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.
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
-
Tabbed content impact
Hi all, I know historically tabbed content has been devalued, what's the situation currently? I've heard a lot about mobile first changing this. This is a design that has been produced by our designers: https://i.gyazo.com/35f655c7ba2bc89a87b9476e4a14534d.png Each tab contains approx 1000 words and previously has been a unique article. Would love to know your thoughts on this design and the benefits/losses of doing it like this. Thanks, Tom
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | ThomasHarvey0 -
Duplicate content, the distrubutors are copying the content of the manufacturer
Hi everybody! While I was checking all points of the Technical Site Audit Checklist 2015 (great checklist!), I found that the distrubutors of my client are copying part of the content to add it in their websites. When I take a content snippet, and put it in quotes and search for it I get four or five sites that have copied the content. They are distributors of my client. The first result is still my client (the manufacturer), but... should I recommend any action to this situation. We don't want to bother the distributors with obstacles. This situation could be a problem or is it a common situation and Google knows perfectly where the content is comming from? Any recommendation? Thank you!
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | teconsite0 -
I'm updating content that is out of date. What is the best way to handle if I want to keep old content as well?
So here is the situation. I'm working on a site that offers "Best Of" Top 10 list type content. They have a list that ranks very well but is out of date. They'd like to create a new list for 2014, but have the old list exist. Ideally the new list would replace the old list in search results. Here's what I'm thinking, but let me know if you think theres a better way to handle this: Put a "View New List" banner on the old page Make sure all internal links point to the new page Rel=canonical tag on the old list pointing to the new list Does this seem like a reasonable way to handle this?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | jim_shook0 -
Google isn't seeing the content but it is still indexing the webpage
When I fetch my website page using GWT this is what I receive. HTTP/1.1 301 Moved Permanently
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | jacobfy
X-Pantheon-Styx-Hostname: styx1560bba9.chios.panth.io
server: nginx
content-type: text/html
location: https://www.inscopix.com/
x-pantheon-endpoint: 4ac0249e-9a7a-4fd6-81fc-a7170812c4d6
Cache-Control: public, max-age=86400
Content-Length: 0
Accept-Ranges: bytes
Date: Fri, 14 Mar 2014 16:29:38 GMT
X-Varnish: 2640682369 2640432361
Age: 326
Via: 1.1 varnish
Connection: keep-alive What I used to get is this: HTTP/1.1 200 OK
Date: Thu, 11 Apr 2013 16:00:24 GMT
Server: Apache/2.2.23 (Amazon)
X-Powered-By: PHP/5.3.18
Expires: Sun, 19 Nov 1978 05:00:00 GMT
Last-Modified: Thu, 11 Apr 2013 16:00:24 +0000
Cache-Control: no-cache, must-revalidate, post-check=0, pre-check=0
ETag: "1365696024"
Content-Language: en
Link: ; rel="canonical",; rel="shortlink"
X-Generator: Drupal 7 (http://drupal.org)
Connection: close
Transfer-Encoding: chunked
Content-Type: text/html; charset=utf-8 xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/terms/"
xmlns:foaf="http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/"
xmlns:og="http://ogp.me/ns#"
xmlns:rdfs="http://www.w3.org/2000/01/rdf-schema#"
xmlns:sioc="http://rdfs.org/sioc/ns#"
xmlns:sioct="http://rdfs.org/sioc/types#"
xmlns:skos="http://www.w3.org/2004/02/skos/core#"
xmlns:xsd="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#"> <title>Inscopix | In vivo rodent brain imaging</title>0 -
Google Penalty or Not?
One of my sites I work with got this message: http://www.mysite: Unnatural inbound linksJune 27, 2013 Google has detected a pattern of artificial or unnatural links pointing to your site. Buying links or participating in link schemes in order to manipulate PageRank are violations of Google's Webmaster Guidelines. As a result, Google has applied a manual spam action to mysite.com/. There may be other actions on your site or parts of your site. But, when I got to manual actions it says: Manual Actions No manual webspam actions found. -- So which is it??? I have been doing link removal, but now I am confused if I need to do a reconsideration request or not.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | netviper0 -
How long will Google take to read my robots.txt after updating?
I updated www.egrecia.es/robots.txt two weeks ago and I still haven't solved Duplicate Title and Content on the website. The Google SERP doesn't show those urls any more but SEOMOZ Crawl Errors nor Google Webmaster Tools recognize the change. How long will it take?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Tintanus0 -
What is next from Google Panda and Google Penguin?
Does anyone know what we can expect next from Google Panda/Penguin? We did prepare for this latest update and so far so good.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | jjgonza0 -
Local SEO (Rankings) + UK-wide SEO (national rankings) - achieving both
Hi All, For clients wishing to sell online / generate leads nationally, yet still want to have a local online presence to attract town / county-wide customers, I've often placed Town / County locations within both the Title Tag (or just County if space is limited) and Meta Description, plus within the Hx headings, Alt-text and within the footer of every page. My question is, does adding the location of the client within these fields really infringe their attempts to rank nationally, as some nationally ranked pages have no mention of location while others have their location (Town, County or Both) shown within them? Any help, insight or feedback greatly appreciated 🙂 Happy New Year Tony
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Tony-Dimmock0