# hidden by the header?
-
Can someone please clarify whether hiding
tags behind the image header is an accepted best practice or is frowned upon by Google?
I was doing some competitive analysis and noticed some websites were doing it, but it certainly wasn't egregious.
-
From what i have read Google wants their crawler and end users to see the same content and have the same experience. Based on that, if you have a header image that says "Great Deals" and you want search engines to read that, simply place that content in your ALT tag (SEOMoz has even posted studies showing that the ALT tag holds more relevance than the
in regards to keyword placement).
So my question to you is why would you need the
to be their in the first place?
-
I've read varying things regarding the juice of the image alt text, and would have to believe that the h1 headers carry more influence overall.
I am specifically talking about the
tags being off page or behind the header image, and understand this to be against the best practices.
-
This is my opinion as well, but due to some of the minimal designs out there, it would be difficult to fit an appropriate
without disrupting the design.
-
quick point of clarification - i wasnt suggesting hiding the text, just utilizing alt tags..
-
Hiding text is definitely frowned upon to say the least. The experience should be the same for the user as it is the search engine. I wouldn't recommend doing it simply because your competitors are... even if it may be frustrating. It will catch up with them.
-
I've done it on some websites and I havent on others.. It really depends on the design elements we've been incorporating. I think if you can have the text there without a complete design overhaul that would be considered best practices, but I havent been penalized by google when I have done it with img tag. I do believe that google doesnt pass as much juice through the alt tag though, so you'll have to be clever with your CSS.
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
-
Impact of keyword/keyphrases density on header/footer
Hi, It might be a stupid question but I prefer to clear things out if it's not a problem: Today I've seen a website where visitors are prompted no less than 5 times per page to "call [their] consultants".
On-Page Optimization | | GhillC
This appears twice on the header, once on the side bar (mouse over pop up), once in the body of most of the pages and once in the footer. So obviously, besides the body of the pages, it appears at least 4 times on every single pages as it's part of the website template. In the past, I never really wondered re the menu, the footer etc as it's usually not hammering the same stuff repeatedly everywhere. Anyway, I then had a look at their blog and, given the average length of their articles, the keyword density around these prompts is about 0.5% to 0.8% for each page. This is huge! So basically my question is as follow: is Google's algorithm smart enough to understand what this is and make abstraction of this "content" to focus on the body of the pages (probably simply focusing on the tags)? Or does it send wrong signals and confuse search engine more than anything else? Reading stuff such as this, I wonder how does it work when this is not navigational or links elements. Thanks,
G Note: I’m purposely not speaking about the UX which is obviously impacted by such a hammering process.0 -
Is this hidden content?
Hi all, I was wondering if the homepage of www.dirtylooks.com has hidden content in a search engines eyes. There is some text which appears underneath a tile called "hair tools" that has to be scrolled in order to be viewed by a visitor. As this isn't the typical white on white or off page by CSS hidden content are we in danger of being penalised?
On-Page Optimization | | BenfromBNKR0 -
Having a terrible time ordering the CSS Styles and Scripts in my header
Hi Guys, I am having a terrible time trying to get the correct optimized (for speed, none blocking etc) order for loading my external css and JS. I follow the recommendations from Google Page Speed or Chrome Audit and it seems no matter where I move the CSS file too (top or bottom) it complains about more blocking and stopping rendering of the page. My URL is http://www.MyFairyTaleBooks.com if some smart person out there could help me figure out what I am doing wrong and the order in which my should be organized I'd appreciate it! Oh I'm not a developer but I can re-arrange text in a file! 😉 Thank you!
On-Page Optimization | | MyFairyTaleBooks
Dinesh0 -
Competitor's 'hidden' links harming my site?
Hi everyone, I'm new to both Moz & seo, and am attempting to tackle our site's issues after being hit by panda / penguin, so would be grateful for any advice offered. I bought a website 3 years ago after the previous company that ran it went into administration. Having bought the website, it became apparent that the employees of the previous company had copied the entire site content, and relaunched it with a new look / brand. Over the last 3 years they've rewritten much of the content, but there remains a lot of links from their site back to ours which have had the anchor text stripped out, and point to images on our site which have since been removed, example below... <a href="http://www.MyCompany.com/catalog/images/filename.pdf" target="<a class="attribute-value">_blank</a>"><strong>strong>a> What I'm trying to understand is whether the 404 errors being returned by the broken links, and the presence of 'hidden' links on their site, is likely to reflect badly on our site or theirs? I'm not interested in outing anyone here, and I realise the standard recommendation for these kinds of situations is to write to the company telling them to remove the offending content, but if at all possible I'd prefer to fix our site by improving content & links etc, rather than 'force' them to take action and inadvertently improve their own site's content / rankings. As I say, all advice gratefully received 🙂
On-Page Optimization | | Sandy_M0 -
Good idea to use hidden text for SEO purposes due to picky clients not allowing additional content?
I do SEO for eCommerce websites both in-house and for clients. A few of our clients want increased rankings but are not willing to allow us to make the changes internally to help make that happen. One of which is adding content to the webpages since 90% of them have very little to none. I have a couple clients that are extremely picky about what can be seen on their eCommerce website. They have the site setup the way they want it but it is not SEO friendly in the slightest. The pages (including homepage) have little to no content, and the only things they want changed are things visitors CANNOT see on the webpages (META, ALT Tags etc). The tactic i am wanting to use is often used by spammers but i have a legitimate reason to use this and wanted to know if this would be a good idea. They are wanting to target fairly competitive keywords but are unwilling to allow any on-page changes to add any information and keywords to help with rankings. I was thinking about adding text behind images or hide the text in whatever ways to prevent the end user from viewing it (except for the search engines). My idea was simply to add a paragraph or two of content for the search engines purely to help in ranking because they have a lot of pages that have zero content except for product image and title listings. Is this tactic recommended or does anyone have any other ideas for these type of situations. Thanks,
On-Page Optimization | | VITALBGS
Stephen0 -
Recommendation: Add a canonical URL tag referencing this URL to the header of the page.
Please clarify: In the page optimization tool, seomoz recommends using the canonical url tag on the unique page itself. Is it the same canonical url tag used when want juice to go to the original page? Although the canonical URL tag is generally thought of as a way to solve duplicate content problems, it can be extremely wise to use it on every (unique) page of a site to help prevent any query strings, session IDs, scraped versions, licensing deals or future developments to potentially create a secondary version and pull link juice or other metrics away from the original. We believe the canonical URL tag is a best practice to help prevent future problems, even if nothing is specifically duplicate/problematic today. Please give example.
On-Page Optimization | | AllIsWell0 -
Add Expires Headers
I noticed recommendations from yslow on "add expires headers" but they refer to sites that plug into mine (such as a you tube video). Can anything be done about this recommendation?
On-Page Optimization | | casper4340 -
HTTP Headers
I ran an independant SEO test that recommended I do the following: Missing Header: Cache-Control header missing, should be presentMissing Header: Content-Length header missing, should be presentMissing Header: Content-Encoding - why don't you try using gzip or deflate?Missing Header: Expires header missing, should be presentMissing Header: Last-Modified header missing, should be presentIs any of this necessary?
On-Page Optimization | | BradBorst0