Google's Advice on Avoiding Sneaky Redirects in Content Updates

Google has cautioned against using specific redirects that may mislead users when updating outdated website content. This warning was highlighted in a recent episode of Google’s Search Off The Record podcast.

In the episode, John Mueller and Lizzi Sassman from the Search Relations team talked about how to deal with "content decay," which is when website content becomes outdated over time.

They also discussed the importance of using redirects when updating or replacing older content.

However, they cautioned against specific redirect methods that could be seen as “sneaky.”

When Rel=canonical Becomes “Sneaky”

The redirect method that raised red flags is the incorrect use of rel=canonical tags.

This was brought up during a discussion about linking similar, but not equivalent, content.

Sassman stated:

“… for that case, I wish that there was something where I could tie those things together, because it almost feels like that would be better to just redirect it.

Daniel Weisberg from our team wrote a blog post about troubleshooting traffic drops using Search Console. We then expanded on this and turned it into documentation, adding more content. Our goal is for users to check out this new resource and for it to be easily found in search results.

In my opinion, there is no need for users to search for the older version because this is not an announcement but rather a compilation of best practices and helpful information.

So, for that, would it be better to do like a rel=canonical situation?”

Mueller immediately raised concerns with Sassman’s proposed use of the rel=canonical tag.

Mueller replied:

“The rel=canonical would be kind of sneaky there because it’s not really the same thing… it’s not equivalent.

I view rel=canonical as a way to inform search engines that two pages are the same and they can choose either one.

Some people interpret it as signaling equivalence, but also implying that one page should be treated as a redirect. This can be confusing because it may seem like they are saying rel=canonical, but meaning something else.

What To Do Instead

If you find yourself having to make a similar decision as Sassman, Mueller says this is the correct approach:

When deciding whether to redirect or not redirect a page, it's essentially choosing between replacing it entirely or keeping both versions. The most effective way to direct users to an updated and more detailed page is through a redirect, rather than using a rel=canonical tag.

Or you can keep them both up if you feel there’s still value in the older page.

Why SEJ Cares

Incorrectly using redirects or canonical tags can be viewed as an effort to manipulate search rankings, going against Google’s rules and potentially leading to penalties or reduced visibility. It is important to follow Google’s advice to maintain a positive standing for your site and help visitors find the most relevant content.

Listen to the full podcast episode below:

FAQ

What are the issues with using rel=canonical tags for updated content?

Using rel=canonical tags incorrectly can lead to confusion if the old and new pages are not the same.

According to Google's John Mueller, using rel=canonical suggests that the pages are exactly alike and a search engine can pick either one. Using it to indicate a redirect when the content is not the same is considered deceptive and could be seen as manipulative.

Is it okay to keep outdated content accessible to users?

When it comes to using rel=canonical, it is important to only use it if the content is truly the same. If not, it is recommended to either use a 301 redirect or keep both pages.

It's okay to leave old content available if it's still useful. According to Google's John Mueller, you have the option to redirect old content to the new page or keep both versions online. If the older content provides valuable information or historical context, it's a good idea to keep it accessible alongside the updated version.

How should redirects be handled when updating website content?

The correct approach to handling redirects is to use a 301 redirect if the old content has been replaced or is considered obsolete.

When you use a 301 redirect, it informs search engines and visitors that the old page has been permanently moved to a new location. This also helps in transferring link equity and reduces any negative effects on search rankings.

Featured Image: Khosro/Shutterstock

Editor's P/S:

The article highlights Google's warning against misusing redirects, particularly rel=canonical tags, when updating website content. It emphasizes that using rel=canonical should only be done when the old and new pages are genuinely identical. Incorrectly using redirects can be perceived as manipulative and may result in penalties or reduced visibility.

Google recommends using a 301 redirect if the old content has been replaced or is obsolete. This ensures that search engines and users are aware of the permanent move and helps transfer link equity. Keeping both versions of the page is also acceptable if the older content still provides value or historical context. By following these guidelines, website owners can maintain a positive standing and provide visitors with the most relevant and up-to-date content.