Only showing googlebot schema.org tagged content - cloaking??
-
Would it be considered cloaking if I only show schema.or tagged content to searchengine bots and not to regular visitors. Mind you, no other change on the page, design or content. So instead of
Googlebot would be served:
41 Main Street
Regular visitors:
41 Main Street
-
Cloaking is defined by Google as "presenting different content to users and search engines".
I recall Matt Cutts offering a geo-targeting example to further explain this issue. It's ok to show users in Canada some content, and then users from the US different content. It is not ok (i.e. would be considered cloaking) to set it up to always show Google bot the US version.
Google wants you to treat their bot as a normal user and not make any special changes for them. In your case, you are specifically showing Google bot something different then regular users, so yes it is considered cloaking.
The two points to make in the case you brought up are:
-
you are not altering "content", you are altering meta tags which the users do not see anyway and do not impact the user experience
-
there is no malicious intent. You are not doing this to deceive users or Google.
In short, yes it meets the definition of cloaking. Google specifically says offering "different" content represents cloaking. Even though you are showing "more" content, that would be a difference. If you didn't show users an H1 tagged title at the top of your page, but you showed it to Google, that would be an example where you are showing more to Google and would definitely be cloaking.
My biggest concern would be Google's automated system detecting it as cloaking then removing your pages or site from the index. You would then explain your actions through the Reconsideration Request and then Google would either accept your explanation or require a change.
-
-
Quiet the contrary..it is certainly a somewhat theoretical question and has nothing to do with css or coding.
One reason is to get an opinion on what is considered cloaking, another reason is a to assess whether giving out more information (such as microtagged content) would be detrimental not to your rankings but to your whole business. -
Why would you consider making such a change? I cannot conceive of any logical reason. The meta data involved is not seen by users.
If I was to stretch for a reason, it would be that you are not familiar with website coding and are having CSS issues?
-
Hi Sebes, I don't think this will be too much of a problem. Google will crack down hard on cloaking that will actually benefit your website, although sometimes you can do it by accident. This is adding no value to your website and I wouldnt worry about it too much. Always try to make your website the same for crawler + visitors it goes without saying.
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
-
Use of trademarks in tags and text
Does Google spider read registered trademarks (the 'R' or 'TM') or do these marks impede anything if they are featured in meta tags or text?
On-Page Optimization | | KnutDSvendsen0 -
Meta tags - removal
A couple of months ago, I did something that has caused me great angst. My website unique visitors was on a steady growth path for about 3 years. I swapped out my SEO plugin, from all-in-one, to Yoast. I then removed all of my meta tags. My site has about 2000 unique posts. After doing that my unique visitors has been on a steady decline of me loosing traffic at a rate of 5 to 10% of my visits. Any thoughts on the best remediation plan I should use. I put back in the meta tags, but wasn't sure of the SEO plugin switch caused the issue.
On-Page Optimization | | copykatrecipes0 -
Cannonical tag not working
I have put canonical tags on most of my pages as I'm slowly fixing the website errors that cause me to lose my rankings last July. However, when I search google for "graphene nanoplatelets" i find it shows the non canonical version. see below cut from the 2nd page of organic results. Graphene Nanoplatelets-GNPs - Cheap Tubes Inc. <cite class="_Hd">cheaptubes.com/graphene-nanoplatelets.htm</cite>High quality, low cost Graphene Nanoplatelets-GNPs.I know I put the canonical tag on the page, see code below. I do not see an error but I am an SEO rookie <title>Graphene Nanoplatelets-GNPs</title> If anyone can find an error in my canonical tag, please tell me where it is so I can fix. I know its affecting other pages as well and most should have the tag. Some non product pages don't have it yet but will as I continue fixing it.
On-Page Optimization | | cheaptubes0 -
Yoast video schema pluggin
What is your opinión or experience in yoast video schema pluggin
On-Page Optimization | | maestrosonrisas0 -
How to check duplicate content with other website?
Hello, I guest that my website may be duplicate contents with other websites. Is this a important factor on SEO? and how to check and fix them? Thanks,
On-Page Optimization | | JohnHuynh1 -
Rel canonical tag back to the same page the tag is on?
Very simple, Why would a website (and I have seen tons doing this) link the rel canonical tag back to the same page the tag is on? Example: somepage.htm has a canonical tag linking to somepage.htm I thought the idea of this tag was to tell google if 2 pages are similar, this page is the original, and it's this page which should be indexed and the page with the tag on should pass all PR to the original. Maybe im wrong and someone can help me out to understand this.
On-Page Optimization | | activitysuper0 -
Which Canonical URL Tag tag should we remove?
Hi guys, We are in the process of optimizing the pages of our new site. We have used the 'on page' report card feature in the Seomoz Pro Campaign analyser. On several pages we got the following result No More Than One Canonical URL Tag Number of Canonical tags <dl> <dd>2</dd> <dt>Explanation</dt> <dd>The canonical URL tag is meant to be employed only a single time on an individual URL (much like the title element or meta description). To ensure the search engines properly parse the canonical source, employ only a single version of this tag.</dd> <dt>Recommendation</dt> <dd>Remove all but a single canonical URL tag</dd> </dl> I have looked into the source code of one of the pages http://www.sabaileela.co.uk/acupuncture-london and can see that there are two "canonical" tags. Does anyone have any advise on which one I should ask the developer to remove? I am not sure how to determine the relative importance of either link.
On-Page Optimization | | brian.james0 -
Canalogical Tag
Hello, I wanted to have a clean url for example : site.com/producta and our web developer installed this module which does this great. However there are now two products one with unclean url for example sit.com/productaxmlayoiadkja and the clean one - on both pages page it says: <link rel="canonical" href="http://www.site.com/producta">Is this correct? Reason being is I'm aiming for the long tail and the site is not getting any visitor although we have unqiue 250 products+ and getting less then 20 visitors a day after almost a year! I would appreciate any help because I'm getting in real trouble because the site is performing so badly!
On-Page Optimization | | reallyitsme0