Cloaking: violates the Google Webmaster Guidelines

The domain has massively lost visibility worldwide on Google. The country with the largest loss is France (-82,1%) and the country with the smallest impact are the Netherlands (-44.5%). In the United Kingdom Spotify lost 48% of all their keywords (from 92,588 to 59,102) and 71% of their Visibility on

Starting our search for answers, we quickly find that the hostname was responsible for the largest amount of visibility for and shows the highest losses now:

List of the hostnames on
List of the hostnames on

If we dig deeper in our analysis and take a look at the directories on, we can see that all of them lost Visibility on Google:

Directories of the hostname
Directories of the hostname

Now, that we have identified where the problem is, we need to figure out what exactly happened to the domain. If you click on the small box in front of any of the individual URLs for, you will discover what is going on here. For the keyword “National Philharmonic Orchestra”, for example, ranks with this URL: If you click on this URL or the corresponding Google search result, you will be redirected to another ULR on like this one:

Snippet for on
Snippet for on

There is no real content on this URL and the user is forced to sign up to in order to see what they came for. If you look at the cached version of the same ULR on Google, you will notice that this version contains the actual content of the page. This discrepancy between what an actual user sees and what Google got (and saved in their cache) is the real problem here.

Google's cache for this URL
Google’s cache for this URL

The user and search engine are shown different versions of the page. This strategy is known as cloaking and, as Google explains, “Cloaking is considered a violation of Google’s Webmaster Guidelines because it provides our users with different results than they expected“, which led to Spotify losing their rankings.

I keep my fingers crossed and hope that Spotify will fix this problem soon.

Have a nice start into the new week!

Related posts
Avatar Alvaro Rondon   
7. November 2016, 16:21

A good example of cloaking in 2016, although I think it has been a mistake not to think about seo for doing that on purpose.


Avatar Kai Spriestersbach   
7. November 2016, 18:30

This is a perfect example how to shoot yourself in the foot with a paywall-like User exclusion

Avatar Olle Neiman   
8. November 2016, 06:18

How would they be able to fix it? They were ranking because of the content the bot saw, but they don’t want users to see that content without being logged in. I suppose the way Pinterest does it works.

Avatar Martin Vasko   
8. November 2016, 12:50

Do you know how long they have implemented this? How long it took to Google to find out cloaking in this case?

Avatar Abel Pardo   
8. November 2016, 22:45

It’s really incredible that big business try to develop this kind of strategies that, finally, can damage the whole marketing strategy.

Let’s see its reaction.

Avatar Everett Sizemore   
16. November 2016, 18:46

God bless 302s.

Avatar David   
16. November 2016, 18:59

Looks like they removed all the redirections; I don’t see any of those anymore.

Avatar Mark   
17. November 2016, 11:11

Does it even matter though. How much do/does Spotify care about organic results in Google? Is it deliberate?

You’ve got 1 second – name me a music streaming & subscription brand, their brand recall is through the roof and affiliations with big name acts, gigs, sponsorships and other brands like Sony, Sonos don’t exactly harm them.

Avatar jason   
17. November 2016, 21:39

Someone is getting fired 🙂

Avatar Stevo   
21. November 2016, 09:32

Surely Spotify saw this coming. It makes me wonder how prevalent cloaking is on the net and why does a site like Spotify even take the chance?

Avatar Laco   
21. November 2016, 13:49

They should ask for login / sign up on “play on Spotify” click, would have also more conversions.

Comments will be closed 30 days after the post was published.