Moz Q&A is closed.
After more than 13 years, and tens of thousands of questions, Moz Q&A closed on 12th December 2024. Whilst we’re not completely removing the content - many posts will still be possible to view - we have locked both new posts and new replies. More details here.
Does blogging with a wysiwyg negatively affect SEO (vs. hand coding)?
-
Many bloggers use a wysiwyg editor to write posts. Are there any drawbacks to wysiwyg vs plain text? When I write blogs I prefer to hand code my text to be sure everything is optimized. My feeling is that wysiwyg leads to code bloat and generally fewer optimization opportunities. I have no real evidence. Is there any reason not to use the wysiwyg editor?
-
Thomas, I agree with you about a copywriter's role and expertise. My point is that there ARE differences in the copy produced by a capable wordsmith versus a writer that understands and considers things like SERP features, semantic scope, mobile vs desktop experience, the role of supporting assets, etc. I've spent so much time massaging professional copy that, by the time it was passably optimized, I had basically done it myself. So yes, I already pay 2x for optimized web copy (and code). The problem is that_ half of that cost is my time_. I would definitely pay a premium for a copywriter with SEO chops.
I digress... The question is whether decent web page / blog copy published via wysiwyg is any more or less successful, SEO-wise, than the same copy coded by hand (by which I mean foundational SEO, not ninja guru jedi sh*t). I'm asking a specific technical question; wysiswyg vs hand coding.
There is clear consensus here that coding by hand (done well) has a better chance to rank on the Google. That's pretty obvious, really. That is not the thrust of the question. Good copywriters write good copy. Good SEOs do good SEO.
Copywriting is tough. We ask these professionals to become experts in topics (and their page-level details) in a matter of just a few (billable) hours. On the other hand, we SEOs spend weeks, months, and years with our clients. We understand their market, audience, vernacular, and differentiating nuance. I don't envy the copywriters' challenge, but I will pay a premium for a unicorn who can do it all.
...I digress again... This is a technical question: What is the delta for the same copy produced via wysiwyg vs. by hand?
-
What a copywriter does best though is writing copy. Any time spent doing something like coding a blog post would not be an effective use of their time. It would probably be more cost effective to get the copywriter to do the writing and then get a web designer to design the blog post itself. Otherwise you're paying a higher hourly rate (if hourly, obviously) to a copywriter to do something they aren't efficient at.
-
Thanks everyone. It would be great if copywriters knew basic html and code. If you know anyone send them to me!! In my experience they don't and won't (HUGE opportunity here). You have all touched on the implications if wysiwyg IS a problem. If so I have to ask myself 1) how big is the problem, 2) how big is the opportunity, and therefore 3) how much are we willing to invest to hire or train these unicorns? Even bringing it up with some writers may be enough to ruffle their feathers so I'm looking for some data.
-
I really doubt. This comment section seems to somehow prove it as it also uses wysig editor. I can't really see co-relation between wysig editor and hand coding as in almost every editor you can switch to source code and manualy alter anything you need.
-
“Professional Service Provider”
No, but I agree to the fact that handing over your code to someone who may or may not know about SEO and SEO friendly codes is simply the worst idea ever. I think SEOs and content producer (in your example) have to learn at least that much of a code that they can fix their things by themselves instead of handing over it to someone who might make things worse for you!
Just a thought!
-
My feeling is that wysiwyg leads to code bloat and generally fewer optimization opportunities. I have no real evidence. Is there any reason not to use the wysiwyg editor?
If you are working really hard to make great content and a great website, then you want to be sure that your code is as good as you can make it. When wysiwyg is used, you are trusting your SEO to a coder who many or may not know anything about SEO.
Because SEO is a competitive endeavor and because one screw-up in the code can be fatal, one must either check to be sure that the wysiwyg code is perfect of take control of the coding yourself.
I found a long time ago that I can only bet on myself for certain things. My work isn't perfect, but my work on a bad day is often better than the work of many "professional service provders" on a good day. So I bet on myself.
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
-
How Do SSL Certificates Affect On SEO?
Does really a SSL certificate affect on SEO? How? Why? According to my hosting provider (ganje.host), "https" improves SEO! As I know, It decreases speed. So how does it improve SEO when my speed is slower than before?
On-Page Optimization | Mar 11, 2024, 12:09 PM | MirzaeeMustafa0 -
301 vs 410
Hello everyone! I'm going through a large list of old 404 links that search console has given me and a lot of these links need to be 301'd. My question is, should I 410 some of these links if I can't find a good place to 301 to? Or is there another thing I should do that is better practice. Thanks!
On-Page Optimization | Sep 2, 2016, 10:47 AM | KathleenDC0 -
Does Rel=canonical affect google shopping feed?
I have a client who gets a good portion of their sales (~40%) from Google Product Feeds, and for those they want each (Product X Quantity) to have it’s own SKU, as they often get 3 listings in a given Google shopping query, i.e. 2,4,8 units of a given product. However, we are worried about this creating duplicate content on the search side. Do you know if we could rel=canonical on the site without messing with their google shopping results? The crux of the issue is that they want the products to appear distinct for the product feed, and unified for the web so as not to dilute. Thoughts?
On-Page Optimization | Jun 10, 2014, 3:52 PM | VISISEEKINC0 -
ECommerce Filtering Affect on SEO
I'm building an eCommerce website which has an advanced filter on the left hand side of the category pages. It allows users to tick boxes for colours, sizes, materials, and so on. When they've made their choices they submit (this will likely be an AJAX thing in a future release, but isn't at time of writing). The new filtered page has a new URL, which is made up of the IDs of the filter's they've ticked - it's a bit like /department/2/17-7-4/10/ My concern is that the filtered pages are, on the most part, going to be the same as the parent. Which may lead to duplicate content. My other concern is that these two URLs would lead to the exact same page (although the system would never generate the 'wrong' URL) /department/2/17-7-4/10/ /department/2/**10/**17-7-4/ But I can't think of a way of canonicalising that automatically. Tricky. So the meat of the question is this: should I worry about this causing issues with the SEO - or can I have trust in Google to work it out?
On-Page Optimization | Dec 15, 2013, 1:36 PM | AndieF0 -
SEO for Online Auto Parts Store
I'm currently doing an audit for an online auto parts store and am having a hard time wrapping my head around their duplicate content issue. The current set up is this: The catalogue starts with the user selecting their year of vehicle They then choose their brand (so each of the year pages have listed every single brand of car, creating duplicate content) They then choose their model of car and then the engine And then this takes them to a page listing every type/category of product they sell (so each and every model type/engine size has the exact same content!) This is amounting to literally thousands of pages being seen as duplicates It's a giant mess. Is using rel=canonical the best thing to do? I'm having a hard time seeing a logical way of structuring the site to avoid this issue. Anyone have any ideas?
On-Page Optimization | Jul 16, 2013, 12:15 PM | ATMOSMarketing560 -
Do Parent Categories Hurt SEO?
I have parent categories and subcategories. Will it be harder for the subcategories to rank well because they have a parent category? The URL is longer, for one. I am just wondering if I should not have parent categories. I have one category page doing really well and I am trying to boost the others (most of which are subcategories) and this is a concern for me. Thanks! Edit: I also have a category that has 2 parent categories. I want it automatically in those 2 categories and one of its own. By itself it is very important keyword. Is this ok or should I have it be a parent category?
On-Page Optimization | Jun 27, 2013, 2:31 PM | 2bloggers0 -
Are blank Product Review pages bad for SEO?
Hi there, I'm running a new e-commerce site (BoatOutfitters.com) and have a question about our product review pages. On our current campaign, we have a lot of duplicate page content errors. When we export the data, it's almost all blank product review pages (since we are new, we don't have that many product reviews yet). Our product reviews aren't run through javascript, so we originally did not add them to a robots.txt file - however, I'm now wondering if it's worse to have all of these duplicate blank pages, or is it not affecting our SEO at all? Should we just wait until these products have reviews which will benefit our SEO and then they won't be considered "duplicate pages" - right? Sorry if this has been answered before - new here at SEO Moz and just looking for some help. Thanks!
On-Page Optimization | Jan 10, 2012, 1:44 AM | BoatOutfitters0 -
Best SEO structure for blog
What is the best SEO page/link structure for a blog with, say 100 posts that grows at a rate of 4 per month? Each post is 500+ words with charts/graphics; they're not simple one paragraph postings. Rather than use a CMS I have a hand crafted HTML/CSS blog (for tighter integration with the parent site, some dynamic data effects, and in general to have total control). I have a sidebar with headlines from all prior posts, and my blog home page is a 1 line summary of each article. I feel that after 100 articles the sidebar and home page have too many links on them. What is the optimal way to split them up? They are all covering the same niche topic that my site is about. I thought of making the side bar and home page only have the most recent 25 postings, and then create an archive directory for older posts. But categorizing by time doesn't really help someone looking for a specific topic. I could tag each entry with 2-3 keywords and then make the sidebar a sorted list of tags. Clicking on a tag would then show an intermediate index of all articles that have that tag, and then you could click on an article title to read the whole article. Or is there some other strategy that is optimal for SEO and the indexing robots? Is it bad to have a blog that is too heirarchical (where articles are 3 levels down from the root domain) or too flat (if there are 100s of entries)? Thanks for any thoughts or pointers.
On-Page Optimization | May 7, 2011, 5:35 PM | scanlin0