Removing blog posts with little/thin content
-
We've got quite a lot (I'd say 75%) of our blog posts which I'd consider as low quality. Short content (500 words or less) with few shares, no backlinks & comments; most of which gets 0-2 unique views a day (however combined this adds up).
Will removing these pages provide an SEO benefit greater than the reduction in traffic from the removal of these pages?
I've heard the likes of Neil Patel/Brian Dean suggest so, however I'm scared it will provide the opposite as less content is indexed and I'll actually see traffic fall.
Sam
-
Sam,
If you can safely assume that the pages are not hurting you, let them stay. It's certainly not ideal to have a website loaded with thin content. But, as is the case with most small sites, the posts are likely to do you more good than harm, provided you're willing to show them some attention.
Here's a good strategy to deploy:
-
Find the top 10 posts, as judged by analyzing GA and against the topics you hope to rank for, then beef them up with additional text and graphics.
-
Republish the posts, listing them as "updated."
-
Share the posts via social, using a meaningful quote from each piece to draw interest and invite re-shares.
-
Continue sharing the posts in the following weeks, each time with new text.
-
Gauge the performance of each social share, then use this information to create additional headlines for new posts, in addition to using it to inform you of what content might draw the most interest.
-
Repeat the process with the next 10 posts.
When you have thin, poorly performing content on your site, you aren't able to learn enough about what you're doing right to make a sound call. So to create more content, even "better" content, is likely a mistake. The wise approach is to use the content you have to investigate additional content ideas that would better serve your audience. Through social media and additional traffic to your site, you should be able to better discern what pieces of content will provide the greatest benefit in the future.
Additionally, the old content is likely to perform much better as well.
RS
-
-
It's difficult to talk in terms of truevalue. Someone of them may provide some value, but they pale in comparison to the new blog posts we have lined up and in my opinion bring the blog down; personally I wouldn't be sad to see them go.
I think it's time to exterminate.
Sam
-
Do the contents of these blog posts provide any value at all to the reader? Are they written well, and would you actually be sad to see them go? If yes, then refer to my previous response on re-purposing them to create even better content with more SEO value.
If not, and you're just worried about SEO, I'd say be rid of them. Based on those stats.
-
Thanks all, from my analysis:
In the last twelve months:
376 pages (although I'd estimate 70 of these aren't pages)
104 pages have bounce rate of 100%
307 pages have less than 20 unique views (for the previous 12 months) but the total count for this would be 1,374
which is a sizable sum.So the question is, is it worth pulling all the pages below 20 unique views and all the 100% bounce rate pages from the site? Will it actually benefit our SEO or am I just making work for myself?
I'd love to hear from people who've actually seen positive SEO movements after removing thin pages.
-
It's a waste of good content to remove it because it's considered "thin". In your position, I would consider grouping these under-performing/thin blog posts into topical themes, compile and update them to create "epic content" in the form of detailed guides or whatever is most suitable to the content. Add to the long post so that there's some logical structure to the combining of the little posts (and so it doesn't just read as if you stuck multiple posts together), then redirect the old post URLs to the newly created relevant posts. Not only do you have fresh content that could each provide a ton of value to your readers, but the SEO value of these so-called "epic" posts should in theory be more impactful.
Good luck, whatever you decide to do!
-
My rule of thumb would be:
Take all pages offline, which have under 30 organic sessions per month.
Like Dmitrii already mentioned, check your past data for these posts and have a look at average sessions durations / bounce rates / pages per sessions, with which you can valdiate the "quality of the traffic". If there are posts which have decent stats - don't take them offline. Rather update them or write a new blog post about the topic and make a redirect. In this case have a look in GWT for the actual serach queries (maybe you find some useful new insights).
-
Hi there.
Are those blogs ranking anywhat for any related keyphrases? At the same time, how about bounce rate and time on page for those 2 visits a day? Are you sure those visits are not bots/crawlers?
We have done similar reduction about 6 months ago and we haven't seen any drop in rankings. The share of traffic to thin pages was pretty small and bounce rate was high, as well as time on page was very short. So, why to have anything which doesn't do any good?
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
-
Search Console Crawl Errors/Not Found - Strange URLs
Hello, In Google Search Console under Crawl > Crawl Errors > Not found I have strange URLs like the following: https://www.domain.com//UbaOZ/
Reporting & Analytics | | chuck-layton
https://www.domain.com//UPhXZ/
https://www.domain.com//KaUpZ/WYdhZ/SnQZZ/MOcUZ/ There is no info in Linked From tab. Have you seen this type of error??
Does anyone know whats causing it??
How should it be fixed?? Thanks for reading and the help!0 -
Domain Change Post Mortem
Hello, my company changed our domain 2 weeks ago and we are just starting to see traffic level back out, except for Organic. The site is on shopify so it made switching the domain pretty easy, as well as the 301 redirects (no url structure changes). We've taken all the proper steps with google/bing webmaster tools as well as monitoring 404's and 301 testing and don't see any red flags. Does anyone roughly know how long it takes for 301's to re-index and domain authority to start building back up for our new domain? Our old domain was about 13 years old and the new one was parked for quite awhile. p.s. I also noticed a lot of our traffic ending up as referral from our old url. I was able to wipe the sessions from analytics which cut it down, but will this persist for the foreseeable future? Thanks!
Reporting & Analytics | | SchoolhouseElectric0 -
Tracing Performance of Individual Social Media Posts
Hello Moz community, I have an Analytics question. Is there a way (using the social media APIs or otherwise) to track performance of individual social media posts to generate monthly reports? We list lawyers on our directories for people to find. We also share the lawyer's information on our social media posts. I'd like to be able to generate a monthly report letting the lawyers know what we've done for them on social media pages. I'm thinking....we can identify a social media post by the URL inside the text of the post (IF URL_Inside_Page =Lawyer-Profile-Page_URL Then). I'd like to see numbers like: Facebook post clicks (combined) Facebook post likes (combined) Facebook post views (combined) Twitter post views (combined) Twitter post clicks (combined) Thank you
Reporting & Analytics | | Heydarian0 -
Fresh Content Still As important?
We have an internal debate, that perhaps y'all can help us resolve. In the past "freshness" of content has been important, correct? (Google's QDF for example) In the past (to present) when we build a site with the intent to SEO the site, we build the core pages with the expectation that we will be adding more site pages as the project progresses, thus settling the "fresh content" factor. But it has been proposed to us, from a client, that completely building the site out with all the pages you hope to rank, getting the upfront bang for your buck. The expectation is that the traffic soars right-off. Now the client says that he has been doing this for years and has not been affected by any alog changes. (although we have not seen proof of this from him) So our question is this: Is it better to provide a website full of fresh content at the beginning of the project, for a jumpstart on traffic, then leave the site alone ( for the most part) or Is it better to have core pages of fresh content at the start, and build out new pages from their, so the website remains fresh every month? And can you prove your argument? (we need cold hard facts to be convinced 🙂
Reporting & Analytics | | Britewave0 -
404 errors more than 1.8 lacs, Duplicate Content, Duplicate title, missing meta description increasing as site is based on regular ticket selling (CRM), kindly help
Sites error increasing i.e. 404 errors more than 1.8 lacs, Duplicate Content, Duplicate title, missing meta description increasing day by day as site is based on regular ticket selling (CRM), We have checked with webmasters for 404's, but it is not easy to delete 1.8 lac entries. How to resolve this issue for future. kindly help and suggest the solution.
Reporting & Analytics | | 1akal0 -
Totally Remove "localhost" entries from Google Analytics
Hello All, In Google Analytics I see a bunch of traffic coming from "localhost:4444 / referral". I had tried once before to create a filter to exclude this traffic source, but obviously I did it wrong since it's still showing up. Here is the filter I have currently: Filter Name: Exclude localhost
Reporting & Analytics | | Robert-B
Filter Type: Custom filter > Exclude
Filter Field: Referral
Filter Pattern: .localhost:4444.
Case Sensitive: No Can anyone see what I'm doing wrong and give me a push in the right direction? Thanks in advance!0 -
Google Analytics Content Experiments don't deliver 50/50?
Our A/B test is actually delivering at about a 70/30 page view rate. 70% in favor of the original version and only 30% of the new. We are sending 100% of our traffic to this homepage test. Has anyone else experienced this? There seems to be a lot of folks experiencing this.....anyone know why?
Reporting & Analytics | | VistageSEO0 -
Duplicate page content
I have a website which "houses" five different and completely separate departments, so the content is separated by subfolders. e.g. domain.com/department1 domain.com/department2 etc. and each have their own individual top navigation menus. There is an "About Us" section for each department which has about 6 subpages (Work for us, What we do, Awards etc.) but the problem is that the content for each department is exactly the same. The only difference is the navigation menu and the breadcrumbs. This isn't ideal as a change to one page means having to make the change to all 5 and from an SEO perspective it's duplicate content x5 (apart from the Nav). One solution I can see is to have the "About Us" section moved to the root level (domain.com/about-us) and have a generic nav, possibly with the department names on it. The only problem with this is that it disrupts the user journey if they are forced away from the department that they're chosen. Basically i'm looking for suggestions or examples of other sites that have got around this problem, I need inspiration! Any help would be greatly appreciated.
Reporting & Analytics | | haydennz0