Javascript
-
Hi there,
Quick question:
Does Google parse javascript?
I have a html ad which contain the anchor text linking to one of our product pages, however the ad unit are javascript based and from this the code is not visible on page source through the browser.
Kind Regards
-
Yeah, I know can you believe it Anyway, look we know lots of websites are doing it, yes even the big brands and are ranking well due to this strategy, I suppose having a big budget to play with, the temptation is just too much.
I am paranoid also, isn't everyone in this industry, I mean if you do follow Google's guidelines, there is no way you are going to rank well for competitive keywords, I look across all industries, especially retail and they are all it.
You have got to be more aggressive I think to gain good SERPs
-
What? Google allows people to rank who have exact anchor text on sites they are so clearly paying for links on? Get out! No, I totally agree with you. It is pretty ridiculous what gets let through. It makes it really tough to do the "right" thing and follow Google's standards.
If I were you, I would look at how high value this domain is where you are placing the ad. If it has a really strong domain authority and a good reputation overall (it ranks, it gets traffic, it has decent social performance, etc.) then I would definitely keep the ad link set to "nofollow" just because it is more likely to be found since that site is higher profile. A low profile site you might get away with it.
That being said, I'm paranoid and I tend to err on the side of "nofollow" because I don't want to ever tell a client "Uh, yeah, you know that thing I did on that link...yeah, sorry Mr. Client, it got you penalized." Despite many flaws, Google is getting better at detecting these things so I don't want to put sites I manage in a situation where they could be at risk as a result of some Panda-on-steroids type change.
As for guest posting, is that really forcing it in a spammy way? I mean, if you build a relationship with a webmaster and get a guest post there as a result of that, then the guest post is a result of a natural relationship. If you are paying for the guest post, that would be spammy.
-
Thanks for the reply Matthew.
Is it really that spammy? I'm just trying to get the most out of my advertising.
Look it's far less spammy than what my competitors are doing, these guys are big brands, they have exact anchor text links on non-relevant websites, all the big players are doing it, i'm not saying monkey see monkey do, I just thought it was thinking outside the box a little rather than putting exact anchor text links on non-relevant websites, and the bizarre thing is, my competitors are ranking well for these keywords, and yes it's the only link building strategy they have and been doing so for years.
I'm sure it's not a big surprise to hear the above, even with the panda update, it just does not catch these websites out.
One of my main strategies is writing guest posts and these are improving the SERPs for the target keywords, if you sticking to the guidelines, even guest posting would not be allowed, I mean your deliberately forcing the back-link, Google says everything should come naturally, yeah right!
-
On the PR fall, was it just one link or several links? If it was just one link, it would be hard to believe the penalty for just that link was that severe. What about other factors - like domain authority in OSE, rankings, organic traffic, etc.? Did that change as a result of the follow/nofollow?
Gary, in response to your question - you are right, you do lose that second opportunity from having SEO value and traffic value. Honestly though I would play by Google's rules on this one and nofollow that link. I don't think the penalty would be so severe that you would lose rankings immediately but you don't want to get caught doing something spammy - there is no long term value there.
With that link no followed though what other link opportunities are on that site other than the ad? For instance, if it is a news website or blog (let's say) where this ad is placed, can you talk to the editors of that site about them interviewing you about the product you are promoting? Or, if it is a blog, can you write a guest post? What I'm getting at is then you can have the link from this website along with having the ad. That way you get the SEO value plus the traffic value from the same website.
-
I doubt that the fall in PR was because you did not have a nofollow.
-
Well, if you don't use the nofollow for a promotional link you risk your site to be penalized.
I experienced that, a fall from PR 5 to PR 4 for my home page at www.jobintourism.it. Then, a few days after that I had changed the link, filling in the correct value for the rel attribute, the PR was 5 again. It may be a dangerous game. -
Hi Matthew,
Thanks for the reply.
Ok, the ad is on an external website, usually these ads are just images pointing to our website, however I thought that by producing the ad in a way that the text on the ad can be read by search engines, I would get 2 benefits, first of all the ad will generate traffic to the website, plus it will pass SEO value to the website with the ability of being able to read the anchor text, OK, yes I have paid for this ad, however if I use a nofollow, surely this is a great opportunity lost in gaining a great back link from an authority website.
Thanks
-
Google does crawl some JavaScript. Here is a brief news update on that from last November: http://searchengineland.com/google-can-now-execute-ajax-javascript-for-indexing-99518
I have seen JavaScript elements get indexed in Google on some of my client's websites - especially simple JavaScript (for example, deep pages linked to using the document.write() method do get indexed and those deep pages are not linked elsewhere).
All that to say, if you are trying to use the link for pure SEO value then you really should pull the link out of JavaScript just to be 100% certain Google crawls that link and reaches the page. After all the link building and site architecture work, why risk Google not seeing an important link?
One final question back to you. You mentioned that this was an HTML ad. Is this an ad internally on your website or an external ad? If it is an internal ad, trying to drive traffic deeper into your website, then I would change that to plain HTML instead of JavaScript so that Google has the ability to access that page easily (and sees the internal promotion easily).
However, if it is an external ad that you are paying for on somebody else's website, that link should have a rel="nofollow". Here is Google's webmaster support section and they say very plainly "Links purchased for advertising should be designated as such." They go on to say that one of the ways to designate a paid link as advertising is by "[a]dding a rel="nofollow" attribute to the <a>tag". If that is the case, within the JavaScript, you can include the rel nofollow as part of the</a> <a>tag that is output.</a> <a></a> http://support.google.com/webmasters/bin/answer.py?hl=en&answer=66736
Got a burning SEO question?
Subscribe to Moz Pro to gain full access to Q&A, answer questions, and ask your own.
Browse Questions
Explore more categories
-
Moz Tools
Chat with the community about the Moz tools.
-
SEO Tactics
Discuss the SEO process with fellow marketers
-
Community
Discuss industry events, jobs, and news!
-
Digital Marketing
Chat about tactics outside of SEO
-
Research & Trends
Dive into research and trends in the search industry.
-
Support
Connect on product support and feature requests.
Related Questions
-
Can Google Crawl & Index my Schema in CSR JavaScript
We currently only have one option for implementing our Schema. It is populated in the JSON which is rendered by JavaScript on the CLIENT side. I've heard tons of mixed reviews about if this will work or not. So, does anyone know for sure if this will or will not work. Also, how can I build a test to see if it does or does not work?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | MJTrevens0 -
Pagination, Javascript & SEO
Hi I need some help identifying whether we need to rethink the way we paginated product pages, On this page http://www.key.co.uk/en/key/workbenches when clicking page 1,2, etc - we have javascript to sort the results, the URL displayed and the URL linked to are different. e.g. The URL for these paginated pages is for example: page2 http://www.key.co.uk/en/key/workbenches#productBeginIndex:30&orderBy:5&pageView:list& Then the arrows either side of pagination, link to the paginated landing page e.g. http://www.key.co.uk/en/key/workbenches?page=3 - this is where the rel/prev details are - done for Google However - when clicking on this arrow, the URL loaded is different again - http://www.key.co.uk/en/key/workbenches#productBeginIndex:60&orderBy:5&pageView:list& & doesn't take you http://www.key.co.uk/en/key/workbenches?page=3 I did not set this up, but I am concerned that the URL http://www.key.co.uk/en/key/workbenches?page=3 never actually loads, but it's linked to Google can crawl it. Is this a problem? I am looking to implement a view all option. Thank you
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | BeckyKey0 -
Does google credit links from iFrames or created by Javascript, if so, is one more powerful than the other?
Consider this example, because I want to be clear about what I mean. You have two websites. Lets all them www.a.com and www.b.com. On www.a.com/some/page, there is an iframe something like this:
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | adriandg
<iframe src="www.b.com/some/special/path"></iframe>
Then content of this iframe is a bunch of pictures, text and numbers, as well as a group of links, linking each picture to www.b.com for example the links might be:
www.b.com/content/1
www.b.com/content/2
www.b.com/content/3 Questions: When google crawls **www.a.com/some/page, **does it pass link juice to www.b.com/content/*? Does google instead consider these to be internal links within b.com itself. because links to www.b.com/content/ ** are actually from b.com itself, since the domain of the iframe is actually: www.b.com/some/special/path 3) Is there any amount of link juice passed from www.a.com/some/page to* www.b.com/some/special/path **because this is the src= element of an iframe that a.com is hosting? Consider an alternative setup. Where instead of using an iframe the contents of the above described iFrame is actually added the the page dynamically using javascript, and a call to an API endpoint at b.com. Resulting in these links being added directly to the body of a.com without being wrapped in an iframe element. Questions:
4) Do these links that were created after page load still get crawled and credited by google? (i have heard in the past that google was going to start crawling javascript, i just don't know if this is known for a fact yet).
5) Do links created on the client side hold the same weight as a link that was served directly via the backend html generation? If both the links within the iframe and the links within the javascript embed method pass link juice. Is one preferred over the other? is one known to be more effective than the other? Thanks!0 -
How do you 301 redirect URLs with a hashbang (#!) format? We just lost a ton of pagerank because we thought javascript redirect was the only way! But other sites have been able to do this – examples and details inside
Hi Moz, Here's more info on our problem, and thanks for reading! We’re trying to Create 301 redirects for 44 pages on site.com. We’re having trouble 301 redirecting these pages, possibly because they are AJAX and have hashbangs in the URLs. These are locations pages. The old locations URLs are in the following format: www.site.com/locations/#!new-york and the new URLs that we want to redirect to are in this format: www.site.com/locations/new-york We have not been able to create these redirects using Yoast WordPress SEO plugin v.1.5.3.2. The CMS is WordPress version 3.9.1 The reason we want to 301 redirect these pages is because we have created new pages to replace them, and we want to pass pagerank from the old pages to the new. A 301 redirect is the ideal way to pass pagerank. Examples of pages that are able to 301 redirect hashbang URLs include http://www.sherrilltree.com/Saddles#!Saddles and https://twitter.com/#!RobOusbey.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | DA20130 -
Pros vs Cons - Navigation/content embedded within javascript
My programmer showed me this demo website where all the navigation and content is embedded within javascript: http://sailsjs.org/#! Google site search returned 51 in results, all pages pretty much unique Title Tags and Meta Descriptions Bing site search returned 24 results with pretty much identical Title Tags and Meta Descriptions Matt Cutts said it's fine but to test first: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Mibrj2bOFCU Has anyone seen any reason to avoid this web convention? My gut is to avoid this approach with the main drawback I see is that websites like this won't do well on search engines other than Google that have less sophisticated algorithms. thoughts?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Rich_Coffman0 -
Alternative HTML Structure for indexation of JavaScript Single Page Content
Hi there, we are currently setting up a pure html version for Bots on our site amazine.com so the content as well as navigation will be fully indexed by google. We will show google exactly the same content the user sees (except for the fancy JS effects). So all bots get pure html and real users see the JS based version. My questions are first, if everyone agrees that this is the way to go or if there are alternatives to this to get the content indexed. Are there best practices? All JS-based websites must have this problem, so I am hoping someone can share their experience. The second question regards the optimal number of content pieces ('Stories') displayed per page and the best method to paginate. Should we display e.g. 10 stories and use ?offset in the URL or display 100 stories to google per page and maybe use rel=”next”/"pref" instead. Generally, I would really appreciate any pointers and experiences from you guys as we haven't done this sort of thing before! Cheers, Frank
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | FranktheTank-474970 -
404 with a Javascript Redirect to the index page...
I have a client that is wanting me to issue a 404 on her links that are no longer valid to a custom 404, pause for 10 seconds, then rediirect to the root page (or whatever other redirect logic she wants)...to me it seems trying to game googlebot this way is a "bad idea" Can anyone confirm/deny or offer up a better suggestion?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | JusinDuff0 -
Ever Wise to Intentionally Use Javascript for Global Navigation?
I may be going against the grain here, but I'm going to throw this out there and I'm interested in hearing your feedback... We are a fairly large online retailer (50k+ SKUs) where all of our category and subcategory pages show well over 100 links (just the refinement links on the left can quickly add up to 50+). What's worse is when you hover on our global navigation, you see the hover menu (bot sees them as ) of over 80 links. Now I realize the good rule of thumb is not to exceed 100 links on a page (and if you did your math, you can see we already exceeded that well before we let the bots get to the good stuff we really wanted them to crawl in the first place). So... Is it wise to intentionally shield these global nav links from the bots by using javascript?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | mrwestern0