3 ms·
It is also reasonable to serve the same content to regular visitors as you do to Google? Is ok to serve a full article to Google and put visitors behind wall?
by postalrat 3y ago
It is also reasonable to serve the same content to regular visitors as you do to Google?
Is ok to serve a full article to Google and put visitors behind wall?
- spencerflem 3y agoyes, because google is only using that article to decide what searches should link to it
- AnthonyMouse 3y agoGiven two pages that both contain the information the user wants, they prefer the one that isn't behind a paywall, and so they prefer a search engine that puts those results first. Giving the search engine the full content so it will rank higher is lying, because that information isn't actually there unless you pay, which most users aren't going to do. In theory you could solve this with a requirement for the site to disclose that it's doing this, so the search engine can have a box that says "exclude paywalled content", but then everybody would check the box.
- spencerflem 3y agoGoogle wants you to be happy with your search, and doesn't care at all about journalists. If they thought people would prefer paywalled content gone they could do that anytime. I agree the option would be nice, but I think you are wrong that everyone wants paywalled articles excluded
- AnthonyMouse 3y ago> If they thought people would prefer paywalled content gone they could do that anytime. Which is what they do by penalizing sites for showing something different to Googlebot than the user. > I agree the option would be nice, but I think you are wrong that everyone wants paywalled articles excluded What they want is for non-paywalled links that include the relevant information to be listed first, which is de facto equivalent to excluding paywalled links (because they'll be on page 75) in the vast majority of search results.