{"id":4167,"date":"2023-05-05T07:18:15","date_gmt":"2023-05-05T07:18:15","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/afreeurl.com\/?p=4167"},"modified":"2023-05-05T07:18:15","modified_gmt":"2023-05-05T07:18:15","slug":"google-issues-a-statement-about-support-for-cross-domain-canonicals","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/afreeurl.com\/?p=4167","title":{"rendered":"Google issues a statement about support for cross-domain Canonicals"},"content":{"rendered":"<p><\/p>\n<p>Google offered a statement to clarify their support for the cross-domain canonical link element (rel=&#8221;canonical&#8221;), noting the limitations in how they use it, saying that they &#8220;try&#8221; to use cross-domain canonicals while noting where it is not recommended.<\/p>\n<p>Google this week wanted to simultaneously release multi-page updates targeting cross-domain canonicals, but instead they were released in a staggered fashion, leading to confusion over whether Google still supports cross-domain canonicals.<\/p>\n<p>There are two changes to note.<\/p>\n<p>1. Google clarified its <a href=\"https:\/\/support.google.com\/news\/publisher-center\/answer\/9606800\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">guidance on duplicate content<\/a> for news publishers who distribute content to Google News.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Here&#8217;s the new content added to the guide on what to do with content syndication:<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>&#8220;Tip: If you want to avoid duplication by syndication partners, the canonical link element is not recommended because syndicated articles tend to be very different in overall content from the original articles.<\/p>\n<p>Instead, partners should use meta tags to block indexing of your content.<\/p>\n<p><a href=\"https:\/\/support.google.com\/news\/publisher-center\/answer\/9605477\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">Learn more about the canonical link element<\/a>.<\/p>\n<p>Avoid duplication on your own site<br \/>If you publish the same article on multiple pages of your site, you can use the rel=&#8221;canonical&#8221; link element.<\/p>\n<p><a href=\"https:\/\/developers.google.com\/search\/docs\/crawling-indexing\/consolidate-duplicate-urls\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">Learn how to specify a canonical.<\/a>&#8220;<\/p>\n<p>The update doesn&#8217;t represent a change in policy, it&#8217;s just meant to clarify guidelines on how to avoid duplication when syndicating content.<\/p>\n<p>2. Google also clarified the <a href=\"https:\/\/support.google.com\/news\/publisher-center\/answer\/9520026\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">guidance on what content should be blocked from Google News<\/a>.<\/p>\n<p>Specifically, the change was made for publishers who republish all content, such as from cable services, in collaboration with other publishers, or from public domain sources.<\/p>\n<p>The most important change was to remove the guidance that encouraged publishers to consider using canonical.<\/p>\n<p><strong>The original page contained the following suggestion:<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>&#8220;Consider blocking or canonical for reposted content&#8221;<\/p>\n<p><strong>The updated guide now suggests this:<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>&#8220;Consider blocking reposted content&#8221;<\/p>\n<p>Also, this part was changed to remove the suggestion to consider a canon.<\/p>\n<p><strong>This is the original proposal <\/strong><a href=\"https:\/\/web.archive.org\/web\/20230316222659\/https:\/\/support.google.com\/news\/publisher-center\/answer\/9520026\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">(snapshot from archive.org<\/a>):<\/p>\n<p>&#8220;Google News also encourages those who republish material to consider proactively blocking such content or using canonicalization so that we can better identify the original content and credit it appropriately.&#8221;<\/p>\n<p><strong>And this is the updated guide now without the suggestion to add a canonical:<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>&#8220;Google News also encourages republishers to consider proactively blocking such content, so we can better identify the original content and credit it appropriately.&#8221;<\/p>\n<p>It is important to note that the above pages are considered a guide and not a policy statement.<\/p>\n<p>That&#8217;s why the guidance uses the word &#8220;consider,&#8221; which is different from recommending that editors &#8220;should&#8221; do something.<\/p>\n<h2>Google issues a statement about the canonical link element<\/h2>\n<p>Google provided Search Engine Journal with the following statement to make it clear that Google still supports the canonical link element.<\/p>\n<p><strong>They wrote in the email:<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>&#8220;We support the canonical link element, which is primarily designed for use within a site to self-identify what should be considered the canonical version of a page when there may be duplicates or near-duplicates.<\/p>\n<p>We also try to support canonical on all domains, but canonical is not recommended for those who want to avoid duplication of syndication partners, because the pages are often very different.<\/p>\n<p>We&#8217;ve updated some of our guidance on this to better advise those distributing content.&#8221;<\/p>\n<p>It is now clear that Google still supports cross-domain canonical link elements.<\/p>\n<p>They also make it clear that this is not a recommended practice for publishers who want to avoid duplicating content syndication.<\/p>\n<p>[ad_2]<br \/>\n<br \/><a href=\"https:\/\/www.searchenginejournal.com\/google-issues-statement-about-support-for-cross-domain-canonicals\/486255\/\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">Source link <\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Google offered a statement to clarify their support for the cross-domain canonical link element (rel=&#8221;canonical&#8221;), noting the limitations in how they use it, saying that they &#8220;try&#8221; to use cross-domain canonicals while noting where it is not recommended. Google this week wanted to simultaneously release multi-page updates targeting cross-domain canonicals, but instead they were released in a staggered fashion, leading to confusion over whether Google still supports cross-domain canonicals. There are two changes to note&#8230;. <\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[1],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-4167","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-seo-news"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/afreeurl.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/4167","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/afreeurl.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/afreeurl.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/afreeurl.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/afreeurl.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=4167"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/afreeurl.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/4167\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/afreeurl.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=4167"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/afreeurl.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=4167"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/afreeurl.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=4167"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}