Not necessary to have keywords in the page? Do you agree?
-
I am being told by my SEO consultants that:
"According to present Google algorithm it is not necessary to have keywords in the page. What is more required is the content is relevant to the page and whether visitors will stay on that page or not. If visitors stay for a longer time in your site it add bonus to the ranking of the site. So I think it is not necessary to add key phrases in the content."
Do you agree?
-
Thanks very much. Appreciate your detailed and documented response.
-
Sounds like your SEO consultant is taking a small fact and blowing it up to usefulness proportions.
Yes, while it is possible to rank for a given keyword without actually having the keyword on the page, the vast majority of the time the keyword - or a close variant - is found in several parts of the HTML. The most common place is the <title>tag, but other common locations include the body text, headers, alt image tags, meta descriptions and so on.</p> <p>Unless you have very good links pointing at your site that reference your keywords (either directly or possibly through co-citation) you face an uphill battle trying to rank for your given terms if you don't include the keyword in your content or other HTML elements.</p> <p>This is a highly studied concept. If you're interested in the raw data, you may want to check out SEOmoz's 2011 ranking factors:<a href="http://www.seomoz.org/article/search-ranking-factors#metrics-6"> http://www.seomoz.org/article/search-ranking-factors#metrics-6</a></p> <p>Or a more recent correlation study performed by the Open Algorythm. <a href="http://www.theopenalgorithm.com/correlation-data/on-page-factors/">http://www.theopenalgorithm.com/correlation-data/on-page-factors/</a></p> <p>Another area that may interest you is LDA, which stands for Latent Dirichlet Allocation. This refers to the relation of how certain keywords associated with one another are positively correlated with higher rankings. A company call Virante has created a couple of tools around this concept. You can find them <a href="http://ntopic.org/">here</a> and <a href="http://www.virante.org/seo-tools/lda-content-optimizer">here</a>.</p> <p>Hope this helps! Best of luck with your SEO.</p></title>
-
Good distinction between authority and non-authority sites. Thanks for the advice.
-
Thanks. I do include them.
-
"Content is king" is the old saying in SEO and whilst content 'may' actually only be a prince or duke nowadays it is still very important unless your site is especially high authority.
If you dont include the keywords or variations of them that you wish to rank for you're going to struggle to rank for them. Logically if you dont have the word 'red widget' on the page you're unlikely to rank for it. If a page is about red widgets why would it not include the keyword 'red widget'? Again if your site is high authority then this isnt so applicable - www.cadbury.co.uk used to rank 1st for 'chocolate' and it didnt even have the word on the home page. How did they do it? Lots of links creating high authority and using chocolate anchor text.
There is however a not so fine line between including keywords in the content (including meta info, link text etc) and keyword stuffing. As Des in this thread mentions and as I just referred to 'meta info' under the umbrella of 'content' - if you dont have the keywords in your page title or meta description you're much less likely to get users to click on your search result as (most of the time) your page title & meta description is what is returned as your search result.
-
I read that article on citations, but how could that apply to small local sites with little position in the search engines?
-
certainly seems that Google is heading in that direction. How far it has gone is open to debate. Check out last Fridays' Whiteboard on the very subject.
I would still include keywords in title and meta - otherwise your CTR will decrease.
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
-
Google's stand on LSI keywords?
Hi all, So the keywords which appear while typing some keywords and suggested keywords at the bottom of the search results page are refereed as LSI keywords. I been noticing some of the LSI keywords for years related to our industry and Google now suddenly changed them. I wonder why it would be. I can see competitors are started using those LSI keywords widely, is that the reason Google changed them? Thanks
Algorithm Updates | | vtmoz0 -
Google webmaster tool content keywords Top URLs
GWT->Optimization->Content Keywords section... If we click on the keyword it will further shows the variants and Top URLs containing those variants. My problem is none of the important pages like product details pages, homepage or category pages are present in that Top URLs list. All the news, guides section url's are listed in the Top URLs section for most important keyword that is also present in my domain name. How to make google realize the important pages for the important keyword?
Algorithm Updates | | BipSum0 -
Queries vs Keywords
Can anyone clarify why my list of queries from google webmaster tools varies so much from the keywords that have resulted in clicks? I have a site that, according to Google analytics, has had clicks from 125 key phrases where as in webmaster tools (via analytics) allegedly only 17 queries have resulted in clicks. Is it becuase GA can't handle less than 5 clicks from the webmaster data or is it something else I am missing? The site I am researching for has very little traffic from other search engines.
Algorithm Updates | | SoundinTheory0 -
Meta keywords tag?
Because Google is cracking on spammy keywords should I remove my meta keywords tag altogether? I hear they dont factor it in anyway?
Algorithm Updates | | dfwgolfer0 -
Keyword Stuffing
Hi, I have a particular page I am working on fully optimised as per the page rank tool and grading A. Problem is, there is still one issue on the page, the keyword I want to rank for in particular on that page is reporting that I am over using the word. I have looked through the HTML on the body of the page and see that the actual content is not an issue, I have less than 15 mentions of the keyword, the problem actually arises from the Nav Bar The word I am ranking for say is football Well in the nav-bar, I have several pages that are named football-xxx.html So where the actual page content only has 12 mentions of the keyword Football, list has another 13 due to my page naming properties.* Football- xxx Football- xxx Football- xxx Football- xxx Football- xxx Football- xxx ....... And so on up to 13 different pages with a similar naming structure (obviously the XXX are products like socks, shorts, tops, boots etc) So, without asking the obvious, I assume that the way to change is would be to rename the pages (can't really happen), or remove the term football from the body of the content on the website. So firstly, is the Google algorithms not smart enough to recongise that the content in the menu tag is in fact the nav bar ... and page names as opposed to keyword stuffing. Also, how did anyone else handle a similair situation And lastly, I am assuming basic on common sense alone that Keyword stuffing is a big no no, of everything I have learned though SEO Moz, this makes clear and concise sense to me ... So how do I resolve the issue I have here Many thanks in advance for any help offered Regards John
Algorithm Updates | | Johnny4B0 -
Best Practices for Page Titles | RSS Feeds
Good Morning MOZers, Quick question for the community: when creating an RSS feed for one of your websites, how do you title your RSS feed? Currently, the sites I'm managing use the 'rss.xml' for the file name, but I was curious to know whether or not it would, in any way, benefit my SERP if I were to add my domain to precede the 'rss.xml', i.e. 'my-sites-rss.xml' or something of that nature. Beyond that, are there any 'best practices' for creating RSS feed page titles or is there a preferred method of implementation? Anybody have any solutions
Algorithm Updates | | NiallSmith0 -
If you rank first organically for a keyword, will you rank first for variations?
Hi everyone, Hoping that someone will be able to answer this question for us. If we rank first organically for a keyword, are we safe to assume that we'll rank first (or close to it) for variations of that keyword as well? E.g. If we rank first easily for "Hamilton Island", can we safely assume that we will rank well organically for close variations of that keyword such as "Hamilton Islands", "Hamiltonisland", "Hamilton Island Hotel" due to the fact that "Hamilton Island" is in those keywords? We're deciding which keywords to monitor in SEOmoz and we don't want to waste keywords on very similar terms if we don't have to. Really appreciate any responses! Cheers.
Algorithm Updates | | HamiltonIsland0 -
Why would my product pages no longer be indexed in Google?
Our UK site has 72 pages in our sitemap. 30 of them are product pages which take a productid parameter. Prior to 1st Feb 2011, all pages were indexed in Google but since then all of our product pages seem to have dropped from the index? If I check in webmaster tools, I can see that we have submitted 72 pages and 42 are indexed. I realise we should have some better url structuring and I'm working on that but do you have any ideas on how we can get our product poages back into googles index http://www.ebacdirect.com
Algorithm Updates | | ebacltd0