Is tabbed content okay or bad for SEO? Google takes both sides.
-
Hello Moz Community!
It seems like there are two opinions coming from directly from Google on tabbed content:
1) John Mueller says here that content is indexed but discounted
2) Matt Cutts says here that if you're not using tabs deceptively, you're in good shape
I see this has been discussed in the Moz Q & A before, but I have an interesting situation:
The pages I am building have ~50% static content, and ~50% tabbed content (only two tabs). Showing all tabbed content at once is not an option.
Since the tabbed content will make up 50% of the total content, it's important that it is 100% weighted by Google. I can think of two ways to show it:
1) Standard tabs using jQuery
Advantage: Both tab 1 and tab 2's content indexed
Disadvantage: Tabbed content may be discounted?
2) Make the content of the tabs conditional on the server side
website.com/page/ only shows tab 1's content in html
website.com/page/?tab=2 only shows tab 2's content in the html. Include rel="canonical" pointing to website.com/page/.
Advantage: Content of tab 1 indexed & 100% counted by Google
Disadvantage: Content of tab 2 not indexed
Which option is best? Is there a better solution?
-
You could display all of it and make some clever use of jump links. Just sayin...
-
EGOL: Makes perfect sense. This, IMHO, is a bad move by Google. They always say "Create for Humans, not Bots" but proper use of tabbed content does make for better UX. We are both eliminating tabs for rankings. Google as usual talking out of both sides of their mouth. Who wants to spend 5 minutes scrolling to the bottom of a ridiculously long page?
-
That happened to us too. We had a huge FAQ page and decided to reduce it's length by placing the answers behind tabs. It made the page neat, but, when that content went behind the tabs a lot of unique words were hidden. Previously that page received a lot of long tail traffic but after the diverse words were placed behind the tabs the long tail traffic collapsed.
-
EGOL is the man! We moved some content behind tabs, and our rankings did drop. When we moved it back out, they returned. We had some other issues/changes as well, so I can't 100% vouch for correlation.
One interesting test I did run is to run some searches for sentences that were hidden behind tabs on our site. The tabbed content was found, indicating that it was indexed by Google, so they aren't ignoring it.
We decided to go tabless, and I think we are the better for it, but who knows? If you have an enormous amount of content on a page, I would consider tabs, but I would leave the juiciest bits out in the open. FWIW.
-
Thanks for your input Egol! 9/10 times I would agree with your thoughts exactly and go with nothing hidden.
**Why not? **
The product has benefits that are described with completely different language to two target markets. The point of the tabs is to be able to effectively sell to people we know to belong to each market. So actually we don't need people to understand/use the tabs, they would exist merely to include our conditional content.
So anyways showing all content won't work well, and separate pages won't work either because of the way search goes for the niche. We'll see if I can get creative!
-
Yep. People argue about this stuff. The horses mouth even talks both ways.
So, if you hide your content behind tabs, you are gambling that Google is not going to respect that content today or tomorrow or at sometime in the future - even if they are doing differently now.
The only safe bet that I see is to display all of your content. So, I have bet ALL of my chips on zero content hidden in tabs. Zero content hidden in any way.
Showing all tabbed content at once is not an option.
Why not?
I don't use tabs for search engine reasons but I also don't use them to make sure that all of my content is out in the open for the visitor. Some people don't know about tabs. People who are old, have vision problems, are in a hurry, are not websavvy, are using a tiny screen, those people and many more have a good chance of missing your tabs.
I am getting all of my content out there for everyone especially Google. Google has hated hidden content since 1998. White text on white background might have been the first Google penalties.
**Which option is best? **
If you ask me, this is like one of those bad jokes, Door A or Door B and there is bad stuff behind both of them. If you think you know how Google treats them today you might be wrong and if you think you know how they will treat them tomorrow there is even a bigger chance that you will be wrong.
Is there a better solution?
Display all text. Search engines have always read it, probably always will read it. Do different at your own risk.
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
-
Revolution Sliders - Still considered bad for SEO in 2018?
Hi guys, I have a question about revolution sliders. Are they generally speaking still technically considered to be bad for SEO? I've done some research on this topic however most of the information I can find dates back to around 2009-2012, when sliders were mostly java and flash based. It seems that back then they were considered to be bad for SEO. Is this still the case? We use revolution sliders because it's easy for us to overlay text and because it scales to mobile automatically. It also allows us to put alt texts and image titles in there - we don't use them for the purpose of sliding images. Would there be any technical reason why a slider would be considered bad for SEO?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | rswhtn0 -
Google Penalty - Has It Been Lifted?
Hi, We have been trying to remove a ‘partial’ google penalty for a new client by the way of removing unnatural backlinks over a period of time and then submitting a reconsideration request, and uploading a disavow file etc. Previously Google listed the partial penalty in the ‘manual actions’ section of webmaster tools, making it possible for us to submit a reconsideration request. Having just logged in however we get the message ‘no manual webspam actions found’. So there isn’t any way we can submit a reconsideration request. Does this mean that the penalty has been lifted? Or could it still exist? If the latter is there any other way to submit a reconsideration request? Many thanks in advance, Lee.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Webpresence0 -
Google WMT Showing Duplicate Content, But There is None
In the HTML improvements section of Google Webmaster Tools, it is showing duplicate content and I have verified that the duplicate content they are listing does not exist. I actually have another duplicate content issue I am baffled by, but that it already being discussed on another thread. These are the pages they are saying have duplicate META descriptions, http://www.hanneganremodeling.com/bathroom-remodeling.html (META from bathroom remodeling page) <meta name="<a class="attribute-value">description</a>" content="<a class="attribute-value">Bathroom Remodeling Washington DC, Bathroom Renovation Washington DC, Bath Remodel, Northern Virginia,DC, VA, Washington, Fairfax, Arlington, Virginia</a>" /> http://www.hanneganremodeling.com/estimate-request.html (META From estimate page) <meta name="<a class="attribute-value">description</a>" content="<a class="attribute-value">Free estimates basement remodeling, bathroom remodeling, home additions, renovations estimates, Washington DC area</a>" /> WlO9TLh
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | WebbyNabler0 -
Copying my Facebook content to website considered duplicate content?
I write career advice on Facebook on a daily basis. On my homepage users can see the most recent 4-5 feeds (using FB social media plugin). I am thinking to create a page on my website where visitors can see all my previous FB feeds. Would this be considered duplicate content if I copy paste the info, but if I use a Facebook social media plugin then it is not considered duplicate content? I am working on increasing content on my website and feel incorporating FB feeds would make sense. thank you
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | knielsen0 -
What is better for google: keep old not visited content deeply in the website, or to remove it?
We have quite a lot of old content which is not visited anymore. Should we remove it and have a lot of 410 errors which will be reported in GWT? Or should we keep it and forget about it?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | bele0 -
How does badly formatted HTML affect SEO?
Our website uses a custom built CMS, but uses a fairly standard WYSIWYG text editor. I've looked at some of the code it produces, and it's not pretty. My gut feeling tells me that this extra bloat is bad for SEO. Am I right in thinking that Google doesn't look kindly upon badly formatted and bloated HTML? Thanks,
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | OptiBacUK
James0 -
Duplicate Content
http://www.pensacolarealestate.com/JAABA/jsp/HomeAdvice/answers.jsp?TopicId=Buy&SubtopicId=Affordability&Subtopicname=What%20You%20Can%20Afford http://www.pensacolarealestate.com/content/answers.html?Topic=Buy&Subtopic=Affordability I have no idea how the first address exists at all... I ran the SEOMOZ tool and I got 600'ish DUPLICATE CONTENT errors! I have errors on content/titles etc... How do I get rid of all the content being generated from this JAABA/JSP "jibberish"? Please ask questions that will help you help me. I have always been 1st on google local and I have a business that is starting to hurt very seriously from being number three 😞
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | JML11790 -
Multiple Google+ Local (Google Place) under one email address
As a automotive dealership group, we have 15+ business listings set up under one Google+ local account. Google+ Local (Google Places) offers the ability to upload a data file for 10+ listings, so we've kept all listings under one login for efficiency. Is there any specific local SEO benefit or any general benefit at all to having each business listing set up under their own separate email address?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | autoczar0