Google ranking content for phrases that don't exist on-page
-
I am experiencing an issue with negative keywords, but the “negative” keyword in question isn’t truly negative and is required within the content – the problem is that Google is ranking pages for inaccurate phrases that don’t exist on the page.
To explain, this product page (as one of many examples) - https://www.scamblermusic.com/albums/royalty-free-rock-music/ - is optimised for “Royalty free rock music” and it gets a Moz grade of 100.
“Royalty free” is the most accurate description of the music (I optimised for “royalty free” instead of “royalty-free” (including a hyphen) because of improved search volume), and there is just one reference to the term “copyrighted” towards the foot of the page – this term is relevant because I need to make the point that the music is licensed, not sold, and the licensee pays for the right to use the music but does not own it (as it remains copyrighted). It turns out however that I appear to need to treat “copyrighted” almost as a negative term because Google isn’t accurately ranking the content.
Despite excellent optimisation for “Royalty free rock music” and only one single reference of “copyrighted” within the copy, I am seeing this page (and other album genres) wrongly rank for the following search terms:
“free rock music”
“Copyright free rock music"
“Uncopyrighted rock music”
“Non copyrighted rock music”I understand that pages might rank for “free rock music” because it is part of the “Royalty free rock music” optimisation, what I can’t get my head around is why the page (and similar product pages) are ranking for “Copyright free”, “Uncopyrighted music” and “Non copyrighted music”.
“Uncopyrighted” and “Non copyrighted” don’t exist anywhere within the copy or source code – why would Google consider it helpful to rank a page for a search term that doesn’t exist as a complete phrase within the content?
By the same logic the page should also wrongly rank for “Skylark rock music” or “Pretzel rock music” as the words “Skylark” and “Pretzel” also feature just once within the content and therefore should generate completely inaccurate results too.
To me this demonstrates just how poor Google is when it comes to understanding relevant content and optimization - it's taking part of an optimized term and combining it with just one other single-use word and then inappropriately ranking the page for that completely made up phrase. It’s one thing to misinterpret one reference of the term “copyrighted” and something else entirely to rank a page for completely made up terms such as “Uncopyrighted” and “Non copyrighted”. It almost makes me think that I’ve got a better chance of accurately ranking content if I buy a goat, shove a cigar up its backside, and sacrifice it in the name of the great god Google!
Any advice (about wrongly attributed negative keywords, not goat sacrifice ) would be most welcome.
-
@JCN-SBWD One way to potentially address this issue is to focus on building a strong backlink profile that reinforces your intended keyword associations. Additionally, you may want to consider adding more content to your product pages to further clarify your intended messaging and minimize the potential for negative keyword associations. Finally, it may be worth exploring alternative search engines or platforms to expand your reach and diversify your traffic sources.
-
@JCN-SBWD cool! (from a SEO perspective) I would speculate that Google considers this related keywords to the keywords optimized for, and thus ranks for it.
Other option would be that you have incoming links with that keyword. I looked and did not see much of that kind.You could take the "copyright" keyword off the page for a while and see if it changes. But that would take some time as Google will consider your page relevant to it for at least a while
(Sorry) -
@JCN-SBWD i hav similar problems...
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
-
Do i optimise only the page that i want to rank or do i have to optimise my entire website.
I'm looking at 2 keywords and i have optimized my main page towards it. My website consist of other pages like, "About Us, Contact Us, Testimonials". My SEO title and Meta Description for these pages are just the basic. Q: My question is, do i have to optimize the pages that i do not want to rank? Is there any way to utilise these pages to help my main page to rank?(besides using them for internal links)
On-Page Optimization | | kevinbp0 -
Ranking for "synonym" terms on separate pages?
(My title says "synonym" but it's not exactly the most accurate word, but works best for the title_) I have a site that ranks #1 for a term, and let’s pretend it’s “cheap phone”. It’s also ranks #1 for “cheap phone service” and #3 for “cheap phone plans”. These are all the home page with those rankings I have a sub page whose natural title would be “Cheap Phone Plans” or “Cheap Phone Service”. I have it named something these and it is not optimized for either of these terms because I think it would be best to not mess with the good rankings I have already for those two terms So here’s my question: what would likely be the outcome if I optimized that subpage for “Cheap Phone Plans” or “Cheap Phone Service”? If Google began to direct searchers of this term to my subpage rather than my home page, would my home page lose some of it’s ranking with it’s main and most popular keyword, “cheap phone? Thanks!
On-Page Optimization | | bizzer0 -
Why Isn't Google Authorship Showing My Picture?
I have several clients and the Google Authorship images used display in the search results for all of them. About a month ago all of the images disappeared, however it still displays "by <name>, indicating that Google Authorship is working -- it just doesn't show the image (see screenshots). The image follows the guidelines, and we've got the rel author tag in place, with a link back to Google. </name> When I use the Google Structured Data Testing Tool it shows that authorship is properly functioning. I'm completely stumped. Does anyone have any ideas why this may not be working? Here's two examples of the sites with Authorship not working properly (screenshots below): criminalattorneylongislandny.com
On-Page Optimization | | socialfirestarter
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/3786946/Screen Shot 2014-01-03 at 12.53.10 PM.png
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/3786946/Screen Shot 2014-01-03 at 12.44.12 PM.png attorneytonyadderley.com https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/3786946/Screen Shot 2014-01-03 at 12.52.36 PM.png
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/3786946/Screen Shot 2014-01-03 at 12.52.52 PM.png0 -
Competitor's 'hidden' links harming my site?
Hi everyone, I'm new to both Moz & seo, and am attempting to tackle our site's issues after being hit by panda / penguin, so would be grateful for any advice offered. I bought a website 3 years ago after the previous company that ran it went into administration. Having bought the website, it became apparent that the employees of the previous company had copied the entire site content, and relaunched it with a new look / brand. Over the last 3 years they've rewritten much of the content, but there remains a lot of links from their site back to ours which have had the anchor text stripped out, and point to images on our site which have since been removed, example below... <a href="http://www.MyCompany.com/catalog/images/filename.pdf" target="<a class="attribute-value">_blank</a>"><strong>strong>a> What I'm trying to understand is whether the 404 errors being returned by the broken links, and the presence of 'hidden' links on their site, is likely to reflect badly on our site or theirs? I'm not interested in outing anyone here, and I realise the standard recommendation for these kinds of situations is to write to the company telling them to remove the offending content, but if at all possible I'd prefer to fix our site by improving content & links etc, rather than 'force' them to take action and inadvertently improve their own site's content / rankings. As I say, all advice gratefully received 🙂
On-Page Optimization | | Sandy_M0 -
Using phrases like 'NO 1' or 'Best' int he title tag
Hi All, Quick question - is it illegal, against any rule etc to use phrases such as 'The No 1 rest of the title tag | Brand Name' on a site?
On-Page Optimization | | Webrevolve0 -
Ranking well with Google but not in Top 50 with Bing and Yahoo?
I have sometimes pages ranking very well on Google but in comparison with Bing and Yahoo they are not listed within the Top50 SERP's What are the ranking factors for Bing and Yahoo? Although Bing and Yahoo play a minor role it would be fine also to rank well with these engines. Thanks for any tips!
On-Page Optimization | | inlinear0 -
Does keyword usage in the footer have an effect on how high a page ranks?
My client has a lot of text about their company in their footer. Is the text in the footer associated with the on page keyword usage and density for all pages or none of the pages?
On-Page Optimization | | Santaur0 -
Why do I hear that it can be a bad thing to have too many content pages?
My site has lots of long tail opportunity and so intention is to produce as much content as possible to target these keywords effectively. However, over the last 6 months I have come across numerous sources suggesting that Google can/does look down on a site having too many content pages. Is there any truth in this? Thanks.
On-Page Optimization | | Clicksjim0