SEO
What It Is & How It Works
Canonicalization is the process that search engines use to determine the main version of a page. That is the page that will be indexed and shown to users. The chosen version is canonical, and ranking signals like links will consolidate to that page. This process is sometimes referred to as standardization or normalization.
According to Google Webmaster Trends Analyst Gary Illyes, ~60% of the internet is duplicate content.
Canonicalization is complex and often misunderstood. I don’t think most of the duplicates are nefarious. It’s mostly going to be technical issues that cause them. We’ll look at this more in a bit. I’m going to talk about how the canonicalization process works as well as:
A lot of different signals go into the canonicalization process. These include:
- Duplicates
- Canonical link elements
- Sitemap URLs
- Internal links
- Redirects
Google looks at all the different signals and weighs them to determine what the canonical version should be. That’s the version of the page they will index and what they usually show to users.
A potential scenario when Google decides on the canonical based on internal links and the canonical URL.
Duplicates
With duplicate content, Google will pick a canonical version to index. All the eligible pages form a cluster of pages, and the signals that go to the pages in that cluster will consolidate at the chosen canonical. That canonical may even change over time.
Some SEOs believe there is a duplicate content penalty, but that’s not true. Generally, you’re going to have one version or another indexed. It may not be the version you want to be indexed, but it will be indexed and rank just as well as any other version of the same page.
Here are some examples of what can cause duplicate pages and sometimes canonicalization issues:
- HTTP and HTTPS variants (e.g., http://www.example.com and https://www.example.com)
- Non-www and www variants (e.g., http://example.com and http://www.example.com)
- URLs with and without trailing slashes (e.g., https://example.com/page/ and https://example.com/page)
- URLs with and without capital letters (e.g., https://example.com/page/ and https://example.com/Page/)
- Default versions of the page such as index pages (e.g., https://www.example.com/, https://www.example.com/index.htm, https://www.example.com/index.html, https://www.example.com/index.php, https://www.example.com/default.htm, etc.)
- Alternate versions of pages. This could include mobile versions (e.g., example.com and m.example.com), AMP versions (e.g., example.com/page and amp.example.com/page), print versions (e.g., example.com/page and example.com /page/print), alternate versions meant for other countries but containing the same content (e.g., example.com/en-us/, example.com/en-gb/, example.com/en-au/), or versions in a dev or staging site (e.g., dev.example.com).
- URL parameters (e.g., example.com?parameter=whatever). These may exist because of tracking codes, faceted navigation, sorting content, session IDs, etc. There are some instances where parameters may change the page’s content so that it’s not a duplicate.
- Other pages showing the full content. Google may choose the wrong canonical when another page displays the content in full. This may include the main blog page, paginated pages, tag pages, category pages, or feed pages.
- Scraped or syndicated content. Content syndication best practices generally recommend having a canonical tag back to the original content or at least a link to the original content. That’s because the canonical chosen can be a completely different domain. They try to select the original source as the canonical, but in some cases, they choose the wrong page.
Most of these aren’t usually issues. As I mentioned, Google will usually choose one version or another as the canonical. There are a few exceptions to this.
- Sometimes with content syndication, the original source isn’t chosen as the canonical. This is a real problem. How would you feel if someone else started ranking for an article you wrote?
- Hreflang does not solve duplication on international sites. Google will generally try to swap to show the correct version, but it’s not guaranteed, and this setup often breaks. When this happens, users see pages from the wrong country. It’s best to avoid having the same content on multiple pages for international websites.
- With some JavaScript sites (typically app shell models), the initial code for the pages can look like other pages or even the code from other websites. Sometimes these pages get canonicalized to other pages on the same or even different websites.
I believe part of the problem with both hreflang and the JavaScript content is that Google may be running the duplicate detection via crawl algorithms that detect duplication patterns, again after just seeing the code, and yet again after rendering the pages.
Google’s render path marked up where I believe duplicate detection systems are run.
Google’s render path marked up where I believe duplicate detection systems are run.
With the pages using hreflang, if they decide that the pages are duplicates without crawling them, they may not be able to swap them properly.
Before a page is even rendered, it may “look” like another page based on the HTML content. Google may choose the canonical based on this initial version and may not prioritize it for rendering because it’s already deemed a duplicate page. This usually resolves itself after rendering, but it can take some time to clear up.
Google has a couple of rules they generally follow when it comes to canonicalization of duplicates.
1. They prefer HTTPS pages over HTTP pages
They will generally index the HTTPS version, but there are a few issues or conflicting signals that may cause them to choose the HTTP version instead, such as:
- Having an invalid security certificate
- HTTPS page links to HTTP resources on the page (excludes images)
- HTTPS redirecting to HTTP
- HTTPS page having a rel=“canonical” link element pointing to the HTTP page
2. They prefer shorter URLs over longer URLs
This has been misconstrued over the years by SEOs to say that all your URLs should be shorter. But that’s not what was meant by the original statement. What Google said was that if you had, for instance, a clean short version of a URL and a longer version with parameters attached, they would generally choose the shorter version of the URL without the parameter as the canonical version.
Canonical link element
This is also commonly referred to as a canonical tag. It looks like this:
<link rel=”canonical” https://www.example.com />
The canonical tag is sometimes referred to as a hint because it’s just one canonicalization signal. Google ignores it if other signals are stronger.
If the canonical tag is respected, all signals like links will pass. However, if the canonical is ignored, no value is passed. The value isn’t lost; it stays with the original page or goes to whatever page Google chooses as the canonical.
A canonical link element can be implemented in two different ways. It can be in the <head> section or the HTTP header.
A fun anecdote. Google’s SEO Starter Guide used to be a PDF. They didn’t have a canonical tag set in the HTTP header, and people used to “steal” the listing with their own duplicate version.
Sometimes the <head> section of a page will end before it should. This is usually caused by a tag in the <head> not closed out properly. When that happens, a canonical tag may be put into the <body> section instead. If that happens, your canonical tag won’t be respected.
Invalid canonical tag located in the <body> section
Sitemap URLs
The URLs you include in your sitemap are also a canonicalization signal. Most of the time, you only want to include URLs of pages that you want to be indexed.
There are some exceptions to this because sitemap URLs also help with crawling. After a website migration, you should create a sitemap that still lists the old pages, even though they aren’t canonical. This will help the redirects be processed faster. You’ll want to delete this sitemap after most of the redirects have been picked up and processed.
Internal links
It matters how you link to pages. Internal links are another canonicalization signal.
Generally, you should link to the version of a page you want to be canonical and update the links to any URLs that may have changed. However, there are exceptions to this, such as with faceted navigation. In some cases like this, what is best for users may trump what is best for SEO.
Redirects
There are several different types of redirects, and they’re all canonicalization signals. They pass PageRank and help determine which URL gets shown in Google’s index.
301s and 308s send signals forward to the new URL. 302s and some 307s send signals backwards to the redirected URL. If a 302 is left in place long enough or the URL it’s redirected to already exists, it may be treated as a 301 and send signals forward instead. It requires enough signals to flip the scale we saw earlier for canonicalization signals. As links build up, internal links are changed, sitemap URLs are updated, etc., more signals point to the new URL than the old URL, and the flip occurs.
At some point the scale flips for 302s
A 307 has two different cases. In cases where it’s a temporary redirect, it will be treated the same as a 302 and attempt to consolidate backward. When web servers require clients to only use HTTPS connections (HSTS policy), Google won’t see the 307 because it’s cached in the browser. The initial hit (without cache) will have a server response code that’s likely a 301 or a 302. But your browser will show you a 307 for subsequent requests.
There are also other types of redirects like those implemented with JavaScript. These are also canonicalization signals and pass the full value just like other redirects as long as they can be seen and processed by Google. They’re fine to use in most cases.
Your main source of truth for what Google chose as the canonical will be the URL Inspection tool in Google Search Console. Enter the URL, and it will show what the declared canonical is and what Google chose as the canonical.
If you don’t have access to Google Search Console, the recommended way to check the version of a page Google has indexed is to paste the URL into Google. The top result is usually the canonical.
Similarly, if you check the cached version of a page in Google and a different page is shown, Google has selected a different version of the page.
Warning: Don’t use site: searches for checking canonicals. It shows what Google knows about, not necessarily what’s indexed or the selected canonical.
Within Site Audit, we show many issues related to canonicalization. Keep in mind that we’re flagging best practices in most cases. Because the canonical is a hint, Google and other search engines will have to choose which version of a page to index.
Even if your website has lots of issues related to canonicalization, search engines may be able to figure out what version should be indexed and where they should consolidate signals. It may not create any real problems for them.
Fun fact. When running a Site Audit, we only count the canonical version of pages as crawl credits. Some other tools count every version of a page towards the credits. On many sites, this can eat multiple credits per page!
There’s a lot that can go wrong with canonicalization. Let’s look at some common mistakes.
Mistake #1: Blocking the canonicalized URL via robots.txt
Blocking a URL in robots.txt prevents Google from crawling it, meaning that they cannot see any canonical tags on that page. That, in turn, prevents them from transferring any “link equity” from the non-canonical to the canonical.
Unless you have a crawl budget issue, it’s probably better to let all the signals consolidate. Even if you’re going to block or noindex some versions, you still may want to check for versions with links that you should canonicalize instead. However, as Google tends to crawl non-canonical pages less over time, you may just want to wait.
Mistake #2: Setting the canonicalized URL to ‘noindex’
Never mix noindex and rel=canonical. They’re contradictory instructions.
As John Mueller states, Google will usually prioritize the canonical tag over the ‘noindex’ tag.
Mistake #3: Setting a 4XX HTTP status code for the canonicalized URL
Setting a 4XX HTTP status code for a canonicalized URL has the same effect as using the ‘noindex’ tag: Google will be unable to see the canonical tag and transfer “link equity” to the canonical version.
Mistake #4: Canonicalizing all paginated pages to the root page
Paginated pages should not be canonicalized to the first paginated page in the series. Instead, self-referencing canonicals should be used on all paginated pages.
Why? As Google’s John Mueller stated on Reddit, this is improper use of the rel=canonical.
The main thing to avoid, since this post is about canonicalization, is to use the rel=canonical on page 2 pointing to page 1. Page 2 isn’t equivalent to page 1, so the rel=canonical like that would be incorrect.
We have a guide on pagination for SEO and best practices if you’re interested.
Mistake #5: Don’t use the URL removal tool in Google Search Console for canonicalization.
This can remove all versions of a URL, effectively deindexing your page from search.
Mistake #6: Not keeping canonicalization signals consistent.
As we talked about earlier, there are many different canonicalization signals.
Having different signals suggest different canonicals means that you will be relying on Google to select a canonical for you. The more consistent signals you show them with your preferred version, the more likely it is that version will be the chosen canonical.
Mistake #7: Not using canonical tags with hreflang
Hreflang tags specify the language and geographical targeting of a webpage.
Google states that when using hreflang, you should “specify a canonical page in the same language, or the best possible substitute language if a canonical doesn’t exist for the same language.”
Mistake #8: Having multiple rel=canonical tags
Having multiple rel=canonical tags will usually cause Google to ignore them. In many cases, this happens because tags are inserted into a system at different points, such as by the CMS, the theme, and plugin(s). This is why many plugins have an overwrite option meant to ensure they are the only source for canonical tags.
Another area where this might be a problem is with canonicals added with JavaScript. If you have no canonical URL specified in the HTML response and then add a rel=canonical tag with JavaScript, it should be respected when Google renders the page. However, if you have a canonical specified in HTML and swap the preferred version with JavaScript, you send mixed signals to Google.
Mistake #9: Rel=canonical in the <body>
Rel=canonical should only appear in the <head> of a document. A canonical tag in the <body> section of a page will be ignored.
Where this can become a problem is with the parsing of a document. Even if the page’s source code has the rel=canonical tag in the correct place, many different things such as unclosed tags, JavaScript injected, or <iframes> in the <head> section can cause the <head> to end prematurely while rendering. In these cases, a canonical tag may be accidentally thrown into the <body> of a rendered page where it will not be respected.
Final thoughts
Many of the tools SEOs had for handling canonicalization have been taken away, such as the URL Parameters Tool and Preferred Domain setting in Google Search Console. However, there are still plenty of other signals to help Google choose a canonical.
If you have questions, message me on Twitter.
![How to Write a Landing Page That Works [Infographic]](https://articles.entireweb.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/08/1691987165_How-to-Write-a-Landing-Page-That-Works-Infographic-400x240.jpg "How to Write a Landing Page That Works [Infographic]")
![How to Write a Landing Page That Works [Infographic]](https://articles.entireweb.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/08/1691987165_How-to-Write-a-Landing-Page-That-Works-Infographic-80x80.jpg "How to Write a Landing Page That Works [Infographic]")
SEO
How To Become an SEO Expert in 4 Steps
With 74.1% of SEOs charging clients upwards of $500 per month for their services, there’s a clear financial incentive to get good at SEO. But with no colleges offering degrees in the topic, it’s down to you to carve your own path in the industry.
There are many ways to do this; some take longer than others.
In this post, I’ll share how I’d go from zero to SEO pro if I had to do it all over again.
Understanding what search engine optimization really is and how it works is the first state of affairs. While you can do this by reading endless blog posts or watching YouTube videos, I wouldn’t recommend that approach for a few reasons:
- It’s hard to know where to start
- It’s hard to join the dots
- It’s hard to know who to trust
You can solve all of these problems by taking a structured course like our SEO course for beginners. It’s completely free (no signup required), consists of 14 short video lessons (2 hours total length), and covers:
- What SEO is and why it’s important
- How to do keyword research
- How to optimize pages for keywords
- How to build links (and why you need them)
- Technical SEO best practices
Here’s the first lesson to get you started:
It doesn’t matter how many books you read about golf, you’re never going to win a tournament without picking up a set of clubs and practicing. It’s the same with SEO. The theory is important, but there’s no substitute for getting your hands dirty and trying to rank a site.
If you don’t have a site already, you can get up and running fairly quickly with any major website platform. Some will set you back a few bucks, but they handle SEO basics out of the box. This saves you time sweating the small stuff.
As for what kind of site you should create, I recommend a simple hobby blog.
Here’s a simple food blog I set up in <10 minutes:
Once you’re set-up, you’re ready to start practicing and honing your SEO skills. Specifically, doing keyword research to find topics, writing and optimizing content about them, and (possibly) building a few backlinks.
For example, according to Ahrefs’ Keywords Explorer, the keyword “neopolitan pizza dough recipe” has a monthly traffic potential of 4.4K as well as a relatively low Keyword Difficulty (KD) score:
Even better, there’s a weak website (DR 16) in the top three positions—so this should definitely be quite an easy topic to rank for.
Given that most of the top-ranking posts have at least a few backlinks, a page about this topic would also likely need at least a few backlinks to compete. Check out the resources below to learn how to build these.
It’s unlikely that your hobby blog is going to pay the bills, so it’s time to use the work you’ve done so far to get a job in SEO. Here are a few benefits of doing this:
- Get paid to learn. This isn’t the case when you’re home alone reading blog posts and watching videos or working on your own site.
- Get deeper hands-on experience. Agencies work with all kinds of businesses, which means you’ll get to build experience with all kinds of sites, from blogs to ecommerce.
- Build your reputation. Future clients or employers are more likely to take you seriously if you’ve worked for a reputable SEO agency.
To find job opportunities, start by signing up for SEO newsletters like SEO Jobs and SEOFOMO. Both of these send weekly emails and feature remote job opportunities:
You can also go the traditional route and search job sites for entry-level positions. The kinds of jobs you’re looking for will usually have “Junior” in their titles or at least mention that it’s a junior position in their description.
Beyond that, you can search for SEO agencies in your local area and check their careers pages.
Even if there are no entry-level positions listed here, it’s still worth emailing and asking if there are any upcoming openings. Make sure to mention any SEO success you’ve had with your website and where you’re at in your journey so far.
This might seem pushy, but many agencies actually encourage this—such as Rise at Seven:
Here’s a quick email template to get you started:
Subject: Junior SEO position?
Hey folks,
Do you have any upcoming openings for junior SEOs?
I’ve been learning SEO for [number] months, but I’m looking to take my knowledge to the next level. So far, I’ve taken Ahrefs’ Beginner SEO course and started my own blog about [topic]—which I’ve had some success with. It’s only [number] months old but already ranks for [number] keywords and gets an estimated [number] monthly search visits according to Ahrefs.
[Ahrefs screenshot]
I checked your careers page and didn’t see any junior positions there, but I was hoping you might consider me for any upcoming positions? I’m super enthusiastic, hard-working, and eager to learn.
Let me know.
[Name]
You can pull all the numbers and screenshots you need by creating a free Ahrefs Webmaster Tools account and verifying your website.
SEO is a broad industry. It’s impossible to be an expert at every aspect of it, so you should niche down and hone your skills in the area that interests you the most. You should have a reasonable idea of what this is from working on your own site and in an agency.
For example, link building was the area that interested me the most, so that’s where I focused on deepening my knowledge. As a result, I became what’s known as a “t-shaped SEO”—someone with broad skills across all things SEO but deep knowledge in one area.
Marie Haynes is another great example of a t-shaped SEO. She specializes in Google penalty recovery. She doesn’t build links or do on-page SEO. She audits websites with traffic drops and helps their owners recover.
In terms of how to build your knowledge in your chosen area, here are a few ideas:
Here are a few SEOs I’d recommend following and their (rough) specialties:
Final thoughts
K Anders Ericsson famously theorized that it takes 10,000 hours of practice to master a new skill. Can it take less? Possibly. But the point is this: becoming an SEO expert is not an overnight process.
I’d even argue that it’s a somewhat unattainable goal because no matter how much you know, there’s always more to learn. That’s part of the fun, though. SEO is a fast-moving industry that keeps you on your toes, but it’s a very rewarding one, too.
Here are a few stats to prove it:
- 74.1% of SEOs charge clients upwards of $500 per month for their services (source)
- $49,211 median annual salary (source)
- ~$74k average salary for self-employed SEOs (source)
Got questions? Ping me on Twitter X.
SEO
A Year Of AI Developments From OpenAI
Today, ChatGPT celebrates one year since its launch in research preview.
Try talking with ChatGPT, our new AI system which is optimized for dialogue. Your feedback will help us improve it. https://t.co/sHDm57g3Kr
— OpenAI (@OpenAI) November 30, 2022
From its humble beginnings, ChatGPT has continually pushed the boundaries of what we perceive as possible with generative AI for almost any task.
a year ago tonight we were probably just sitting around the office putting the finishing touches on chatgpt before the next morning’s launch.
what a year it’s been…
— Sam Altman (@sama) November 30, 2023
In this article, we take a journey through the past year, highlighting the significant milestones and updates that have shaped ChatGPT into the versatile and powerful tool it is today.
a year ago tonight we were placing bets on how many total users we’d get by sunday
20k, 80k, 250k… i jokingly said “8B”.
little did we know… https://t.co/8YtO8GbLPy— rapha gontijo lopes (@rapha_gl) November 30, 2023
ChatGPT: From Research Preview To Customizable GPTs
This story unfolds over the course of nearly a year, beginning on November 30, when OpenAI announced the launch of its research preview of ChatGPT.
As users began to offer feedback, improvements began to arrive.
Before the holiday, on December 15, 2022, ChatGPT received general performance enhancements and new features for managing conversation history.
As the calendar turned to January 9, 2023, ChatGPT saw improvements in factuality, and a notable feature was added to halt response generation mid-conversation, addressing user feedback and enhancing control.
Just a few weeks later, on January 30, the model was further upgraded for enhanced factuality and mathematical capabilities, broadening its scope of expertise.
February 2023 was a landmark month. On February 9, ChatGPT Plus was introduced, bringing new features and a faster ‘Turbo’ version to Plus users.
This was followed closely on February 13 with updates to the free plan’s performance and the international availability of ChatGPT Plus, featuring a faster version for Plus users.
March 14, 2023, marked a pivotal moment with the introduction of GPT-4 to ChatGPT Plus subscribers.
Screenshot from ChatGPT, March 2023This new model featured advanced reasoning, complex instruction handling, and increased creativity.
Less than ten days later, on March 23, experimental AI plugins, including browsing and Code Interpreter capabilities, were made available to selected users.
On May 3, users gained the ability to turn off chat history and export data.
Plus users received early access to experimental web browsing and third-party plugins on May 12.
On May 24, the iOS app expanded to more countries with new features like shared links, Bing web browsing, and the option to turn off chat history on iOS.
June and July 2023 were filled with updates enhancing mobile app experiences and introducing new features.
The mobile app was updated with browsing features on June 22, and the browsing feature itself underwent temporary removal for improvements on July 3.
The Code Interpreter feature rolled out in beta to Plus users on July 6.
Plus customers enjoyed increased message limits for GPT-4 from July 19, and custom instructions became available in beta to Plus users the next day.
July 25 saw the Android version of the ChatGPT app launch in selected countries.
As summer progressed, August 3 brought several small updates enhancing the user experience.
Custom instructions were extended to free users in most regions by August 21.
The month concluded with the launch of ChatGPT Enterprise on August 28, offering advanced features and security for enterprise users.
Entering autumn, September 11 witnessed limited language support in the web interface.
Voice and image input capabilities in beta were introduced on September 25, further expanding ChatGPT’s interactive abilities.
An updated version of web browsing rolled out to Plus users on September 27.
The fourth quarter of 2023 began with integrating DALL·E 3 in beta on October 16, allowing for image generation from text prompts.
The browsing feature moved out of beta for Plus and Enterprise users on October 17.
Customizable versions of ChatGPT, called GPTs, were introduced for specific tasks on November 6 at OpenAI’s DevDay.
Screenshot from ChatGPT, November 2023On November 21, the voice feature in ChatGPT was made available to all users, rounding off a year of significant advancements and broadening the horizons of AI interaction.
And here, we have ChatGPT today, with a sidebar full of GPTs.
Screenshot from ChatGPT, November 2023Looking Ahead: What’s Next For ChatGPT
The past year has been a testament to continuous innovation, but it is merely the prologue to a future rich with potential.
The upcoming year promises incremental improvements and leaps in AI capabilities, user experience, and integrative technologies that could redefine our interaction with digital assistants.
With a community of users and developers growing stronger and more diverse, the evolution of ChatGPT is poised to surpass expectations and challenge the boundaries of today’s AI landscape.
As we step into this next chapter, the possibilities are as limitless as generative AI continues to advance.
Featured image: photosince/Shutterstock
SEO
Is AI Going To E-E-A-T Your Experience For Breakfast? The LinkedIn Example
Are LinkedIn’s collaborative articles part of SEO strategies nowadays?
More to the point, should they be?
The search landscape has changed dramatically in recent years, blurring the lines between search engines and where searches occur.
Following the explosive adoption of AI in content marketing and the most recent Google HCU, core, and spam updates, we’re looking at a very different picture now in search versus 12 months ago.
User-generated and community-led content seems to be met with renewed favourability by the algorithm (theoretically, mirroring what people reward, too).
LinkedIn’s freshly launched “collaborative articles” seem to be a perfect sign of our times: content that combines authority (thanks to LinkedIn’s authority), AI-generated content, and user-generated content.
What could go wrong?
In this article, we’ll cover:
- What are “collaborative articles” on LinkedIn?
- Why am I discussing them in the context of SEO?
- The main issues with collaborative articles.
- How is Google treating them?
- How they can impact your organic performance.
What Are LinkedIn Collaborative Articles?
First launched in March 2023, LinkedIn says about collaborative articles:
“These articles begin as AI-powered conversation starters, developed with our editorial team, but they aren’t complete without insights from our members. A select group of experts have been invited to contribute their own ideas, examples and experiences within the articles.“
Essentially, each of these articles starts as a collection of AI-generated answers to FAQs/prompts around any given topic. Under each of these sections, community members can add their own perspectives, insights, and advice.
What’s in it for contributors? To earn, ultimately, a “Top Voice” badge on their profile.
The articles are indexable and are all placed under the same folder (https://www.linkedin.com/advice/).
They look like this:
On the left-hand side, there are always FAQs relevant to the topic answered by AI.
On the right-hand side is where the contributions by community members get posted. Users can react to each contribution in the same way as to any LinkedIn post on their feed.
How Easy Is It To Contribute And Earn A Badge For Your Insights?
Pretty easy.
I first got invited to contribute on September 19, 2023 – though I had already found a way to contribute a few weeks before this.
Screenshot from LinkedIn, November 2023My notifications included updates from connections who had contributed to an article.
By clicking on these, I was transferred to the article and was able to contribute to it, too (as well as additional articles, linked at the bottom).
I wanted to test how hard it was to earn a Top SEO Voice badge. Eight article contributions later (around three to four hours of my time), I had earned three.
Screenshots from LinkedIn, November 2023How? Apparently, simply by earning likes for my contributions.
A Mix Of Brilliance, Fuzzy Editorial Rules, And Weird Uncle Bob
Collaborative articles sound great in principle – a win-win for both sides.
- LinkedIn struck a bullseye: creating and scaling content (theoretically) oozing with E-E-A-T, with minimal investment.
- Users benefit from building their personal brand (and their company’s) for a fragment of the effort and cost this usually takes. The smartest ones complement their on-site content strategy with this off-site golden ticket.
What isn’t clear from LinkedIn’s Help Center is what this editorial mix of AI and human input looks like.
Things like:
- How much involvement do the editors have before the topic is put to the community?
- Are they only determining and refining the prompts?
- Are they editing the AI-generated responses?
- More importantly, what involvement (if any) do they have after they unleash the original AI-generated piece into the world?
- And more.
I think of this content like weird Uncle Bob, always joining the family gatherings with his usual, unoriginal conversation starters. Only, this time, he’s come bearing gifts.
Do you engage? Or do you proceed to consume as many canapés as possible, pretending you haven’t seen him yet?
Why Am I Talking About LinkedIn Articles And SEO?
When I first posted about LinkedIn’s articles, it was the end of September. Semrush showed clear evidence of their impact and potential in Search. (Disclosure: I work for Semrush.)
Only six months after their launch, LinkedIn articles were on a visible, consistent upward trend.
- They were already driving 792.5K organic visits a month. (This was a 75% jump in August.)
- They ranked for 811,700 keywords.
- Their pages were ranking in the top 10 for 78,000 of them.
- For 123,700 of them, they appeared in a SERP feature, such as People Also Ask and Featured Snippets.
- Almost 72% of the keywords had informational intent, followed by commercial keywords (22%).
Here’s a screenshot with some of the top keywords for which these pages ranked at the top:
Screenshot from Semrush US database, desktop, September 2023Now, take the page that held the Featured Snippet for competitive queries like “how to enter bios” (monthly search volume of 5,400 and keyword difficulty of 84, based on Semrush data).
It came in ahead of pages on Tom’s Hardware, Hewlett-Packard, or Reddit.
Screenshots from LinkedIn, November 2023See anything weird? Even at the time of writing this post, this collaborative article had precisely zero (0) contributions.
This means a page with 100% AI-generated content (and unclear interference of human editors) was rewarded with the Featured Snippet against highly authoritative and relevant domains and pages.
A Sea Of Opportunity Or A Storm Ready To Break Out?
Let’s consider these articles in the context of Google’s guidelines for creating helpful, reliable, people-first content and its Search Quality Rater Guidelines.
Of particular importance here, I believe, is the most recently added “E” in “E-E-A-T,” which takes experience into account, alongside expertise, authoritativeness, and trustworthiness.
For so many of these articles to have been ranking so well must mean that they were meeting the guidelines and proving helpful and reliable for content consumers.
After all, they rely on “a select group of experts to contribute their own ideas, examples and experiences within the articles,” so they must be worthy of strong organic performances, right?
Possibly. (I’ve yet to see such an example, but I want to believe somewhere in the thousands of pages these do exist).
But, based on what I’ve seen, there are too many examples of poor-quality content to justify such big rewards in the search engine results pages (SERPs).
The common issues I’ve spotted:
1. Misinformation
I can’t tell how much vetting or editing there is going on behind the scenes, but the amount of misinformation in some collaborative articles is alarming. This goes for AI-generated content and community contributions alike.
I don’t really envy the task of fact-checking what LinkedIn describes as “thousands of collaborative articles on 2,500+ skills.” Still, if it’s quality and helpfulness we’re concerned with here, I’d start brewing my coffee a little stronger if I were LinkedIn.
At the moment, it feels a little too much like a free-for-all.
Here are some examples of topics like SEO or content marketing.
Screenshots from LinkedIn, November 20232. Thin Content
To a degree, some contributions seem to do nothing more than mirror the points made in the original AI-generated piece.
For example, are these contributions enough to warrant a high level of “experience” in these articles?
Screenshots from LinkedIn, November 2023The irony to think that some of these contributions may have also been generated by AI…
3. Missing Information
While many examples don’t provide new or unique perspectives, some articles simply don’t provide…any perspectives at all.
This piece about analytical reasoning ranked in the top 10 for 128 keywords when I first looked into it last September (down to 80 in October).
Screenshot from LinkedIn, November 2023It even held the Featured Snippet for competitive keywords like “inductive reasoning examples” for a while (5.4K monthly searches in the US), although it had no contributions on this subsection.
Most of its sections remain empty, so we’re talking about mainly AI-generated content.
Does this mean that Google really doesn’t care whether your content comes from humans or AI?
I’m not convinced.
How Have The Recent Google Updates Impacted This Content?
After August and October 2023 Google core updates (at the time of writing, the November 2023 Google core update is rolling out), the September 2023 helpful content update, and the October 2023 spam update, the performance of this section seems to be declining.
According to Semrush data:
Screenshot from Semrush, November 2023- Organic traffic to these pages was down to 453,000 (a 43% drop from September, bringing their performance close to August levels).
- They ranked for 465,100 keywords (down by 43% MoM).
- Keywords in the Top 10 dropped by 33% (51,900 vs 78,000 in September).
- Keywords in the top 10 accounted for 161,800 visits (vs 287,200 in September, down by 44% MoM).
The LinkedIn domain doesn’t seem to have been impacted negatively overall.
Screenshot from Semrush, November 2023Is this a sign that Google has already picked up the weaknesses in this content and has started balancing actual usefulness versus the overall domain authority that might have propelled it originally?
Will we see it declining further in the coming months? Or are there better things to come for this feature?
Should You Already Be On The Bandwagon If You’re In SEO?
I was on the side of caution before the Google algorithm updates of the past couple of months.
Now, I’d be even more hesitant to invest a substantial part of my resources towards baking this content into my strategy.
As with any other new, third-party feature (or platform – does anyone remember Threads?), it’s always a case of balancing being an early adopter with avoiding over-investment. At least while being unclear on the benefits.
Collaborative articles are a relatively fresh, experimental, external feature you have minimal control over as part of your SEO strategy.
Now, we also have signs from Google that this content may not be as “cool” as we initially thought.
This Is What I’d Do
That’s not to say it’s not worth trying some small-scale experiments.
Or, maybe, use it as part of promoting your own personal brand (but I’ve yet to see any data around the impact of the “Top Voice” badges on perceived value).
Treat this content as you would any other owned content.
- Follow Google’s guidelines.
- Add genuine value for your audience.
- Add your own unique perspective.
- Highlight gaps and misinformation.
Experience shows us that when tactics get abused, and the user experience suffers, Google eventually steps in (from guest blogging to parasite SEO, most recently).
It might make algorithmic tweaks when launching updates, launch a new system, or hand out manual actions – the point is that you don’t know how things will progress. Only LinkedIn and Google have control over that.
As things stand, I can easily see any of the below potential outcomes:
- This content becomes the AI equivalent of the content farms of the pre-Panda age, leading to Google clamping down on its search performance.
- LinkedIn’s editors stepping in more for quality control (provided LinkedIn deems the investment worthwhile).
- LinkedIn starts pushing its initiative much more to encourage participation and engagement. (This could be what makes the difference between a dead content farm and Reddit-like value.)
Anything could happen. I believe the next few months will give us a clearer picture.
What’s Next For AI And Its Role In SEO And Social Media?
When it comes to content creation, I think it’s safe to say that AI isn’t quite ready to E-E-A-T your experience for breakfast. Yet.
We can probably expect more of these kinds of movements from social media platforms and forums in the coming months, moving more toward mixing AI with human experience.
What do you think is next for LinkedIn’s collaborative articles? Let me know on LinkedIn!
More resources:
Featured Image: BestForBest/Shutterstock
Indian Government Warns Facebook, YouTube About Deepfakes, Misinformation Violations
Whiteboard Friday Recap 2023: AI Edition
Meta Stock: Still Room For Upside In A Maturing Market (NASDAQ:META)
Instagram Will Now Enable All Users to Download Publicly Posted Reels Clips
OpenAI: The return of the king
Making the Most of Electronic Resumes (Pro Tips and Tricks)
Google Merchant Center Automatically Creating Promotions
Google Discusses Fixing 404 Errors From Inbound Links
No Estimate To Share For Completion Of Google November Core & Reviews Updates
Google On Traffic Metric & SEO
-
FACEBOOK6 days agoIndian Government Warns Facebook, YouTube About Deepfakes, Misinformation Violations
-
MARKETING5 days agoWhiteboard Friday Recap 2023: AI Edition
-
SOCIAL7 days agoMeta Stock: Still Room For Upside In A Maturing Market (NASDAQ:META)
-
SOCIAL7 days agoInstagram Will Now Enable All Users to Download Publicly Posted Reels Clips
-
MARKETING7 days agoOpenAI: The return of the king
-
MARKETING6 days agoMaking the Most of Electronic Resumes (Pro Tips and Tricks)
-
SEARCHENGINES4 days agoGoogle Merchant Center Automatically Creating Promotions
-
SEO3 days agoGoogle Discusses Fixing 404 Errors From Inbound Links
You must be logged in to post a comment Login