How to solve JavaScript paginated content for SEO
-
In our blog listings page, we limit the number of blogs that can be seen on the page to 10. However, all of the blogs are loaded in the html of the page and page links are added to the bottom.
Example page: https://tulanehealthcare.com/about/newsroom/
When a user clicks the next page, it simply filters the content on the same page for the next group of postings and displays these to the user. Nothing in the html or URL change. This is all done via JavaScript.
So the question is, does Google consider this hidden content because all listings are in the html but the listings on page are limited to only a handful of them?
Or is Googlebot smart enough to know that the content is being filtered by JavaScript pagination?
If this is indeed a problem we have 2 possible solutions:
- not building the HTML for the next pages until you click on the 'next' page.
- adding parameters to the URL to show the content has changed.
Any other solutions that would be better for SEO?
-
thanks for the thorough response. I was leaning toward leaving it alone for the time being and this helps affirm my decision. I don't think we are going to see much benefit from tampering with it to make it more Googlebot-friendly
-
It will be strongly de-valued and the links may or may not even be noticed / seen at all. Googlebot can leverage headless browsers (something similar to Selenium or Windmill in Python, with targeting handled via XPath maybe). The only thing is, this takes ages longer than basic source-code scraping. To scrape the modified source with a headless browser can take, 5-10 seconds instead of less than 1 second
Since Google's mission is the 'index the web', you have to fathom that they wouldn't take this colossal efficiency hit all the time, or for everyone. Certainly looking at the results of many sites and their different builds, that's exactly what I see. Just because 'Google can' that doesn't mean that 'Google will' on all crawls and websites
Some very large websites rely on such technologies, but usually they're household name sites which offer a unique value-proposition of cultural trust signals for the specified audience. If you're not a titan of industry, then you're likely not one of the favoured few who gets such special treatment from Googlebot so regularly
This is an interesting post to read:
https://medium.com/@baphemot/whats-server-side-rendering-and-do-i-need-it-cb42dc059b38
... you may also have the option of building the HTML on the server side and then serving it in different URLs to the user. To me it sounds like a case where SSR might be the best option. That way you can still use your existing technologies (which are FAST) to render the modified HTML, but render it on the server side and then serve the static HTML (after the render) to users using SSR. That's personally what I would start looking at as it will keep the best of both worlds
Implementation could be costly though!
I don't think you'd get accused of cloaking but that doesn't change the fact, part of your site's architecture will 90% become invisible to Google 90% of the time which is not really very good for SEO (at all)
Another option, instead of building all the post listings on page-load (which will cause stutter between pages), just load all of them at once in the source code and use the JavaScript to handle the visual navigation (from page to page) only. Let JS handle the visual effect, but keep all listings in the HTML right from the get-go. That can work fine too, but maybe SSR would be better for you (I don't know)
...
after looking at your source code, it seems you have already done this. The only real problem would be if the links themselves were 'created' through the JS, which they are not (they all start visible in your non-modified source code). Yes, things which begin hidden, are slightly de-valued (but not completely). This might impact you slightly, but to be honest I don't think separating them out and making the pages load entirely separately would be much better. It would help architectural internal-indexation slightly, but likely would hamper content-loading speeds significantly
Maybe think about the SSR option. You might get the best of both worlds and you might be able to keep the JS intact whilst also allowing deep-linking of paginated content (which currently is impossible, can't link to page 2 of results)
Let me know if you have previously thought about SSR
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
-
Filter Content By State Selection and SEO Consideratoins
I have an insurance client that is represented in three states. They need to present different information to users by state identification. They prefer to have one page with all the information and then present the information relevant to the state by the users selection from a pop up window. Spiders will be able to index all the content. Users will only see the content based on their selection. So, I wanted to ask the Moz community what SEO implication could this have? The information available on the web is very thin with this situation so really appreciate any guidance that can be given...thanks,
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Liamis0 -
How does putting a trial sign up code mid-blog post effect SEO? Do you think it will make my content seem less pleasing, therefor decrease the page rank??
I'm working on driving trials for our product - we have a number of blog posts that rank on page #1 of Google, and we get 2-3 trial sign ups per day from them. I'd like to put trial signup boxes about midway down each post to see if I can increase the number of trial signups that come directly from our blog. Do you think I can be "penalized" for this, since it's mid- blog-post content? Do you think Google will view this negatively?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Karibeaulieu0 -
CDN for SEO (or not)?
Does CDN impact on SEO or not? There seems conflicting ideas as to whether they impact positively or negatively, I realise that if the page loads quicker this is a good thing for SEO and usability of course. Does Google see CDN as just cheating and a get-around for not doing the work from the ground up and using good hosting etc? Do you have any direct experience? All constructive input much appreciated!
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | seoman101 -
Duplicate content question
Hi there, I work for a Theater news site. We have an issue where our system creates a chunk of duplicate content in Google's eyes and we're not sure how best to solve. When an editor produces a video, it simultaneously 1) creates a page with it's own static URL (e.g. http://www.theatermania.com/video/mary-louise-parker-tommy-tune-laura-osnes-and-more_668.html); and 2) displays said video on a public index page (http://www.theatermania.com/videos/). Since the content is very similar, Google sees them as duplicate. What should we do about this? We were thinking that one solution would to be dynamically canonicalize the index page to the static page whenever a new video is posted, but would Google frown on this? Alternatively, should we simply nofollow the index page? Lastly, are there any solutions we may have missed entirely?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | TheaterMania0 -
Duplicate Content and Titles
Hi Mozzers, I saw a considerable amount of duplicate content and page titles on our clients website. We are just implementing a fix in the CMS to make sure that these are all fixed. What changes do you think I could see in terms of rankings?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | KarlBantleman0 -
SEO on page content links help
I run a website at the bottom we have scroller box which the old SEO guy used to contain all of the crap content so we can rank for keywords not on the page and put all of the links in to spread the link juice into the other inner category pages (some of these pages are only listed on our innerpages otherwise). We are trying to remove this content and add decent content above the fold with relevant long tail keywords in (it is currently decent but could do with expanding if we are removing this large chunk of text in theSEO box and some long tail keywords will be missing if we just remove it) we can add a couple of links into this new content but will struggle to list the category pages not on the left hand navigation. If we were to list all of the pages in the left hand nav would we dilute the power going to the main pages currently or would we be in the same position we are now? For example at the minute I would say the power is mainly going to the left hand nav links and then a small amount of power to the links in the SEO content if we put these into the nav will it not dilute the power to the main pages. Thank you for your time and hopefully your help.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | BobAnderson0 -
Seo Hosting
Can anyone suggest me some seo hosting providers?But in better price like hostgator?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | nyanainc0 -
Content Focus
I have a particular Page which shows primary contact details as well as "additional" contact details for the client. GIven I do not believe I want Google to misinterpret the focus of the page from the primary contact details which of the following three options would be best? Place the "additional" contact details (w/maps) in Javascript, Ajax or similar to suppress them from being crawled. Leave "additional" contact details alone but emphasize the Primary contact details by placing the Primary contact details in Rich Snippets/Microformats. Do nothing and allow Google to Crawl the pages with all contact details Thanks, Phil
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | AU-SEO0