I'm thinking I might need to canonicalize back to the home site and combine some content, what do you think?
-
I have a site that is mostly just podcasts with transcripts, and it has both audio and video versions of the podcasts. I also have a blog that I contribute to that links back to the video/transcript page of these podcasts. So this blog I contribute to has the exact same content (the podcast; both audio and video but no transcript) and then an audio and video version of this podcast. Each post of the podcast has different content on it that is technically unique but I'm not sure it's unique enough.
So my question is, should I canonicalize the posts on this blog back to the original video/transcript page of the podcast and then combine the video with the audio posts.
Thanks!
-
If you combine them, you'll also need to rel=canonical or 301-redirect the audio pages to the video pages (or vise-versa). To avoid chaining your canonicals, the blog posts should all go back to whichever version (audio/video) you choose as the canonical.
It depends on usage, but I'm guessing the videos have higher engagement than the audio? You could just build a longish page that looks like:
[Video]
[Audio]
[Description]
[Transcript]Transcripts add a lot of SEO power to a page, potentially, and getting that content right on the main video page could help quite a bit, if you can keep it user-friendly.
-
Okay thanks, I'll discuss this with others at my organization. I think we will combine the video and audio posts into one and then rel=canonical the patheos blog posts to the original website.
Any other ideas or suggestions?
This has been great feedback thank you!
-
You have to understand that "unique" is relative. Yes, each of these pages have some unique content and legitimately target different things. In Google's eyes, though, they have virtually the same title tag, are on the same subject, share common header elements, text, and keywords, and could be seen as near-duplicates. The audio page especially appears thin, since Google can't weigh in the value of the actual audio itself.
Personally, I'd combine the audio/video on one page, for starters. I just don't see clear value in the separation, either for search or users. As for the transcripts, that page is essentially richer. It's the video + the transcript. From a business/organizational standpoint, I'm not really clear on what the two sites are trying to accomplish, but you are potentially diluting your ranking ability. Two sites are harder to market and promote than one - that's a reality that goes far beyond SEO.
I see that the two sites have very different purposes, but if it were me, I would probably focus the ranking power of these videos/podcasts on just one page, and use cross-domain canonicals. This is as much a business decision as an SEO decision, so I can only give you my opinions, but the four copies probably are hurting you in the long run.
-
Yes definitely. We are talking about dozens podcasts so far...
this is the video version of this podcast from the blog:
and this links back to the video and transcript post on the website
this is the audio version of this podcast from the blog:
and this links back to the video and transcript post on the website also.
video and transcript version of this podcast on the website:
http://ibelievepodcast.com/1452/die-without-knowing-christ-video-transcript
audio version of this podcast on the website:
http://ibelievepodcast.com/1455/die-without-knowing-christ-audio
as you can see there a total of four posts for each podcast.
-
If the intent of the blog on patheos is for people to stumble across that content, or to fuel a feed for users/subscribers on that site (as opposed to having higher search visibility than the actual podcast site), then you can go ahead and direct the canonical to the original podcast pages. Or, simply leave things as they are (so long as it's not creating thin/duplicate content issues).
If your patheos blog ranks higher in search results because it's part of a larger blog network, then you definitely won't want to change the canonical, because you'll want the blog to maintain it's juice.
Have you looked at your referral traffic data lately? How much traffic is the blog driving to the site? Enough to make it worth all the extra effort?
-
Any chance you could share one pair of URLs that you worry might seem like duplicates? Unfortunately, it's hard to tell out of context. How many podcasts/videos are we talking about - dozens, hundreds, thousands?
-
The website is the original source and the more important entity, so the goal is to bring people there. The blog that we manage is on a larger site called patheos.com, a religious website.
I'm not 100% sure if it's creating a "duplicate" content problem but I am feeling like there might be a uniqueness problem.
Both pages (the website and blog) exist in order to help promote the podcast with the blog posts linking back to their respective full transcript posts on the website.
So I'm thinking the other issue might be that the content on the blog if not duplicate, then is considered "thin". It is wordpress based and the content it includes is made up of posts, and there is one for each of the video and audio versions of the cast. The video version includes the video and and then a few short paragraphs talking about the topic at hand being discussed in the podcast. And the audio version is just one paragraph or so about the topic along with the audio. Technically unique from the video, but obviously short, and is generally targeting the same thing.
The website is also wordpress based and has a post for each of the video and audio versions of the cast as well. The video post just has the video and then the verbatim transcript, like Moz's whiteboard fridays! And then the audio version includes a short paragraph or so on the topic, again technically different or unique from the video transcript and also different from the other audio post on the blog but also "thin". Sorry if this is confusing...
Thanks so much for your responses so far, I greatly appreciate it!
-
I tend to agree with Karin. On the one hand - yes, this could be seen as duplicate/thin content, especially at large scale. On the other hand, I'm not clear on what your goal is or which set of pages is more important. Think about the business case and where you want to bring users, not just the SEO aspect. Why do both of these pages exist, and what are you trying to achieve?
-
What's the more valuable goal for your traffic: to have people find the blog or the main site? If you point the canonical tags from the blog to the site, then you'll reduce the chances of anyone ever finding the blog in a search, which would waste the extra effort of adding unique content about the podcasts (unless you have a devoted readership who is going from the podcast page to the corresponding blog post in order to see what extra insights you've added).
Is it creating any duplicate content issues to have the posts in both places? If so, that would be a good reason to redirect the canonical refs (or discontinue the blog altogether).
-
I believe best practice is to always canonicalize to the original content. However, the mix of the original content within those blog pages is tricky because I'm sure a lot has to do with how much content is duped.
Have you tried running any reports for duplicate content issues? I know Moz has some great tools and one of my favorites is Screaming Frog Spider. Have you also looked at your GWT to see what if any issues Google may have?
Duplicate content can be bad, but there are a few cases with transcriptions that we've recently discovered where penalties are non-existent. One of the recent lessons we learned was from a similar thread about video transcriptions. Phil in the post submitted some good links and research to back it all up.
Here's the link to that discussion: http://moz.com/community/q/video-seo-youtube-transcriptions-dupe-content
I hope this points you in the right direction!
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
-
Can't get my site recognised for keyword
My site prettycool.co.uk and primary we sell fascinators, the problem is I can't get the word fascinators to be listed by Google. We are on the 1st page for most colours ie. pink fascinators, blue fascinators etc. but for the term fascinators even if we fetch we are listed for a couple of hours and then disappear. I've checked for keyword stuffing but our site sell fascinators and we need to have this word in our site and other sites have a lot more references to the term and are listed on the 1st or 2nd pages. We used to be listed on page 1 for many years but the last 2 or 3 years dropped back to page 4 but now nothing. Any help or suggestions would be fantastic!
Technical SEO | | Rutts0 -
Duplicate Content - Different URLs and Content on each
Seeing a lot of duplicate content instances of seemingly unrelated pages. For instance, http://www.rushimprint.com/custom-bluetooth-speakers.html?from=topnav3 is being tracked as a duplicate of http://www.rushimprint.com/custom-planners-diaries.html?resultsperpg=viewall. Does anyone else see this issue? Is there a solution anyone is aware of?
Technical SEO | | ClaytonKendall0 -
301'd site, but new site is not getting picked up in google.
Hi I'm having big issues! Any help would be greatly appreciated This is the 3rd time this happened. Every time I switch my old site greatcleanjokes.com to the new design of chokeonajoke.com traffic goes almost completely down (I even tried out the new design on greatcleanjokes [to see if it was a 301 issue] and traffic also went down.) What can possibly be wrong with this new site that google just doesn't like it ?! I was ranking high up for many big phrase like joke of the day, corny jokes, clean jokes, short jokes. Now It's all gone. I also think it's strange that when I search for site:chokeonajoke.com the post pages show up before the category pages!? Here is the old site http://web.archive.org/web/20140406214615/http://www.greatcleanjokes.com/ Here is the new one http://chokeonajoke.com/ If you can't figure out anything do you know of anyone I can hire who may be able to figure it out?
Technical SEO | | Nickys22111 -
Site hacked, but can't find the code
Discovered some really odd words ranking for us in WMT. Looked further and found pages like this www.pdnseek.com/wll/canadian-24-hour-pharmacy. When you click it it redirects to the home page. The developers can't find /wll anywhere on the site. The pages are indexed and cached. Looked at the back links in moz and found many backlinks to our site from other sites using URLs like this. The host says there is nothing on the server, but where else could it be. We've run virus scans, nothing, looked through source code, nothing. Anyone with some idea? www.pdnseek.com is the URL
Technical SEO | | Britewave0 -
We're no longer turning up in Google SERP for our brand search when we used to be #1 after our site update. Any ideas why?
We recently updated our website and during the push, someone mistakenly 301 redirected "www.brandx.com" to "brandx.com" instead of the otherway. Since then, our website no longer turns up for the search "brandx" on Google. We have reversed the mistake a few days ago, but we're still not turning up, and we used to rank #1 in Google SERP. Could it just be due to timing between the crawls and that our www. site didn't make it in Google's index due to this mistake? We have submitted our new sitemap to google a couple of days ago as well, as a side we're still showing up #1 in Bing's results however. And it should still show up based on SEOMoz's SERP report. Any help would help as I'm growing increasingly concerned.
Technical SEO | | JoeLin0 -
WMT - Googlebot can't access your site
Hi On our new website which is just a few weeks old upon logging into Webmaster tools I am getting the following message Googlebot can't access your site - The overall error rate for DNS queries is 50% What do I need to do to resolve this, I have never had this problem before with any of the sites - where the domains are with Fasthosts (UK) and hosting is with Dreamhosts. What is the recommended course of action Google mention contacting your host in my case Dreamhost - but what do you need to ask them in a support ticket. When doing a fetch in WMT the fetch status is a success?
Technical SEO | | ocelot0 -
Mitigating duplicate page content on dynamic sites such as social networks and blogs.
Hello, I recently did an SEOMoz crawl for a client site. As it typical, the most common errors were duplicate page title and duplicate content. The client site is a custom social network for researchers. Most of the pages that showing as duplicate are simple variations of each user's profile such as comment sections, friends pages, and events. So my question is how can we limit duplicate content errors for a complex site like this. I already know about the rel canonical tag, and rel next tag, but I'm not sure if either of these will do the job. Also, I don't want to lose potential links/link juice for good pages. Are there ways of using the "noindex" tag in batches? For instance: noindex all urls containing this character? Or do most CMS allow this to be done systematically? Anyone with experience doing SEO for a custom Social Network or Forum, please advise. Thanks!!!
Technical SEO | | BPIAnalytics0 -
Question about duplicate content within my site
Hi. New here to SEOmoz and also somewhat new to SEO in general. A friend has asked me to help do some onsite SEO for their company's website. The company uses Drupal Content Management System. They have a couple product pages that contain a tabbed section for features, accessories, etc. When they built their tabs, they used a Drupal module called Quicktabs, by which each individual tab is created as a separate page and then pulled into the tabs from those pages. So, in essence, you now have instances of repeated content. 1) the page used to create the tab, and 2) the tab that displays on the product page. My question is, how should I handle the pages that were used to create the tabs? Should I make them NOINDEX? Thank you for your advice in advance.
Technical SEO | | aprilm-1890400