Hide keyword tag or not?
-
We have a mandatory keyword tag field in our cms page templates, which we have to keep
as our internal search facility bases queries on the keywords we use. Should we hide the keywords from the search
engines, as I read that Bing uses it as a spam signal? Or do we just need to stick to best practise ensuring the keywords match the keywords found in the body content? Many thanks for any help. Sophie -
Just to chime in Bing has also hinted that it sometimes uses the keywords as a negative factor in ranking signals which is another reason in my books to not use it. Tim makes some great points though so thumbs up all around!
-
Good point - strengthens my case to get rid of it. Thanks
-
The only issue I can think of from an SEO perspective is more from the stand point of competitor spying/research. There was a time when you could simply look at a competitors site structure and determine all of their targeted keywords just from the meta tag, so in effect free keyword research.
This has changed somewhat and as soon as it was no longer determined to boost rank most simply dropped the tag.
Nowadays it is simply just not recommended to use them.
-
Hi Tim,
That is helpful, thank you. I think the devs are looking for a way to avoid this job unless it's completely necessary. If there isn't a big issue from an SEO perspective then the consensus is we can just leave the field there. I guess if you have a reputable site with no spam markers a few keyword tags on a page aren't going to be detrimental.
Thanks again for your help.
Sophie
-
Hello Sophie,
I am not sure which CMS you use, but I personally have not used the keywords meta tag for some time now. Not due to it being a spam signal, but simply because it is no longer used as a ranking factor.
To alleviate your issue and not show your tag but still continue to use the CMS field, could your developers not look into the template files that are used and remove the location where a meta tag is dynamically added to your header. That way the CMS can still have the field for search queries but not be present in the pages code structure.
That way you get the best of both worlds, without causing you any issues. Hopefully I have understood how your site works and this is a possible solution.
Tim
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
-
The Importance of Bold Keywords in SEO?
Hi all, Recently I came cross an RV lifestyle blog named RVing Trends. The website features high-quality contents about handy RV camping tips & guides, and in-depth RV product reviews. They seem to spend a lot of effort on the content quality. I've followed this website for a few months and can see they've been producing 3,000-5,000 word length contents regularly. One thing I notice is that they emphasize the main keyword as bold in almost the posts. You can check 1 sample here about RV mattress reviews. Just want to ask for your opinions about the efficiency of this technique and is the keyword density still important for blog content to rank well in Google. Thanks!
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | TungNM1930 -
Canonical tag On Each Page With Same Page URL - Its Harmful For SEO or Not?
Hi. I have an e-commerce project and they have canonical code in each and every page for it's own URL. (Canonical on Original Page No duplicate page) The url of my wesite is like this: "https://www.website.com/products/produt1"
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | HuptechWebseo
and the site is having canonical code like this: " This is occurring in each and every products as well as every pages of my website. Now, my question is that "is it harmful for the SEO?" Or "should I remove this tags from all pages?" Is that any benefit for using the canonical tag for the same URL (Original URL)?0 -
Canonical tags being direct to "page=all" pages for an Ecommerce website
I find it alarming that my client has canonical tags pointing to "page=all" product gallery pages. Some of these product gallery pages have over 100 products and I think this could effect load time, especially for mobile. I would like to get some insight from the community on this, thanks!
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | JMSCC0 -
Repetition in Title Tag and Description
Let's say this is a hypothetical title: "Chevrolet Parts in Buffalo, NY | Novotny Chevrolet" Would having two instances of Chevrolet between the name of the store and the keyword set off a spam warning or at least be a bad SEO practice? Also, would it be smarter to phrase it, "Novotny Chevrolet Parts in Buffalo, NY" or something of the sort? Would this principal also apply to meta descriptions? Thanks!
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | oomdomarketing0 -
Should you include keywords in your domain name to rank well on Google Places?
Is it okay to include keywords in your domain name (as well as business name) to rank well on Google Places? In my opinion, this is very spammy and the sites using this technique will be slapped by Google sooner or later.
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | thegoatman1 -
Keywords in Google Local results
We have a client in the moving business and I'm absolutely flabbergasted by the "local" results and the number of them that are not following Google's guidelines for Google Local accounts. 3 of them are using exact match keyword strings as their company names. I've reported all 3, every week for the last 2 months and have not seen a single dip in the rankings. Meanwhile our client has a duplicate listing we've verified and "suspended" and it hasn't changed for 4 months! Any tips? I've attached a photo of the listings as well. xwWZWyT.gif
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | SmartWebPros0 -
Multiple domains different content same keywords
what would you advice on my case: It is bad for google if i have the four domains. I dont link between them as i dont want no association, or loss in rakings in branded page. Is bad if i link between them or the non branded to them branded domain. Is bad if i have all on my webmaster tools, i just have the branded My google page is all about the new non penalized domain. altough google gave a unique domain +propdental to the one that he manually penalized. (doesn't make sense) So. What are the thinks that i should not do with my domain to follow and respect google guidelines. As i want a white hat and do not do something that is wrong without knowledge
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | maestrosonrisas0 -
Rel Noindex Nofollow tag vs meta noindex nofollow robots
Hi Mozzers I have a bit of thing I was pondering about this morning and would love to hear your opinion on it. So we had a bit of an issue on our client's website in the beginning of the year. I tried to find a way around it by using wild cards in my robots.txt but because different search engines treat wild cards differently it dint work out so well and only some search engines understood what I was trying to do. so here goes, I had a parameter on a big amount of URLs on the website with ?filter being pushed from the database we make use of filters on the site to filter out content for users to find what they are looking for much easier, concluding to database driven ?filter URLs (those ugly &^% URLs we all hate so much*. So what we looking to do is implementing nofollow noindex on all the internal links pointing to it the ?filter parameter URLs, however my SEO sense is telling me that the noindex nofollow should rather be on the individual ?filter parameter URL's metadata robots instead of all the internal links pointing the parameter URLs. Am I right in thinking this way? (reason why we want to put it on the internal links atm is because the of the development company states that they don't have control over the metadata of these database driven parameter URLs) If I am not mistaken noindex nofollow on the internal links could be seen as page rank sculpting where as onpage meta robots noindex nofolow is more of a comand like your robots.txt Anyone tested this before or have some more knowledge on the small detail of noindex nofollow? PS: canonical tags is also not doable at this point because we still in the process of cleaning out all the parameter URLs so +- 70% of the URLs doesn't have an SEO friendly URL yet to be canonicalized to. PSS: another reason why this needs looking at is because search engines won't be able to make an interpretation of these pages (until they have been cleaned up and fleshed out with unique content) which could result in bad ranking of the pages which could conclude to my users not being satisfied, so over and above the SEO factor, usability of the site is being looked at here as well, I don't want my users to land on these pages atm. If they navigate to it via the filters then awesome because they are defining what they are looking for with the filters. Would love to hear your thoughts on this. Thanks, Chris Captivate.
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | DROIDSTERS0