP version of the page, which you wouldn't present to the users, but would show to the search engines. The actual content on the pages would be the same.
I wonder if anyone knows any example of large(ish) websites which does this well, or any options I haven't considered here.
Many thanks.
-
Thanks Justin and Bruce,
I think I will try and push for the "limited view until signed in" solution. The HTTP/ HTTPS one just feels a bit too much like a dirty hack that will end up hurting in some way, at some point!
Thanks for your responses.
-
Could you model your approach after other subscription sites? Take, for example, the online version of the Wall Street Journal: http://online.wsj.com/home-page. They present enough content in preview mode to be relevant to both users and Google. You know from the blurb what the story is basically about.
Once someone logs in, they get the rest of the content. But I don't think they get a separate URL.
I wouldn't do the duplicate HTTP/HTTPS approach. In the future, you may want the whole site to be HTTPS, so you'd have to face this issue again.
-
Hi Pascale
If the content is visible to the "not signed in end user" then it is visible to google. If it is not, it is not visible to Google.
I might have this wrong, but it would appear that you have a pinterest style site and that you want further content only be visible when the user is logged in? This then would be a site settings and not crawl issue. This is a trgger on the website server to require the guest to log in after XYZ. The whole site is opened to crawl but you set these parameters for the guest user in your sites back office
I think it is a case of either or, not both
Bruce
edit typo
-
Hi Bruce,
Thanks for your response. I agree - that the whole point of login is to to stop unwanted visitors seeing private content. For the most part.
This is not a log in in that same way - it's more of a "sign up" so like Pinterest or DueDil - you have to sign up in order to view the content.
I hope that makes more sense and I will modify the title (if I can) to make it clearer.
Thanks
-
If the content is for Logged in Users, why would you want it crawled?
Google crawls sites open to the public, therefore if the site is behind a login, then google will not crawl it. If google crawls it, then the content will show up in search results, hence making the login process redundant.
If you want to offer subscription content, then this is a marketing issue, not a crawl issue. You will need to have open content available that the viewing will perhaps then make a call whether to subscribe to your site or not.
Remember login is a cloaking devise, designed to stop unwanted visitors viewing the content, hence why google will view this in the same way.
Hope that helps
Bruce
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
-
Duplicate content issue
Hi, A client of ours has one URL for the moment (https://aalst.mobilepoint.be/) and wants to create a second one with exactly the same content (https://deinze.mobilepoint.be/). Will that mean Google punishes the second one because of duplicate content? What are the recommendations?
Technical SEO | | conversal0 -
Managing Zendesk content, specifically redirecting/retiring content?
We've been using Zendesk to manage support content, and have old/duplicate articles that we'd like to redirect. However, Zendesk doesn't seem to have a solution for this, and the suggestions we've found (some hacky JS) have not worked. I'd like for us to not just delete/hide these articles. Has anyone else successfully navigated retiring/redirecting Zendesk content in an SEO-friendly fashion?
Technical SEO | | KMStrava0 -
If I want clean up my URLs and take the "www.site.com/page.html" and make it "www.site.com/page" do I need a redirect?
If I want clean up my URLs and take the "www.site.com/page.html" and make it "www.site.com/page" do I need a redirect? If this scenario requires a 301 redirect no matter what, I might as well update the URL to be a little more keyword rich for the page while I'm at it. However, since these pages are ranking well I'd rather not lose any authority in the process and keep the URL just stripped of the ".html" (if that's possible). Thanks for you help! [edited for formatting]
Technical SEO | | Booj0 -
Duplicate Content
Hello guys, After fixing the rel tag on similar pages on the site I thought that duplicate content issue were resolved. I checked HTML Improvements on GWT and instead of going down as I expected, it went up. The duplicate issues affect identical product pages which differ from each other just for one detail, let's say length or colour. I could write different meta tags as the duplicate is the meta description, and I did it for some products but still didn't have any effects and they are still showing as duplicates. What would the problem be? Cheers
Technical SEO | | PremioOscar0 -
404-like content
A site that I look after is having lots of soft 404 responses for pages that are not 404 at all but unique content pages. the following page is an example: http://www.professionalindemnitynow.com/medical-malpractice-insurance-clinics This page returns a 200 response code, has unique content, but is not getting indexed. Any ideas? To add further information that may well impact your answer, let me explain how this "classic ASP" website performs the SEO Friendly url mapping: All pages within the custom CMS have a unique ID which are referenced with an ?intID=xx parameter. The custom 404.asp file receives a request, looks up the ID to find matching content in the CMS, and then server.transfers the visitor to the correct page. Like I said, the response codes are setup correctly, as far as Firebug can tell me. any thoughts would be most appreciated.
Technical SEO | | eseyo20 -
Displaying static content - risky?
In an attempt to improve the speed of our site, We have installed Cache_Lite extension for PHP. Its a PEAR based system which converts dynamic pages into static pages. The system is set to delete the temp files every 15 minutes, at which point any changes / new content will appear on the system. I don't see any risk of doing this but thought it safe to double check if there could be any impact on Google by doing it?
Technical SEO | | ukss19840 -
Does anyone see benefit in .com/en vs .com/uk for a UK site?
The client is already on /en and in my opinion there is not much to be gained by switching to /uk
Technical SEO | | Red_Mud_Rookie0 -
About duplicate content
Hi i'm a new guy around here, but i'm having this problem in my website. Using de Seomoz tools i ran a camping to my website, in results i get to many errors for duplicate conten, for example, http://www.mysite/blue/ http://www.mysite/blue/index.html, so my question is, what is the best way to resolve this problem, use a 301 or use the rel canonical tag? Wich url will be consider for main url, Thanks for yor help.
Technical SEO | | NorbertoMM0