Is tabbed content okay or bad for SEO? Google takes both sides.
-
Hello Moz Community!
It seems like there are two opinions coming from directly from Google on tabbed content:
1) John Mueller says here that content is indexed but discounted
2) Matt Cutts says here that if you're not using tabs deceptively, you're in good shape
I see this has been discussed in the Moz Q & A before, but I have an interesting situation:
The pages I am building have ~50% static content, and ~50% tabbed content (only two tabs). Showing all tabbed content at once is not an option.
Since the tabbed content will make up 50% of the total content, it's important that it is 100% weighted by Google. I can think of two ways to show it:
1) Standard tabs using jQuery
Advantage: Both tab 1 and tab 2's content indexed
Disadvantage: Tabbed content may be discounted?
2) Make the content of the tabs conditional on the server side
website.com/page/ only shows tab 1's content in html
website.com/page/?tab=2 only shows tab 2's content in the html. Include rel="canonical" pointing to website.com/page/.
Advantage: Content of tab 1 indexed & 100% counted by Google
Disadvantage: Content of tab 2 not indexed
Which option is best? Is there a better solution?
-
You could display all of it and make some clever use of jump links. Just sayin...
-
EGOL: Makes perfect sense. This, IMHO, is a bad move by Google. They always say "Create for Humans, not Bots" but proper use of tabbed content does make for better UX. We are both eliminating tabs for rankings. Google as usual talking out of both sides of their mouth. Who wants to spend 5 minutes scrolling to the bottom of a ridiculously long page?
-
That happened to us too. We had a huge FAQ page and decided to reduce it's length by placing the answers behind tabs. It made the page neat, but, when that content went behind the tabs a lot of unique words were hidden. Previously that page received a lot of long tail traffic but after the diverse words were placed behind the tabs the long tail traffic collapsed.
-
EGOL is the man! We moved some content behind tabs, and our rankings did drop. When we moved it back out, they returned. We had some other issues/changes as well, so I can't 100% vouch for correlation.
One interesting test I did run is to run some searches for sentences that were hidden behind tabs on our site. The tabbed content was found, indicating that it was indexed by Google, so they aren't ignoring it.
We decided to go tabless, and I think we are the better for it, but who knows? If you have an enormous amount of content on a page, I would consider tabs, but I would leave the juiciest bits out in the open. FWIW.
-
Thanks for your input Egol! 9/10 times I would agree with your thoughts exactly and go with nothing hidden.
**Why not? **
The product has benefits that are described with completely different language to two target markets. The point of the tabs is to be able to effectively sell to people we know to belong to each market. So actually we don't need people to understand/use the tabs, they would exist merely to include our conditional content.
So anyways showing all content won't work well, and separate pages won't work either because of the way search goes for the niche. We'll see if I can get creative!
-
Yep. People argue about this stuff. The horses mouth even talks both ways.
So, if you hide your content behind tabs, you are gambling that Google is not going to respect that content today or tomorrow or at sometime in the future - even if they are doing differently now.
The only safe bet that I see is to display all of your content. So, I have bet ALL of my chips on zero content hidden in tabs. Zero content hidden in any way.
Showing all tabbed content at once is not an option.
Why not?
I don't use tabs for search engine reasons but I also don't use them to make sure that all of my content is out in the open for the visitor. Some people don't know about tabs. People who are old, have vision problems, are in a hurry, are not websavvy, are using a tiny screen, those people and many more have a good chance of missing your tabs.
I am getting all of my content out there for everyone especially Google. Google has hated hidden content since 1998. White text on white background might have been the first Google penalties.
**Which option is best? **
If you ask me, this is like one of those bad jokes, Door A or Door B and there is bad stuff behind both of them. If you think you know how Google treats them today you might be wrong and if you think you know how they will treat them tomorrow there is even a bigger chance that you will be wrong.
Is there a better solution?
Display all text. Search engines have always read it, probably always will read it. Do different at your own risk.
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
-
International SEO and duplicate content: what should I do when hreflangs are not enough?
Hi, A follow up question from another one I had a couple of months ago: It has been almost 2 months now that my hreflangs are in place. Google recognises them well and GSC is cleaned (no hreflang errors). Though I've seen some positive changes, I'm quite far from sorting that duplicate content issue completely and some entire sub-folders remain hidden from the SERP.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | GhillC
I believe it happens for two reasons: 1. Fully mirrored content - as per the link to my previous question above, some parts of the site I'm working on are 100% similar. Quite a "gravity issue" here as there is nothing I can do to fix the site architecture nor to get bespoke content in place. 2. Sub-folders "authority". I'm guessing that Google prefers sub-folders over others due to their legacy traffic/history. Meaning that even with hreflangs in place, the older sub-folder would rank over the right one because Google believes it provides better results to its users. Two questions from these reasons:
1. Is the latter correct? Am I guessing correctly re "sub-folders" authority (if such thing exists) or am I simply wrong? 2. Can I solve this using canonical tags?
Instead of trying to fix and "promote" hidden sub-folders, I'm thinking to actually reinforce the results I'm getting from stronger sub-folders.
I.e: if a user based in belgium is Googling something relating to my site, the site.com/fr/ subfolder shows up instead of the site.com/be/fr/ sub-sub-folder.
Or if someone is based in Belgium using Dutch, he would get site.com/nl/ results instead of the site.com/be/nl/ sub-sub-folder. Therefore, I could canonicalise /be/fr/ to /fr/ and do something similar for that second one. I'd prefer traffic coming to the right part of the site for tracking and analytic reasons. However, instead of trying to move mountain by changing Google's behaviour (if ever I could do this?), I'm thinking to encourage the current flow (also because it's not completely wrong as it brings traffic to pages featuring the correct language no matter what). That second question is the main reason why I'm looking out for MoZ's community advice: am I going to damage the site badly by using canonical tags that way? Thank you so much!
G0 -
SEO penalty for changing domains by simply switching DNS on Wordpress and adding 301s server-side?
Working on a domain change for a client. They're hosted on Wordpress and their developer wants to simply switch out the DNS for the new domain to point to wordpress, and then have the old domain use 301s to redirect to the new domain. The url structure will be the same, but there will be no CMS connected to the old domain after the switch. Is this dangerous for SEO? A significant portion of their customers are from organic traffic and losing SEO value would be very bad.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | dfolwell0 -
Why do Local "5 pack" results vary between showing Google+, Google+ and website address
I had a client ask me a good question. When they pull up a search result they show up at the top but only with a link to their G+ page. Other competitors show their web address and G+ page. Why are these results different in the same search group? Is there a way to ensure the web address shows up?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Ron_McCabe0 -
Content Aggregation Site: How much content per aggregated piece is too much?
Let's say I set up a section of my website that aggregated content from major news outlets and bloggers around a certain topic. For each piece of aggregated content, is there a bad, fair, and good range of word count that should be stipulated? I'm asking this because I've been mulling it over—both SEO (duplicate content) issues and copyright issues—to determine what is considered best practice. Any ideas about what is considered best practice in this situation? Also, are there any other issues to consider that I didn't mention?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | kdaniels0 -
Duplicate Content: Is a product feed/page rolled out across subdomains deemed duplicate content?
A company has a TLD (top-level-domain) which every single product: company.com/product/name.html The company also has subdomains (tailored to a range of products) which lists a choosen selection of the products from the TLD - sort of like a feed: subdomain.company.com/product/name.html The content on the TLD & subdomain product page are exactly the same and cannot be changed - CSS and HTML is slightly differant but the content (text and images) is exactly the same! My concern (and rightly so) is that Google will deem this to be duplicate content, therfore I'm going to have to add a rel cannonical tag into the header of all subdomain pages, pointing to the original product page on the TLD. Does this sound like the correct thing to do? Or is there a better solution? Moving on, not only are products fed onto subdomain, there are a handfull of other domains which list the products - again, the content (text and images) is exactly the same: other.com/product/name.html Would I be best placed to add a rel cannonical tag into the header of the product pages on other domains, pointing to the original product page on the actual TLD? Does rel cannonical work across domains? Would the product pages with a rel cannonical tag in the header still rank? Let me know if there is a better solution all-round!
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | iam-sold0 -
Duplicate content in Webmaster tools, is this bad?
We launched a new site, and we did a 301 redirect to every page. I have over 5k duplicate meta tags and title tags. It shows the old page and the new page as having the same title tag and meta description. This isn't true, we changed the titles and meta description, but it still shows up like that. What would cause that?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | EcommerceSite0 -
SEO Tools for Content Audit
Hi i'm looking for a tool which can do a full content audit for a site for instance - Find pages which: • Lack text content. • Finds pages with lengthy meta descriptions • Finds missing H1 tags or multiple H1 tags . • Duplicate meta descriptions. • Find images with no alt text Are there any tools besides the ones on SEMOZ which can enable me to do a full content audit on factors like these. Or any SEO audit tools out there which you can recommend. Cheers, Mark
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | monster990 -
Bi-Lingual Site: Lack of Translated Content & Duplicate Content
One of our clients has a blog with an English and Spanish version of every blog post. It's in WordPress and we're using the Q-Translate plugin. The problem is that my company is publishing blog posts in English only. The client is then responsible for having the piece translated, at which point we can add the translation to the blog. So the process is working like this: We add the post in English. We literally copy the exact same English content to the Spanish version, to serve as a placeholder until it's translated by the client. (*Question on this below) We give the Spanish page a placeholder title tag, so at least the title tags will not be duplicate in the mean time. We publish. Two pages go live with the exact same content and different title tags. A week or more later, we get the translated version of the post, and add that as the Spanish version, updating the content, links, and meta data. Our posts typically get indexed very quickly, so I'm worried that this is creating a duplicate content issue. What do you think? What we're noticing is that growth in search traffic is much flatter than it usually is after the first month of a new client blog. I'm looking for any suggestions and advice to make this process more successful for the client. *Would it be better to leave the Spanish page blank? Or add a sentence like: "This post is only available in English" with a link to the English version? Additionally, if you know of a relatively inexpensive but high-quality translation service that can turn these translations around quicker than my client can, I would love to hear about it. Thanks! David
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | djreich0