How to solve JavaScript paginated content for SEO
-
In our blog listings page, we limit the number of blogs that can be seen on the page to 10. However, all of the blogs are loaded in the html of the page and page links are added to the bottom.
Example page: https://tulanehealthcare.com/about/newsroom/
When a user clicks the next page, it simply filters the content on the same page for the next group of postings and displays these to the user. Nothing in the html or URL change. This is all done via JavaScript.
So the question is, does Google consider this hidden content because all listings are in the html but the listings on page are limited to only a handful of them?
Or is Googlebot smart enough to know that the content is being filtered by JavaScript pagination?
If this is indeed a problem we have 2 possible solutions:
- not building the HTML for the next pages until you click on the 'next' page.
- adding parameters to the URL to show the content has changed.
Any other solutions that would be better for SEO?
-
thanks for the thorough response. I was leaning toward leaving it alone for the time being and this helps affirm my decision. I don't think we are going to see much benefit from tampering with it to make it more Googlebot-friendly
-
It will be strongly de-valued and the links may or may not even be noticed / seen at all. Googlebot can leverage headless browsers (something similar to Selenium or Windmill in Python, with targeting handled via XPath maybe). The only thing is, this takes ages longer than basic source-code scraping. To scrape the modified source with a headless browser can take, 5-10 seconds instead of less than 1 second
Since Google's mission is the 'index the web', you have to fathom that they wouldn't take this colossal efficiency hit all the time, or for everyone. Certainly looking at the results of many sites and their different builds, that's exactly what I see. Just because 'Google can' that doesn't mean that 'Google will' on all crawls and websites
Some very large websites rely on such technologies, but usually they're household name sites which offer a unique value-proposition of cultural trust signals for the specified audience. If you're not a titan of industry, then you're likely not one of the favoured few who gets such special treatment from Googlebot so regularly
This is an interesting post to read:
https://medium.com/@baphemot/whats-server-side-rendering-and-do-i-need-it-cb42dc059b38
... you may also have the option of building the HTML on the server side and then serving it in different URLs to the user. To me it sounds like a case where SSR might be the best option. That way you can still use your existing technologies (which are FAST) to render the modified HTML, but render it on the server side and then serve the static HTML (after the render) to users using SSR. That's personally what I would start looking at as it will keep the best of both worlds
Implementation could be costly though!
I don't think you'd get accused of cloaking but that doesn't change the fact, part of your site's architecture will 90% become invisible to Google 90% of the time which is not really very good for SEO (at all)
Another option, instead of building all the post listings on page-load (which will cause stutter between pages), just load all of them at once in the source code and use the JavaScript to handle the visual navigation (from page to page) only. Let JS handle the visual effect, but keep all listings in the HTML right from the get-go. That can work fine too, but maybe SSR would be better for you (I don't know)
...
after looking at your source code, it seems you have already done this. The only real problem would be if the links themselves were 'created' through the JS, which they are not (they all start visible in your non-modified source code). Yes, things which begin hidden, are slightly de-valued (but not completely). This might impact you slightly, but to be honest I don't think separating them out and making the pages load entirely separately would be much better. It would help architectural internal-indexation slightly, but likely would hamper content-loading speeds significantly
Maybe think about the SSR option. You might get the best of both worlds and you might be able to keep the JS intact whilst also allowing deep-linking of paginated content (which currently is impossible, can't link to page 2 of results)
Let me know if you have previously thought about SSR
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
-
Is this the correct way of using rel canonical, next and prev for paginated content?
Hello Moz fellows, a while ago (3-4 years ago) we setup our e-commerce website category pages to apply what Google suggested to correctly handle pagination. We added rel "canonicals", rel "next" and "prev" as follows: On page 1: On page 2: On page 3: And so on, until the last page is reached: Do you think everything we have been doing is correct? I have doubts on the way we have handled the canonical tag, so, any help to confirm that is very appreciated! Thank you in advance to everyone.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | fablau0 -
Technical SEO
Hi Team, What are the points we are missing on our website from technical SEO front? http://www.giftxoxo.com/
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Obbserv0 -
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?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | jamiestu130 -
Video seo stats
I've come across various places that give statistics for things like "Video search results have a higher click-through than plain text results. " and
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Gordon_Hall
"Video is 50 times more likely to get organic page ranks in Google than plain text results" How true are these and does anyone have a definitive guide to video SEO?0 -
Duplicate Content: Organic vs Local SEO
Does Google treat them differently? I found something interesting just now and decided to post it up http://www.daviddischler.com/is-duplicate-content-treated-differently-when-local-seo-comes-into-play/
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | daviddischler0 -
Duplicate Content Question
We are getting ready to release an integration with another product for our app. We would like to add a landing page specifically for this integration. We would also like it to be very similar to our current home page. However, if we do this and use a lot of the same content, will this hurt our SEO due to duplicate content?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | NathanGilmore0 -
Joomla Plugins for SEO
Any input on which Joomla plugins could help us to facilitate the SEO on a client's site? Wordpress has some simple all-in-ones but we're not as familiar with Joomla and it doesn't look like that's the case. Thanks!
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | MackenzieFogelson0 -
Duplicate content for images
On SEOmoz I am getting duplicate errors for my onsite report. Unfortunately it does not specify what that content is... We are getting these errors for our photo gallery and i am assuming that the reason is some of the photos are listed in multiple categories. Can this be the problem? what else can it be? how can we resolve these issues?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | SEODinosaur0