Are Meta Keywords Useful, In Blogger Blog Posts?

Some blog owners do not completely understand the concept of meta description, vs meta keywords - and how blog search reputation can be affected.

We see occasional questions, in Blogger Help Forum: Learn More About Blogger.

I know how to enter meta info on each blog post under the Search Description field - but do I have to put all permutations of a subject in the Search Description?

Here, we see the possibility of unintended "keyword stuffing", and degraded search engine reputation.

We must be careful to not misuse the meta search description feature - and avoid keyword stuffing.

Well written meta descriptions can help search reputation.

A well written meta description can be part of a well designed blog and of well written posts. It can help search engines index a blog, or a post, properly - and in a SERP listing, can attract readers.

Contrarily, a collection of meta keywords can look like keyword stuffing. The latter can cause degraded search engine reputation.

Search engines are long past benefiting from meta keywords.

Search engines have long been made more introspective, than for a blog to benefit from meta keywords. Search engines now extract keywords from indexed content, automatically.

While it is possible to design blog or website pages to use keywords, keywords now are extracted from visible content. Google is quite blunt about meta keywords.

Google doesn't use the "keywords" meta tag in our web search ranking.

Write good posts, to get good SERP positions.

If you want good SERP positioning, write good posts, using informative, interesting, and unique content. That's the best advice, for Blogger blogs.

---

Some #Blogger blog owners still try to use meta keyword tags, to improve search engine reputation. They don't realise that search engines now develop their own keyword lists, from visible content.

Good search list positions come from good content, to be read by people - not from jumbles of words, randomly strung together.

https://webmasters.googleblog.com/2009/09/google-does-not-use-keywords-meta-tag.html

https://moz.com/community/q/meta-keywords-should-we-use-them-or-not

http://cohlab.com/blog/stop-using-keywords-meta-tag.html

https://support.google.com/webmasters/answer/79812

Read More

Using The Meta Search Description In Your Blog

There is some confusion, about including "search description" meta content, in blog template code, to provide source for data shares to social sharing sites.

In various topics in Blogger Help Forum: Get Help with an Issue, I've seen references to "data:post.metaDescription", "data:post.snippet", and "data:post.pageTitle" used, in providing the blog post source for the FaceBook "og:description" tag. As far as I can tell, none of these exist.

The Layout data tag "data:blog.metaDescription", which provides "og:description", does exist - though it seems to be referenced, ambiguously.

Some FaceBook Open Graph content references different Blogger tags, depending upon page type. The FaceBook "og:title" references "data:blog.pageName" with an "item" (post) page, and "data:blog.title"; with other pages.

"og:description", on the other hand, only references one Blogger tag - "data:blog.metaDescription". The latter appears to change its source, depending upon whether the main page, or a post page, is being viewed.

• In main page mode, the per blog "Description", from Settings - Search preferences, is referenced.
• In post page mode, the per post "Search Description", from the Post Editor "Post settings", is referenced.

Source listing for this blog, in main page view.

"What Blogger won't (or can't) tell you. Blogger features and problems explained, using real life examples."

Source listing for this post, in post page view.

"Blogger provides the meta tag "data:blog.metaDescription", which seems to vary in source. Learn how it varies."



There is no mention of "data:blog.metaDescription", in the reference Blogger Help: Layouts Data Tags - as either a per blog, or per post, data element.

In my earlier post, my reference to "'data:blog.metaDescription' name='description'" was simple. But simplicity can lead to confusion.

<meta expr:content='data:blog.metaDescription' name='description' property='og:description'/>

Some tags are universal, others vary depending upon page type ("item" being post page).

<!-- BEGIN Open Graph tags -->
<meta expr:content='data:blog.metaDescription' name='description'' property='og:description'/>
<meta expr:content='data:blog.pageTitle' name='keywords'/>
<b:if cond='data:blog.pageType == "item"'>
<meta content='article' property='og:type'/>
<meta content='https://plus.google.com/nnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnn/about' property='article:author'/>
<meta expr:content='data:blog.canonicalUrl' property='og:url'/>
<meta expr:content='data:blog.pageName' property='og:title'/>
<b:if cond='data:blog.postImageUrl'>
<meta expr:content='data:blog.postImageUrl' property='og:image'/>
<b:else/>
<meta content='http://xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx/xxxxxxxxxxxx/xxxxxxxxxxx/xxxxxxxxxxx/xxxxxxxxxxx/S1600-R/yyyyyyyyyyyyy.gif' property='og:image'/>
</b:if>
<b:else/>
<meta expr:content='data:blog.title' property='og:title'/>
<meta expr:content='data:blog.canonicalHomepageUrl' property='og:url'/>
<meta content='blog' property='og:type'/>
<meta content='http://xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx/xxxxxxxxxxxx/xxxxxxxxxxx/xxxxxxxxxxx/xxxxxxxxxxx/S1600-R/yyyyyyyyyyyyy.gif' property='og:image'/>
</b:if>
<meta expr:content='"en_US"' property='og:locale'/>
<!-- END Open Graph tags -->

'data:blog.metaDescription' name='description' is referenced once, in the template code - and the source is apparently determined, based on the context.

If you find this confusing, I have to agree with you.

---

#Blogger provides the Layout data tag "data:blog.metaDescription", which is used for the FaceBook meta ag "og:description" - for both blog main page, and post pages, when shared. This is in contrast to the FaceBook meta tag "og:title" and others, which use different Blogger data tags for the main page and post pages.

This variation has caused some confusion - and attempted use of different non existent Blogger data tags.

Read More

Ownership Verification Is Not A Standard Process

With the recently restored custom domain publishing feature, and the new domain ownership verification requirement, comes various queries from blog owners unable to verify domain ownership, and to publish their blog to their custom domain.

Can I use a "TXT" file, instead of a "CNAME"? My registrar suggests this as an alternative.

and

Why do I need this? My domain was working, just fine, before I had to re publish the blog!

Not all blog owners understand the historical need for verifying domain ownership.

---

(Update 2013/09): The second "CNAME" won't be required, in all cases. If you don't see instructions for adding a second "CNAME", focus your efforts on getting the domain working, with righteous base DNS addresses,

---

Ownership verification, allowing one to setup a given relationship between various Internet resources, varies according to the need of the application which uses the Internet resources in question.

Domain ownership verification, to provide urgently needed custom domain security, is simply one example of ownership verification, in general.

• If you have file / folder control of a web site, you may be able to add a specific named file, to the website. The application in question can check for the presence of the required file (possibly one with a complex name).
• Some applications such as Webmaster Tools can, alternatively, use a meta tag in the blog header, to verify blog ownership. Again, the tag will have a complex name / value.
• To verify domain ownership, Blogger requires you to install a unique "CNAME" as a DNS address into your domain. The "CNAME" will contain two complex values, provided only to the blog / domain owner.

In either case, the complex values provide an encrypted certificate, which is specific to the application and to the blog / website, which is provided only to the owner of the blog / domain / website.

The named file is a simple solution - both to setup and to verify - but using it requires that the blog / website owner have the ability to setup a specific named file, in a specific folder, containing the certificate. Blogger does not provide file / folder control, so that solution is out - for any application which is to be used with Blogger blogs.

Applications (such as Webmaster Tools) which work with Blogger blogs, and similar websites, can use meta tag verification. This requires that the blog owner add a meta tag in the blog header, with a complex tag name / value. The tag name / value contains the certificate in question.

Blogger blogs can use neither a named file, nor meta tags, for domain ownership verification. There is no domain header, where meta tags could be installed - and again, Blogger does not provide file / folder control.

To verify domain ownership, Blogger requires the domain ownership certificate to be installed as a unique "CNAME" DNS address. The complex values in the "Name" and "Destination" values of the "CNAME" contain the encrypted ownership certificate. Since the specific certificate values, for each different domain, are provided to the blog owner (in the "settings instructions" document) - and the "CNAME" can only be installed by the domain owner - when the proper "CNAME" exists, the blog owner and domain owner are certified to be one person.

The unfortunate problem with "CNAME" based domain ownership verification is that not all registrars can provide the required "CNAME"s, and can provide "CNAME"s with long "Name" or "Destination" values. This does not mean that the Blogger solution, for domain ownership verification, is faulty.

It's possible that Blogger Engineering has considered a second option for domain ownership verification, which will be added when - or after - the "Buy a domain" wizard is updated to support automatic domain ownership verification. It's also possible that blog owners, who use specific registrars which are unable to provide the required "CNAME", will be forced to abandon their current registrar.

Whatever the case, it's likely that the "CNAME" based domain ownership certificate was the best possible solution, to solve the urgent security problem, and allow custom domain publishing to be restored last week.

Read More