Official statement
Other statements from this video 9 ▾
- 5:44 Le contenu centré utilisateur suffit-il vraiment à résoudre vos problèmes SEO ?
- 10:17 Pourquoi Google insiste-t-il sur la connaissance des directives qualité avant de recruter un consultant SEO ?
- 15:29 Google privilégie-t-il vraiment le contenu original dans ses résultats de recherche ?
- 25:13 Le SEO technique suffit-il vraiment à bien ranker sur Google ?
- 53:28 Google note-t-il vraiment vos articles de blog ?
- 72:03 Les backlinks sont-ils encore un signal de ranking majeur ou un risque de pénalité ?
- 83:27 Chapeau noir vs chapeau blanc : Google dit-il vraiment toute la vérité sur ce qui fonctionne ?
- 87:27 Les balises et catégories nuisent-elles vraiment au référencement si mal utilisées ?
- 97:08 Comment Google définit-il vraiment la découvrabilité du contenu ?
Google states that tag elements (thematic labels) are not a direct ranking factor. Their value lies solely in user experience and internal navigation. For SEO, this is a clear signal: optimizing these pages for search engines is a waste of time, it's better to focus on their real utility or block them entirely.
What you need to understand
What does "not a direct ranking factor" really mean?
When Google refers to a direct ranking factor, it signifies an element explicitly included in the positioning calculation by the algorithm. Tag elements, those labeling classification systems found on blogs and content sites, do not fall into this category.
This does not mean they are completely invisible to Google. The engine crawls these pages, sometimes indexes them, but their presence or optimization does not provide any algorithmic advantage for improving a site's visibility. The nuance is important: a page can exist in the index without being valued by ranking signals.
Why is Google highlighting this point now?
This clarification addresses an obsolete SEO practice: intensive optimization of tag pages as if they were strategic categories. Many sites accumulate hundreds of tag pages, often very similar, creating duplicate or thin content.
Google is setting the record straight: these pages are meant for users already on the site, not to attract organic traffic. If someone searches for "quick vegetarian recipes", the tag page "quick" on your cooking blog should not be your SEO battleground. It's your substantive articles that should rank.
How do they differ from categories?
Categories structure a site's information architecture in a hierarchical and stable manner. They benefit from internal linking, receive PageRank, and can rank if they provide real editorial value with unique and substantial content.
Tags, on the other hand, are transversal, often redundant with each other, and typically generate poor listings with little or no unique content. Their proliferation creates noise: the more tags you have, the more you fragment your internal PageRank without real gain. This is exactly what Google does not value.
- Tags are not ranking signals – their optimization does not improve positioning
- Their value is strictly UX – internal navigation for users already on the site
- Critical distinction with categories – categories can have SEO weight if well-designed
- Risk of dilution – too many tag pages fragment the crawl budget and PageRank
- Unnecessary indexing potential – these pages take up space in the index without providing qualified traffic
SEO Expert opinion
Is Google’s stance consistent with real-world observations?
Absolutely. Crawl data and log analysis show that tag pages rarely generate significant organic traffic, except in very specific cases (massive authority sites with tags that have become full-fledged destinations). In 95% of cases, they consume crawl budget without return on investment.
Where the issue lies: many CMS generate these pages by default, and site owners leave them indexed out of inertia. The result? Hundreds of poor URLs that dilute the quality signals of the site. Google has never contradicted this in its guidelines – this statement merely makes explicit an already existing algorithmic reality.
Should we delete all tag pages then?
Not necessarily. The question is not binary. If your users actually use these tags to navigate and discover related content, they have a legitimate UX value. The problem arises when they are treated as fully-fledged SEO pages.
The best approach? Noindex, follow. This way, you maintain the internal linking (the "follow" allows PageRank to circulate), but you avoid polluting the index with weak content. Some sites may also block them completely in robots.txt if their usage is negligible. [To verify] in niche sectors where highly specific tags could capture long-tail traffic – but this is marginal.
What indirect signals can they still influence?
Even though tags are not a direct factor, they can have collateral impacts. A coherent internal linking structure via tags can improve the distribution of PageRank to your strategic content. If an important article receives internal links from multiple tag pages, it indirectly benefits from this structure.
But beware: this effect is weak and easily counterbalanced by the risks (duplication, thin content). In short, if you rely on tags to boost your SEO, you are on the wrong path. It's better to invest that time in pillar content, solid semantic clusters, or optimizing your main categories.
Practical impact and recommendations
What concrete actions should you take with existing tag pages?
Audit first. Export all your tag URLs from Search Console or your crawler. Look at how many generate real organic traffic (sessions > 10 over 6 months). You will likely find that 90%+ contribute nothing. This is your priority noindex list.
For tags that generate a bit of traffic, ask yourself: is there a real user need or is it algorithmic coincidence? If it’s legitimate, transform this page into editorialized content with a unique intro, curated selection, not just an automatic listing. Otherwise, noindex it too.
How to technically set noindex on tags?
On WordPress, SEO plugins (Yoast, Rank Math) allow you to noindex taxonomies with a single click. Then check by crawling the site that the directive is present in the <head> or in the HTTP header. On custom CMS, add the meta robots tag or the X-Robots-Tag: noindex, follow header at the server level.
Don’t block with robots.txt if you want to preserve internal linking – Google needs to crawl these pages to follow the links. The noindex allows this compromise: crawling authorized, indexing refused. Monitor the logs for a few weeks to confirm that Googlebot continues to visit but that the pages disappear from the index.
What alternatives exist to improve content discovery?
If you massively delete or noindex your tags, replace this navigation with related content blocks at the bottom of articles, based on editorial criteria or semantic similarity. A good "Similar Articles" module provides much more value than a generic tag page.
Also invest in your main categories: give them unique content, a well-crafted intro, and clear organization. They can become true SEO landing pages. And if you really need granularity, create subcategories or thematic hubs – with a real editorial strategy behind them, not just automatic classification.
- Audit all tag URLs and identify those generating real organic traffic
- Apply noindex, follow on 90%+ of tag pages (or all if there’s no UX value)
- Check the meta robots directive in the source code and HTTP headers
- Crawl the site post-deployment to confirm the presence of noindex
- Monitor index trends in Search Console (decrease in indexed pages)
- Enhance main categories with unique, editorialized content
- Implement related content recommendations based on semantic relevance
❓ Frequently Asked Questions
Les tags peuvent-ils pénaliser le SEO d'un site ?
Faut-il bloquer les tags en robots.txt ou les noindexer ?
Les tags peuvent-ils aider au maillage interne même noindexés ?
Quelle est la différence entre tags et catégories pour Google ?
Un site peut-il ranker sur des requêtes via ses pages de tags ?
🎥 From the same video 9
Other SEO insights extracted from this same Google Search Central video · duration 1h06 · published on 02/12/2015
🎥 Watch the full video on YouTube →
💬 Comments (0)
Be the first to comment.