Google ranking content for phrases that don't exist on-page
-
I am experiencing an issue with negative keywords, but the “negative” keyword in question isn’t truly negative and is required within the content – the problem is that Google is ranking pages for inaccurate phrases that don’t exist on the page.
To explain, this product page (as one of many examples) - https://www.scamblermusic.com/albums/royalty-free-rock-music/ - is optimised for “Royalty free rock music” and it gets a Moz grade of 100.
“Royalty free” is the most accurate description of the music (I optimised for “royalty free” instead of “royalty-free” (including a hyphen) because of improved search volume), and there is just one reference to the term “copyrighted” towards the foot of the page – this term is relevant because I need to make the point that the music is licensed, not sold, and the licensee pays for the right to use the music but does not own it (as it remains copyrighted). It turns out however that I appear to need to treat “copyrighted” almost as a negative term because Google isn’t accurately ranking the content.
Despite excellent optimisation for “Royalty free rock music” and only one single reference of “copyrighted” within the copy, I am seeing this page (and other album genres) wrongly rank for the following search terms:
“free rock music”
“Copyright free rock music"
“Uncopyrighted rock music”
“Non copyrighted rock music”I understand that pages might rank for “free rock music” because it is part of the “Royalty free rock music” optimisation, what I can’t get my head around is why the page (and similar product pages) are ranking for “Copyright free”, “Uncopyrighted music” and “Non copyrighted music”.
“Uncopyrighted” and “Non copyrighted” don’t exist anywhere within the copy or source code – why would Google consider it helpful to rank a page for a search term that doesn’t exist as a complete phrase within the content?
By the same logic the page should also wrongly rank for “Skylark rock music” or “Pretzel rock music” as the words “Skylark” and “Pretzel” also feature just once within the content and therefore should generate completely inaccurate results too.
To me this demonstrates just how poor Google is when it comes to understanding relevant content and optimization - it's taking part of an optimized term and combining it with just one other single-use word and then inappropriately ranking the page for that completely made up phrase. It’s one thing to misinterpret one reference of the term “copyrighted” and something else entirely to rank a page for completely made up terms such as “Uncopyrighted” and “Non copyrighted”. It almost makes me think that I’ve got a better chance of accurately ranking content if I buy a goat, shove a cigar up its backside, and sacrifice it in the name of the great god Google!
Any advice (about wrongly attributed negative keywords, not goat sacrifice ) would be most welcome.
-
@JCN-SBWD One way to potentially address this issue is to focus on building a strong backlink profile that reinforces your intended keyword associations. Additionally, you may want to consider adding more content to your product pages to further clarify your intended messaging and minimize the potential for negative keyword associations. Finally, it may be worth exploring alternative search engines or platforms to expand your reach and diversify your traffic sources.
-
@JCN-SBWD cool! (from a SEO perspective) I would speculate that Google considers this related keywords to the keywords optimized for, and thus ranks for it.
Other option would be that you have incoming links with that keyword. I looked and did not see much of that kind.You could take the "copyright" keyword off the page for a while and see if it changes. But that would take some time as Google will consider your page relevant to it for at least a while (Sorry)
-
@JCN-SBWD i hav similar problems...
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
-
We recently updated a large guide that takes the place of the original. The original has some nice organic traffic to it and I don't want to risk losing it. Should I 301 redirect to the new version, or update all the info directly on the original page?
We don't have a lot of content that garners much non-branded organic, so this is something I don't want to risk losing. We do not have a whole lot of external links into the page either.
On-Page Optimization | | AFP_Digital1 -
Optimizing a product category vs. a bespoke content page
Hi there, I work for a furniture retailer in the UK and I have a question about ranking for search phrases. Say I'm looking to rank for the keyword phrases: 'Tempur mattress' and 'Tempur mattress liverpool' and I have a category at: www.mysite.co.uk/tempur/ which list all of our mattresses, would I be better trying to optimize this page for those key phrases or would I be better generating a new page, say, www.mysite.co.uk/tempur-mattress-liverpool.html Thank you for your input.
On-Page Optimization | | Bee1590 -
How to find google indexed pages
I can't find where the # of indexed pages are on my google analytics. I tried the instructions below, but the index status was not an option on my dashboard. View the Index Status page: On the Webmaster Tools home page, click the site you want. On the Dashboard, click Google Index, and then click Index Status.
On-Page Optimization | | SoftwareMarketing0 -
Google crawler showing cache of another page
For the page http://www.thinkdigit.com/top-products/Laptops-and-PCs/top-10-laptops-124.php google is showing another page in cache (http://www.thinkdigit.com/top-products/Ultrabooks/top-10-ultrabooks-153.php). Please let me know how this happened and how to correct it.
On-Page Optimization | | 9dot90 -
On page link question, creating an additional 'county' layer between states and zips/cities
Question We have a large site that has a page for all 50 states. Each of these pages has unique content, but following the content has a MASSIVE amount of links for each zip AND city in that state. I am also in the process of creating unique content for each of these cities and zips HOWEVER, I was wondering would it make sense to create an additional 'county' layer between the states and the zips/cities. Would the additional 'depth' of the links bring down the overall rank of the long tail city and zip pages, or would the fact that the counties would knock the on page link count down from a thousand or so, to a management 50-100 substantially improve the overall quality and ranking of the site? To illustrate, currently I have State -> city and zip pages (1200+ links on each state page) what i want to do is do state -> county (5-300 counties on each state page) -> city + zip (maybe 50-100 links on each county page). What do you guys think? Am I incurring some kind of automatic penalty for having 1000+ links on a page?
On-Page Optimization | | ilyaelbert0 -
Wrong sitelinks & landing pages in Google
I've recently launched a well-optimized website with good-content category landing pages and then I've added a blog to the website (as supporting content to the landing pages, the only links pointing to the blog are from the category landing pages) What happened is that Google is now using the Blog pages as the site - sitelinks and also as the landing pages for most keywords I only have inbound links to the reg. landing pages and none to the blog, how do I get Google to change that? I know I can demote sitelink URL's in webmaster tools, but would that help me with getting the right sitelinks, it sure wont help much with the landing pages Thanks
On-Page Optimization | | Plorex
-J0 -
Help I don't understand Rel Canonical
I'm really stuck on how to fix up Rel Canonical errors on a Wordpress site. I went in and changed all the URLs to remove the www and added / to the end. I get this message on page analysis details: <dt>Canonical URL</dt> <dd>"http://www.some-url.com.au/",</dd> <dd>"http://some-url..com.au/", and</dd> <dd>"http://some-url..com.au/"</dd> <dd>Well the first one with the www doesn't exists and the second two urls are the same! (Note that I have removed the actual URL for this post)</dd> <dd>I'm not sure how to read and fix the errors from the reports ether. The only issues I can see is that the 'Tag Value' has the www and the 'Page Title - URL' doesn't have the www.
On-Page Optimization | | zapprabbit
</dd>0 -
Zero ranking after a month of ON Page Tweeks.
I've been tweaking a Wordpress little by little over the last 3 to 4 weeks but I'm making no progress in the rankings for my keywords. All keywords are still reporting >50 in the SEOMOZ Campaign. Here's the clients pet keyword: "Sailing in Scotland" www.capriceyachtcharter.co.uk The site is indexed and shows IF I search for the company name "Caprice Yacht Charter" What am I missing? Thanks in advance Steve
On-Page Optimization | | stevecounsell0