Connect with us


H1 Headings For SEO – Why They Matter



The use of headings for ranking better on search engines has a long history. It’s one of the earliest known Google ranking factors. Because search engines algorithms evolve, it’s important to understand how why headings remain important and how to use them for modern search engines.

This article links to research papers, patents and statements from Google that shows the best way to use the H1 element for SEO ranking purposes.

Original Google Algorithm and Headings

The original Google algorithm was described in the 1998 “The Anatomy of a Large-Scale Hypertextual Web Search Engine” (available as a PDF research paper and HTML page). That document provided the foundation of Search Engine Optimization (SEO) practices appropriate for modern search engines.

Screenshot of the Anatomy of a Search Engine Paper

Screenshot of anatomy of a search engine research paper

The document was widely read by search marketers in the early days and some of the insights remain with us today.

In it is found statements that make it clear that specific kinds of on-page elements were in fact ranking factors.

For example, it states that the title element (title tag) was an important ranking factor. This document from 1998 can be considered responsible for the SEO practice of adding keywords to specific web page elements (headings, title, etc.) for ranking purposes.

Here is an example of how the title tag and the PageRank score was enough to accurately rank a web page:

“For most popular subjects, a simple text matching search that is restricted to web page titles performs admirably when PageRank prioritizes the results.”

Other ranking signals are word position within a document (keywords near the top of the page were more important), font size used, and even capitalization.

The paper describes algorithmically “weighting” the fonts.

That means assigning ranking signal importance to them. When something has more weight, that means it has more importance as a ranking factor.

The founders of Google explained how keyword “hits” (matching query keywords to on-page keywords) were influenced by the “weighting” of various on-page factors and then tallied up as a score.

(IR means Information Retrieval and the IR Score is a measurement of how relevant a page is to a search query.)

This is how the original version of Google’s ranking process is described:

“Google considers each hit to be one of several different types (title, anchor, URL, plain text large font, plain text small font, …), each of which has its own type-weight.

…Google counts the number of hits of each type… Then every count is converted into a count-weight.

Count-weights increase linearly with counts at first but quickly taper off so that more than a certain count will not help. We take the dot product of the vector of count-weights with the vector of type-weights to compute an IR score for the document.

Finally, the IR score is combined with PageRank to give a final rank to the document.”

As you can see, on-page factors were very important, including the size of the fonts. The size of the fonts is a reference to the HTML sizing of the fonts, which is a reference to the headings used and possibly the font size attribute.

By 2003, using the font size HTML attribute was not considered a ranking factor. In terms of ranking factors related to font size, only the heading element (H1, H2, etc.) was considered a ranking factor.

Google Patents Related to Headings

Bill Slawski (@bill_slawski) of GoFishDigital (@gofishdigital), is commonly acknowledged as the leading expert on search engine patents. So I asked him about patents related to heading elements.

Bill responded with two interesting patents.

Screenshot of Bill Slawski speaking with Search Engine Journal

Screenshot from a video of Bill Slawski speaking with Search Engine JournalBill Slawski speaking with Search Engine Journal

The first patent was filed in 2004, which he describes in the article, Google Defines Semantic Closeness as a Ranking Signal

The article explains what the algorithm is trying to do:

“One part of the process behind this approach involves a search engine analyzing the HTML structures on a page, looking for elements such as titles and headings on a page…

In other words, the search engine is attempting to locate and understand visual structures on a page that might be semantically meaningful, such as a list of items associated with a heading.”

Bill explains how the algorithm is figuring out semantic relatedness:

“The patent gives us the following rules about headings and list items when it comes to the distance between words appearing within them:

If both terms appear in the same list item, the terms are considered close to one another;

If one term appears in a list item and the other term appears in the header, this pair of terms may be considered to be approximately equally distant to another pair of terms that appear in the header and another of the list items;

Pairs of terms appearing in different list items may be considered to be farther apart than the pairs of terms falling under 1 and 2.”

Headings and Featured Snippets

Another more recent patent involves the importance of headings in the selection of featured snippets. The algorithm uses the headings on a page as part of the process of selecting passages to be used in a featured snippet.

Bill related that this is what the algorithm is about:

“This answer passages patent uses a page title and main headings to adjust scores for answer passages, by giving them context.”

The article is titled, Adjusting Featured Snippet Answers by Context.

Bill’s article uses the words “heading or headings” 127 times, which shows just how important headings are to this patent.

The article quotes this from the patent, which shows just how important headings were for this patent:

Receiving a query that is a question query seeking an answer response

Receiving candidate answer passages, each passage made of text selected from a text section subordinate to a heading on a resource, with a corresponding answer score

Determining a hierarchy of headings on a page, with two or more heading levels hierarchically arranged in parent-child relationships, where each heading level has one or more headings, a subheading of a respective heading is a child heading in a parent-child relationship and the respective heading is a parent heading in that relationship, and the heading hierarchy includes a root level corresponding to a root heading (for each candidate answer passage)

Determining a heading vector describing a path in the hierarchy of headings from the root heading to the respective heading to which the candidate answer passage is subordinate, determining a context score based, at least in part, on the heading vector, adjusting the answer score of the candidate answer passage at least in part by the context score to form an adjusted answer score.”

What Google Says About H1 and Headings in General

Google’s John Mueller has fielded many questions about headings. The reason why there’s so much interest is because headings continue to be perceived by the SEO community as having more weighting, a higher level of influence as a ranking factor.

Algorithms Evolve

While the heading element may have had a stronger weight as a ranking factor in the past, that influence may have evolved.

Bill Slawski’s example about how headings might be used in the process of selecting featured snippets is an example on how the influence of heading elements has evolved.

In the featured snippets patent, the heading elements are used for understanding context. They are not used to give more ranking power to a passage of content.

In other words, instead of influencing a ranking score, the headings are being used to influence how an algorithm understands what a passage of content is about.

Statements by Google’s John Mueller on H1 Headings

That patent aligns with the most recent statements that Google’s John Mueller has made about H1 headings and headings in general.

Screenshot of John Mueller Explaining How Google Uses H1 Headings for Search

Screenshot of John Mueller discussing H1 headings and SEO

John Mueller Discusses How to Use Headings

Search Engine Journal published an article titled, John Mueller on How to Use Headings. The article notes Mueller’s answer on how to use headings for SEO.

John confirmed that Google still uses headings for search. He said that Google uses them to understand content.

“We do use headings when it comes to search. But we use them to better understand the content on the pages.”

H1 Headings and Order of Headings

In what may be shocking to some in the SEO industry, Mueller asserted that the order of the headings doesn’t matter to Google.

According to Mueller, the importance of the heading elements is to communicate what the following text passage or image is about.

How Mueller explained heading elements:

“So… this question of… how should I order my H1, H2, H3, headings and what should the content be, that’s something from my point of view isn’t really that relevant.

But rather, what we use these headings for is well we have this big chunk of text or we have this big image and there’s a heading above that, therefore maybe this heading applies to this chunk of text or to this image.

So it’s not so much like there are five keywords in these headings, therefore this page will rank for these keywords but more, here’s some more information about that piece of text or about that image on that page.

And that helps us to better understand how to… frame that piece of text, how to frame the images that you have within those blocks. And with that it’s a lot easier to find… the right queries that lead us to these pages.

So it’s not so much that suddenly your page ranks higher because you have those keywords there.

But suddenly it’s more well, Google understands my content a little bit better and therefore it can send users who are explicitly looking for my content a little bit more towards my page.”

Google and Using Multiple H1 Elements

John Mueller has discussed the use of multiple H1 elements. In the past it was understood that the H1 element sent a more powerful signal than an H2 element.

Some in the SEO industry may reason that if the H1 element is stronger than an H2, H3 element, that using H1 elements through a web page may send a stronger keyword signal. But that is incorrect, that’s not how ranking works.

As we can see from Mueller’s comment above and even in the Google patent that Bill Slawski wrote about, that is no longer be the case.

John Mueller recently dispelled all doubts about this point when he debunked the strategy of using multiple H1 elements for ranking purposes.

This point about using multiple H1 elements was documented in an article titled, John Mueller on Multiple Use of H1 Headings.

Mueller explained:

“You can use H1 tags as often as you want on a page. There’s no limit, neither upper or lower bound.

Your site is going to rank perfectly fine with no H1 tags or with five H1 tags.”

Heading Elements Give Structure to a Page

Mueller next reiterated the importance of heading elements as a way to give structure to a web page.

“H1 elements are a great way to give more structure to a page so that users and search engines can understand which parts of a page are kind of under different headings.

So I would use them in the proper way on a page. And especially with HTML5 having multiple H1 elements on a page is completely normal and kind of expected.

Some SEO tools flag this as an issue and say like Oh you don’t have any H1 tag or you have two H1 tags… from our point of view that’s not a critical issue.”

Heading Tags Continue to be Important

In the answer documented above, Mueller said that a web page can rank without the use of headings. This is true.

But that does not diminish the importance of the use of headings in a web page. Headings continue to be a useful way to make it clear what a web page is about.

The importance of heading tags was documented in the article titled, Heading Tags are a Strong Signal

Google’s Mueller explained why headings are important:

“So, headings on a page help us to better understand the content on the page.

Headings on the page are not the only ranking factor that we have.

We look at the content on its own as well.

But sometimes having a clear heading on a page gives us a little bit more information on what that section is about.”

Headings For Image SEO

Mueller also discussed how the textual context of headings helps Google to understand what images are about.

“So in particular when it comes to images, that’s something where headings and the context of that image helps us a lot to understand where we should be showing that image in search.

…images are not text. We don’t automatically know what we should be showing it for.

And that combination of the image plus the landing page is something that depends quite a bit on the text of the page.”

Headings are a Strong Signal

Mueller next reaffirmed that headings are a strong signal.

“And when it comes to text on a page, a heading is a really strong signal telling us this part of the page is about this topic.

…whether you put that into an H1 tag or an H2 tag or H5 or whatever, that doesn’t matter so much.

But rather kind of this general signal that you give us that says… this part of the page is about this topic. And this other part of the page is maybe about a different topic.”

Headings Communicate Semantic Meaning

The original Google algorithm research paper from 1998 demonstrates without question that text reproduced in larger fonts were interpreted as being important for ranking purposes.  More recently, patents that mention heading elements discuss them as a way for understanding context and not so much for generating a ranking score.

A further indication of the evolution of how headings are used come from statements by Google’s John Mueller that indicate that the way heading tags are used may have indeed changed since 1998.

Heading tags continue to be important. But because Google’s algorithm has changed in the past twenty two years, it may be useful to pay close attention to what Google’s patents and Googlers have to say about headings and update one’s search strategy accordingly.


What can ChatGPT do?



ChatGPT Explained

ChatGPT is a large language model developed by OpenAI that is trained on a massive amount of text data. It is capable of generating human-like text and has been used in a variety of applications, such as chatbots, language translation, and text summarization.

One of the key features of ChatGPT is its ability to generate text that is similar to human writing. This is achieved through the use of a transformer architecture, which allows the model to understand the context and relationships between words in a sentence. The transformer architecture is a type of neural network that is designed to process sequential data, such as natural language.

Another important aspect of ChatGPT is its ability to generate text that is contextually relevant. This means that the model is able to understand the context of a conversation and generate responses that are appropriate to the conversation. This is accomplished by the use of a technique called “masked language modeling,” which allows the model to predict the next word in a sentence based on the context of the previous words.

One of the most popular applications of ChatGPT is in the creation of chatbots. Chatbots are computer programs that simulate human conversation and can be used in customer service, sales, and other applications. ChatGPT is particularly well-suited for this task because of its ability to generate human-like text and understand context.

Another application of ChatGPT is language translation. By training the model on a large amount of text data in multiple languages, it can be used to translate text from one language to another. The model is able to understand the meaning of the text and generate a translation that is grammatically correct and semantically equivalent.

In addition to chatbots and language translation, ChatGPT can also be used for text summarization. This is the process of taking a large amount of text and condensing it into a shorter, more concise version. ChatGPT is able to understand the main ideas of the text and generate a summary that captures the most important information.

Despite its many capabilities and applications, ChatGPT is not without its limitations. One of the main challenges with using language models like ChatGPT is the risk of generating text that is biased or offensive. This can occur when the model is trained on text data that contains biases or stereotypes. To address this, OpenAI has implemented a number of techniques to reduce bias in the training data and in the model itself.

In conclusion, ChatGPT is a powerful language model that is capable of generating human-like text and understanding context. It has a wide range of applications, including chatbots, language translation, and text summarization. While there are limitations to its use, ongoing research and development is aimed at improving the model’s performance and reducing the risk of bias.

** The above article has been written 100% by ChatGPT. This is an example of what can be done with AI. This was done to show the advanced text that can be written by an automated AI.

Continue Reading


Google December Product Reviews Update Affects More Than English Language Sites? via @sejournal, @martinibuster



Google’s Product Reviews update was announced to be rolling out to the English language. No mention was made as to if or when it would roll out to other languages. Mueller answered a question as to whether it is rolling out to other languages.

Google December 2021 Product Reviews Update

On December 1, 2021, Google announced on Twitter that a Product Review update would be rolling out that would focus on English language web pages.

The focus of the update was for improving the quality of reviews shown in Google search, specifically targeting review sites.

A Googler tweeted a description of the kinds of sites that would be targeted for demotion in the search rankings:

“Mainly relevant to sites that post articles reviewing products.

Think of sites like “best TVs under $200″.com.

Goal is to improve the quality and usefulness of reviews we show users.”


Continue Reading Below

Google also published a blog post with more guidance on the product review update that introduced two new best practices that Google’s algorithm would be looking for.

The first best practice was a requirement of evidence that a product was actually handled and reviewed.

The second best practice was to provide links to more than one place that a user could purchase the product.

The Twitter announcement stated that it was rolling out to English language websites. The blog post did not mention what languages it was rolling out to nor did the blog post specify that the product review update was limited to the English language.

Google’s Mueller Thinking About Product Reviews Update

Screenshot of Google's John Mueller trying to recall if December Product Review Update affects more than the English language

Screenshot of Google's John Mueller trying to recall if December Product Review Update affects more than the English language

Product Review Update Targets More Languages?

The person asking the question was rightly under the impression that the product review update only affected English language search results.


Continue Reading Below

But he asserted that he was seeing search volatility in the German language that appears to be related to Google’s December 2021 Product Review Update.

This is his question:

“I was seeing some movements in German search as well.

So I was wondering if there could also be an effect on websites in other languages by this product reviews update… because we had lots of movement and volatility in the last weeks.

…My question is, is it possible that the product reviews update affects other sites as well?”

John Mueller answered:

“I don’t know… like other languages?

My assumption was this was global and and across all languages.

But I don’t know what we announced in the blog post specifically.

But usually we try to push the engineering team to make a decision on that so that we can document it properly in the blog post.

I don’t know if that happened with the product reviews update. I don’t recall the complete blog post.

But it’s… from my point of view it seems like something that we could be doing in multiple languages and wouldn’t be tied to English.

And even if it were English initially, it feels like something that is relevant across the board, and we should try to find ways to roll that out to other languages over time as well.

So I’m not particularly surprised that you see changes in Germany.

But I also don’t know what we actually announced with regards to the locations and languages that are involved.”

Does Product Reviews Update Affect More Languages?

While the tweeted announcement specified that the product reviews update was limited to the English language the official blog post did not mention any such limitations.

Google’s John Mueller offered his opinion that the product reviews update is something that Google could do in multiple languages.

One must wonder if the tweet was meant to communicate that the update was rolling out first in English and subsequently to other languages.

It’s unclear if the product reviews update was rolled out globally to more languages. Hopefully Google will clarify this soon.


Google Blog Post About Product Reviews Update

Product reviews update and your site

Google’s New Product Reviews Guidelines

Write high quality product reviews

John Mueller Discusses If Product Reviews Update Is Global

Watch Mueller answer the question at the 14:00 Minute Mark

[embedded content]

Continue Reading


Survey says: Amazon, Google more trusted with your personal data than Apple is




MacRumors reveals that more people feel better with their personal data in the hands of Amazon and Google than Apple’s. Companies that the public really doesn’t trust when it comes to their personal data include Facebook, TikTok, and Instagram.

The survey asked over 1,000 internet users in the U.S. how much they trusted certain companies such as Facebook, TikTok, Instagram, WhatsApp, YouTube, Google, Microsoft, Apple, and Amazon to handle their user data and browsing activity responsibly.

Amazon and Google are considered by survey respondents to be more trustworthy than Apple

Those surveyed were asked whether they trusted these firms with their personal data “a great deal,” “a good amount,” “not much,” or “not at all.” Respondents could also answer that they had no opinion about a particular company. 18% of those polled said that they trust Apple “a great deal” which topped the 14% received by Google and Amazon.

However, 39% said that they trust Amazon  by “a good amount” with Google picking up 34% of the votes in that same category. Only 26% of those answering said that they trust Apple by “a good amount.” The first two responses, “a great deal” and “a good amount,” are considered positive replies for a company. “Not much” and “not at all” are considered negative responses.

By adding up the scores in the positive categories,

Apple tallied a score of 44% (18% said it trusted Apple with its personal data “a great deal” while 26% said it trusted Apple “a good amount”). But that placed the tech giant third after Amazon’s 53% and Google’s 48%. After Apple, Microsoft finished fourth with 43%, YouTube (which is owned by Google) was fifth with 35%, and Facebook was sixth at 20%.

Rounding out the remainder of the nine firms in the survey, Instagram placed seventh with a positive score of 19%, WhatsApp was eighth with a score of 15%, and TikTok was last at 12%.

Looking at the scoring for the two negative responses (“not much,” or “not at all”), Facebook had a combined negative score of 72% making it the least trusted company in the survey. TikTok was next at 63% with Instagram following at 60%. WhatsApp and YouTube were both in the middle of the pact at 53% followed next by Google and Microsoft at 47% and 42% respectively. Apple and Amazon each had the lowest combined negative scores at 40% each.

74% of those surveyed called targeted online ads invasive

The survey also found that a whopping 82% of respondents found targeted online ads annoying and 74% called them invasive. Just 27% found such ads helpful. This response doesn’t exactly track the 62% of iOS users who have used Apple’s App Tracking Transparency feature to opt-out of being tracked while browsing websites and using apps. The tracking allows third-party firms to send users targeted ads online which is something that they cannot do to users who have opted out.

The 38% of iOS users who decided not to opt out of being tracked might have done so because they find it convenient to receive targeted ads about a certain product that they looked up online. But is ATT actually doing anything?

Marketing strategy consultant Eric Seufert said last summer, “Anyone opting out of tracking right now is basically having the same level of data collected as they were before. Apple hasn’t actually deterred the behavior that they have called out as being so reprehensible, so they are kind of complicit in it happening.”

The Financial Times says that iPhone users are being lumped together by certain behaviors instead of unique ID numbers in order to send targeted ads. Facebook chief operating officer Sheryl Sandberg says that the company is working to rebuild its ad infrastructure “using more aggregate or anonymized data.”

Aggregated data is a collection of individual data that is used to create high-level data. Anonymized data is data that removes any information that can be used to identify the people in a group.

When consumers were asked how often do they think that their phones or other tech devices are listening in to them in ways that they didn’t agree to, 72% answered “very often” or “somewhat often.” 28% responded by saying “rarely” or “never.”

Continue Reading