Google’s John Mueller answered a question about a situation where multiple pages were ranking for the same search queries. Mueller affirmed the importance of reducing unnecessary duplication but also downplayed keyword cannibalization.
What Is Keyword/Content Cannibalization?
There is an idea that web pages will have trouble ranking if multiple pages are competing for the same keyword phrases. This is related to the SEO fear of duplicate content. Keyword cannibalization is just a catchall phrase that is applied to low-ranking pages that are on similar topics.
The problem with saying that something is keyword cannibalization is that it does not identify something specific about the content that is wrong. That is why there are people asking John Mueller about it, simply because it is an ill-defined and unhelpful SEO concept.
SEO Confusion
The SEO was confused about the recent &num=100 change, where Google is blocking rank trackers from scraping the search results (SERPs) at the rate of 100 results at a time. Some rank trackers are floating the idea of only showing ranking data for the top 20 search results. This affects rank trackers’ ability to scrape the SERPs and has no effect on Google Search Console other than to show more accurate results.
The SEO was under the wrong impression that Search Console was no longer showing impressions from results beyond the top twenty. This is false.
Mueller didn’t address that question; it is just a misunderstanding on the part of the SEO.
Here is the question that was asked:
“If now we are not seeing data from GSC from positions 20 and over, does that mean in fact there are no pages ranking above those places?
If I want to avoid cannibalization, how would I know which pages are being considered for a query, if I can only see URLs in the top 20 or so positions?”
Different Pages Ranking For Same Query
Mueller said that different pages ranking for the same search query is not a problem. I agree: multiple web pages ranking for the same keyword phrases is not a problem; it’s a good thing.
Mueller explained:
“Search Console shows data for when pages were actually shown, it’s not a theoretical measurement. Assuming you’re looking for pages ranking for the same query, you’d see that only if they were actually shown. (IMO it’s not really “cannibalization” if it’s theoretical.)
All that said, I don’t know if this is actually a good use of time. If you have 3 different pages appearing in the same search result, that doesn’t seem problematic to me just because it’s “more than 1″. You need to look at the details, you need to know your site, and your potential users.
Reduce unnecessary duplication and spend your energy on a fantastic page, sure. But pages aren’t duplicates just because they happen to appear in the same search results page. I like cheese, and many pages could appear without being duplicates: shops, recipes, suggestions, knives, pineapple, etc.”
Actual SEO Problems
Multiple pages ranking for the same keyword phrases is not a problem; it’s a good thing and not a reason for concern. Multiple pages not ranking for keywords is a problem.
Here are some real reasons why pages on the same topic may fail to rank:
- The pages are too long and consequently are unfocused.
- The pages contain off-topic passages.
- The pages are insufficiently linked internally.
- The pages are thin.
- The pages are virtually duplicates of the other pages in the group.
The above are just a few real reasons why multiple pages on the same topic may not be ranking. Pointing at the pages and declaring they are cannibalizing each other is not real. It’s not something to worry about because keyword cannibalization is just a catchall phrase that masks all the actual reasons I just listed.
Takeaway
The debate over keyword cannibalization says less about Google’s algorithm and more about how the SEO community is willing to accept ideas without really questioning whether the underlying basis makes sense. The question about keyword cannibalization is frequently discussed, and I think that’s because many SEOs have the intuition that it’s somehow not right.
Maybe the habit of diagnosing ranking issues with convenient labels mirrors the human tendency to prefer simple explanations over complex answers. But, as Mueller reminds us, the real story is not that two or three pages happen to surface for the same query. The real story is whether those pages are useful, well linked, and focused enough to meet a reader’s information needs.
What is diagnosed as “content cannibalization” is more likely something else. So, rather than chasing shadows, it may be better to look at the web pages with the eyes of a user and really dig into what’s wrong with the page or the interlinking patterns of the entire section that is proving problematic. Keyword cannibalization disappears the moment you look closer, and other real reasons become evident.
Featured Image by Shutterstock/Roman Samborskyi
