Same content on other domain owned by de company. Canonical is not working
-
Hi!
I am analyzing a website right now. It's a school, let's name it NEWSCHOOL. This school is owned by other school, let's name it, BIGSCHOOL
NEWSCHOOL is specialized in tourism degrees, and the BIGSCHOOL is a bigger and older one with a lot of different degrees.
What happens is that NEWSCHOOL has a course, let's name it TOURISM DEGREE.
BIGSCHOOL has that course too, with the same content, trying to help to promote the content, because this school is older, well known and has a consolidated brand internationally.BIGSCHOOL, has placed a canonical tag, telling Google that content comes from NEWSCHOOL.
What is happening is that the result of newschool is beeing omited by google. The first result is the BIGSCHOOL content, and then a lot of training portals, where the degree content is too to increase its visibility.
So, I would like to know, how can we do to say google that the content that it should show is the one of NEWSCHOOL and not the one in BIGSCHOOL. It's pretty clear that Google knows that those portals are closed related, because it is omitting the NEWSCHOOL results.
I know that we can send a link from the content area from one portal to the other in the content we want. But... would it solve the problem... and y we have to repeat that for each degree, woudn't it be a little dangerous?
Would like to know your points of view!
Thanks!
-
Thanks Everett, I agree that the best would be creating diferent content, but It is a little difficult, cause it is the explanation of the contents and programming of one course.
Thank you for your answer, and I will recomend publishing the content first in NEWSCHOOL and sending to the index before sending that content to other pages or portals!
-
The cross-domain rel canonical tag is a "hint" to Google, not a "directive". They can and do ignore it when other signals overwhelmingly indicate that a different page is the canonical one.
My advice would be to write new content for NEWSCHOOL.
If you can't do that, consider all of the different signals that Google can use besides the rel canonical tag:
- Initial publish date of the content
- Initial indexation date
- External links pointing to the content
- Internal links pointing to the content
- Domain authority (including domain-wide links)
- Age of the domain
- How the two pages are linking to each other
Last but not least you could noindex the BIGSCHOOL version, but not the NEWSCHOOL version and leave your cross-domain rel canonical tag up.
Again, it would be best to have unique content on both sites.
-
On my sites, if I have rel=caononical on Page A, referring to Page B (on another domain) as the source of the content, I do have a followed link from Page A to Page B. That link is in a sentence that says that the content was originally published on Page B on the other domain. I do not know if this is the way that Google would have done this, but this is what I have done and I can say that the results have been excellent. Page B does very well in the SERPs. (Page A is on a much more powerful website.)
-
Hi!
So, your point is to wait for that to happen, isn't it? What do you think about sending a link from the BIGSCHOOL course page to the NEWSCHOOL course page? I mean, canonical + link
Thank you!
-
Thanks Rebecca! I would probably go that way!
-
Thanks Umar!
What do you mean with ...
"I reckon your "New School" is not offering lots of degree courses so yes you can get the link from "Big School's" content but make sure, you are linking in a proper and natural way"
I woudn't be natural... cause both have the same owner...
-
I suggest lots of patience here. One of the goals of the rel=canonical is to have the ranking value of the BigSchool page passed to the new domain. If you simply do rel=canonical that will happen. If you use noindex, nofollow, robots, meta robots or anything else then you will take, by total chance, whatever google decides to give you.
I would be willing to sit for months on this if you are going to rel=canonical route.
-
You could noindex, follow the BIGSCHOOL tourism degree page.
-
I agree with Umar that BIGSCHOOL's overall authority is probably getting in the way. Is there any way to get a dofollow link from their course page to yours to help reinforce the linkage? Funneling a little extra juice your way certainly wouldn't hurt and it makes sense contextually.
-
It can take google a really long time to honor some rel=canonical. I have used some and it has taken many months for all of them to be honored.
-
Hey,
It seems that Google is giving respect to "Big School" because of it's overall authority. If you like to continue this approach, you might need to work on the overall authority of "New School" to get things straight.
Frankly speaking, I wouldn't go with this strategy as there are lots of other ways to leverage your new site from the old one. For instance, you may place the attractive banners at the "Tourism" page that point to your new school and stuff like that.
I reckon your "New School" is not offering lots of degree courses so yes you can get the link from "Big School's" content but make sure, you are linking in a proper and natural way.
For more details about canonical tags FAQs, please refer to this brilliant resource from Dr.Pete,
https://mza.seotoolninja.com/blog/rel-confused-answers-to-your-rel-canonical-questionsHope this helps!
Thanks,
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
-
Copied Content - Define Canonical
Hello, The Story I am working on a news organization. Our website is the https://www.neakriti.gr My question regards copied content with source references. Sometimes a small portion of our content is based on some third article that is posted on some site (that is about 1% of our content). We always put "source" reference if that is the case. This is inevitable as "news" is something that sometimes has sources on other news sites, especially if there is something you cannot verify or don't have immediate sources, and therefore you need to state that "according to this source, something has happened". Here is one article of ours that has a source from another site: https://www.neakriti.gr/article/ellada-nea/1503363/nekros-vrethike-o-agnooumenos-arhimandritis-stin-lakonia/ if you open the above article you will see we have a link to the equivalent article of the original source site http://lakonikos.gr/epikairothta/item/133664-nekros-entopistike-o-arximandritis-p-andreas-bolovinos-synexis-enimerosi Now here is my question. I have read in other MOZ forum articles that a "canonical" approach solves this issue... How can we be legit when it comes to duplicate content in the eyes of search engines? Should we use some kind of canonical link to the source site? Should the "canonical" be inside the link in some way? Should it be on our section? Our site has AMP equivalent pages (if you add the /amp keyword at the end of the article URL). Our AMP pages have canonical to our original article. So if we have a "canonical" approach how would the AMP be effected as well? Also by applying a possible canonical solution to the source URL, does that "canonical" effect our article as not being shown in search results, thus passing all indexing to the canonical site? (I know that canonical indicates what URL is to be indexed). Additionally, does such a canonical indication make us legit in such a case in the eyes of search engines? (i.e. it eliminates any possible article duplication for original content in the eyes of search engines?). Or simply put, having a simple link to the original article (as we have it now) is enough for the search engines to understand that we have reference to original article URL? How would we approach this problem in our site based on its current structure?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | ioannisanif0 -
Influencers, links, guest blogging, content what really works ?
Hi there, I am scratching my head lately and wondering what is the best in order to increase the ranking of my website... I am sure most of you will say a combination of everything but what else... I know that if an influencer (someone who has a important Klout score) writes about you and links to your website is helpful but what about having a link on a webpage like that : https://goo.gl/YYy5f9 is it still worth my time asking for link on those types of webpages (not that they aren't considered spam according to moz spam score) What about having a link in article on the USA today, what is more important, the fact that the usa today writes about you and has a high DA or the person who writes it ? I am in tourism industry and work with hotels is it worth my time contacting hotels I work with for links or see that a hotel page is not related to what I do which is bicycle tours, or am I wasting my time ? Finally, can't I outrank my competitors by just being more relevant in my content than them know I have a DA of already 38...without chasing links and a website that is 10 years old. Thank you,
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | seoanalytics0 -
301s Or Stick With Canonical?
Hello all! A nice interesting one for you on this fine Friday... I have some pages which are accessible by 2 different urls - This is for user experience allowing the user to get to these pages in two different ways. To keep Google happy we have a rel canonical so that Google only sees one of these urls to avoid duplicates. After some SEO work I need to change both of these urls (on around 1,000 pages). Is the best way to do this... To 301 every old url to every new url Or... To not worry as I will just point the indexed pages to the new rel canonical? Any ideas or suggestions would be brilliant. Thanks!
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | HB170 -
Lower quality new domain link vs higher quality repeat domain link
First time poster here with a dilemma that head scratching and spreadsheets can't solve! I'm trying to work out whether to focus on getting links from new domains or to nurture relationships with the bigger sites in our business and get more links. Of the two links below which does the community here think would be more valuable a signal to Google? Both would be links from within relevant text/post copy. Link 1. Site DA 30. No links currently from this domain. Link 2. Site DA 60. Many links over last 12 months already from this domain. I suspect link 1 but given the enormous disparity in ranking power am I correct?! Thanks for any considered opinions out there! Matthew
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | mat20150 -
Can you canonical your homepage to a different URL on the same domain?
I would like to know if it is acceptable (or even possible from Google's standpoint) to canonical your homepage to a different URL on the same domain? For example, my homepage is www.grasscare.com (it's not) and I've built links to that page for years for terms like "grass seed" and "buy grass seed" because all I sold in the past was grass seed. If I then decide I want to sell both grass seed and sod, can I canonical my homepage (grasscare.com) to a new URL www.grasscare.com/grasss-seed.html to preserve the link value I've built up for "grass seed"?The new homepage would turn into a doorway page of sorts, forcing users to select either grass seed or sod before going further. Whatever content there is on the new homepage about grass seed would also be present on grasscare.com/grass-seed.html, though it would only be a small amount of content. Can a canonical be used to point the homepage to this new page and also, will this canonical pass all of the link value and ranking signals it help in the past to the new URL? Thank you in advance for any help or insight.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | andrewv0 -
Blog content - what to do, and what to avoid in terms of links, when you're paying for blog content
Hi, I've just been looking at a restaurant site which is paying food writers to put food news and blogs on their website. I checked the backlink profile of the site and the various bloggers in question usually link from their blogs / company websites to the said restaurant to help promote any new blogs that appear on the restaurant site. That got me wondering about whether this might cause problems with Google. I guess they've been putting about one blog live per month for 2 years, from 12/13 bloggers who have been linking to their website. What would you advise?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | McTaggart0 -
Domain certificate
Hello, I would like to know if there is any certificate we can buy to increase the Seo of my website. Thanks very much for your time
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Cartageno0 -
Is having a canonical tag for the link that IS the canonical a negative thing?
Throughout our site, canonical tags have been added where needed. However, the canonical tags are also included for the canonical itself. For example, for www.askaquestion.com, the canonical tag has been added as www.askaquestion.com. Will this have a negative impact or does it not really matter whether there is such a loop?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | kbbseo0