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
-
Best Way to Create SEO Content for Multiple, International Websites
I have a client that has multiple websites for providing to other countries. For instance, they have a .com website for the US (abccompany.com), a .co.uk website for the UK (abccompany.co.uk), a .de website for Germany (abccompany.de), and so on. The have websites for the Netherlands, France, and even China. These all act as separate websites. They have their own addresses, their own content (some duplicated but translated), their own pricing, their own Domain Authority, backlinks, etc. Right now, I write content for the US site. The goal is to write content for long and medium tail keywords. However, the UK site is interested in having myself write content for them as well. The issue I'm having is how can I differentiate the content? And what is the best way to target content for each country? Does it make sense to write separate content for each website to target results in that country? The .com site will still show up in UK web results still fairly high. Does it make sense to just duplicate the content but in a different language or for the specific audience in that country? I guess the biggest question I'm asking is, what is the best way of creating content for multiples countries' search results? I don't want the different websites to compete with each other in a sense nor do I want to spend extra time trying to rank content for multiple sites when I could just focus on trying to rank one for all countries. Any help is appreciated!
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | cody1090 -
SEO Experts: Where did you start?
Hi all! I'm beginning to travel down the road of becoming an SEO expert! I've attended the latest few webinars on Moz, and have started watching the White Board Fridays. However I'm wondering, for the current SEO Experts, how did you get to where you are today? I.e. What books did you read? Did you pay for classes or just learn everything from Moz? Where is a good place to get an SEO Expert Certification/Is it necessary? How long did it take you to become an expert? (Stuff like that) I suppose I'm looking to make a list for myself, organizing what I should learn first, and then create a timeline moving forward. Thanks for your help Mozzers! - Briana B.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | JCWhelan13 -
Merge content pages together to get one deep high quality content page - good or not !?
Hi, I manage the SEO of a brand poker website that provide ongoing very good content around specific poker tournaments, but all this content is split into dozens of pages in different sections of the website (blog section, news sections, tournament section, promotion section). It seems like today having one deep piece of content in one page has better chance to get mention / social signals / links and therefore get a higher authority / ranking / traffic than if this content was split into dozens of pages. But the poker website I work for and also many other website do generate naturally good content targeting long tail keywords around a specific topic into different section of the website on an ongoing basis. Do you we need once a while to merge those content pages into one page ? If yes, what technical implementation would you advice ? (copy and readjust/restructure all content into one page + 301 the URL into one). Thanks Jeremy
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Tit0 -
Hosting Providers and SEO
I have been wondering for a while which web host provider is the best for SEO purposes? Things to consider. Shared Hosting vs Dedicated Server Location of the Host Provider Site Up Time One question that I have been thinking about is what impact would changing a host provider have on a websites serps ranking? Is there a possible negative impact and if so how can it be avoided? Name the top 3 Web Hosts for SEO.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | bronxpad0 -
Content Landing Page
Hey Mozzers, I wanted to get some opinions on here. I'm going to be building out the content on my site a lot of the next couple of months, and have recently started thinking about creating a content landing page. For those not familiar with the concept it's the idea of building this page that basically just pulls together all the content you've written on a specific subject & serves as hopefully a link magnet & destination for people interested in the topic. So my question is this, I am just outlining all of the different posts & areas that I want to cover on specific topics & it is a lot. I'm talking ~20 posts on each subject. Do you think that would be too much content to try & get on one page? Should I break it down to a more finite 5-7 links to high quality articles per page, or create basically this monster guide that links to all these different articles I'll create. Looking forward to getting your opinion, Chris
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | chris.kent0 -
Remove content that is indexed?
Hi guys, I want to delete a entire folder with content indexed, how i can explain to google that content no longer exists?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Valarlf0 -
Duplicate content mess
One website I'm working with keeps a HTML archive of content from various magazines they publish. Some articles were repeated across different magazines, sometimes up to 5 times. These articles were also used as content elsewhere on the same website, resulting in up to 10 duplicates of the same article on one website. With regards to the 5 that are duplicates but not contained in the magazine, I can delete (resulting in 404) all but the highest value of each (most don't have any external links). There are hundreds of occurrences of this and it seems unfeasible to 301 or noindex them. After seeing how their system works I can canonical the remaining duplicate that isn't contained in the magazine to the corresponding original magazine version - but I can't canonical any of the other versions in the magazines to the original. I can't delete the other duplicates as they're part of the content of a particular issue of a magazine. The best thing I can think of doing is adding a link in the magazine duplicates to the original article, something along the lines of "This article originally appeared in...", though I get the impression the client wouldn't want to reveal that they used to share so much content across different magazines. The duplicate pages across the different magazines do differ slightly as a result of the different Contents menu for each magazine. Do you think it's a case of what I'm doing will be better than how it was, or is there something further I can do? Is adding the links enough? Thanks. 🙂
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Alex-Harford0 -
Seo for mobile and apps
I have a client with a website who's URL is a very common name (most people say this phrase daily). My questions are: How would you best SEO for this site given the common nature of their URL They want to move to mobile and are wondering if their mobile site needs different SEO then their main page Is there a way to SEO apps?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | StreetwiseReports0