How valuable is content "hidden" behind a JavaScript dropdown really?
-
I've come across a method implemented by some SEO agencies to fill up pages with somehow relevant text and hide it behind a javascript dropdown. Does Google fall for such cheap tricks?
You can see this method used on these pages for example (just scroll down to the bottom) - it's all in German, but you get the idea I guess:
http://www.insider-boersenbrief.de/
http://www.deko-und-kerzenshop.de/
How is you experience with this way of adding content to a site? Do you think it is valuable or will it get penalised?
-
Hey guys -
Good question here. You are right, JFKORN, that the scenario I described in my post was where content that should be accessible to Google was hidden behind Javascript. Of course, Google is now indexing Javascript and can parse it quite well, so I'm not sure it still holds true, but I still recommend, to be safe, to not serve content using Javascript.
It seems to me, though, that you are asking the opposite. But what they are doing here seems to be legit to me. In my mind, it is not any different from simply using a collapsible DIV to put tabs onto a page, like on this page: http://www.rei.com/product/812097/black-diamond-posiwire-quickpack-quickdraw-set-package-of-6. I would actually say that it's fine to do this. But, be careful with the content because you do not want to get into "stuffing" the pages with keywords, which can hurt your rankings, even without an official penalty. I've seen this more as an assumed algorithmic penalty that then went away when the text was removed.
So be careful, but I don't think you'd be doing anything greyhat here.
-
Thank you for the reply. I checked the link you posted, good information there. The only thing I was thinking about: The scenario John described wasn't necessarily content hidden behind an accessible dropdown. I'm still wondering if this makes any difference to Google. Hiding content to users completely or giving them the choice to display it by clicking the dropdown button seems different to me. One could also do this using CSS, just like with CSS dropdown navigation. There wouldn't even have to be any JS involved. Seems all pretty grey-hat to me though.
-
UNANIMOUS. Dont do it. We had several sites we were working on, from an acquisition, that had it hidden and did some extensive research last month and got consistent feedback that it will be picked up by google.
This guys name is john doherty. He is an active contributor to seomoz and I have read some great seo articles from him.....in this one he gives an example of an seo audit and what to make sure you look for.....
http://www.johnfdoherty.com/seo-facepalms-dont-hide-content-behind-javascript/
Without any lack of clarity he tells you not to do it.....we got the same feedback from several other folks in seo at the agency level.
Good luck.
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
-
Duplicate Content and Subdirectories
Hi there and thank you in advance for your help! I'm seeking guidance on how to structure a resources directory (white papers, webinars, etc.) while avoiding duplicate content penalties. If you go to /resources on our site, there is filter function. If you filter for webinars, the URL becomes /resources/?type=webinar We didn't want that dynamic URL to be the primary URL for webinars, so we created a new page with the URL /resources/webinar that lists all of our webinars and includes a featured webinar up top. However, the same webinar titles now appear on the /resources page and the /resources/webinar page. Will that cause duplicate content issues? P.S. Not sure if it matters, but we also changed the URLs for the individual resource pages to include the resource type. For example, one of our webinar URLs is /resources/webinar/forecasting-your-revenue Thank you!
Technical SEO | | SAIM_Marketing0 -
Combining variants of "last modified", cache-duration etc
Hiya, As you know, you can specify the date of the last change of a document in various places, for example the sitemap, the http-header, ETag and also add an "expected" change, for example Cache-Duration via header/htaccess (or even the changefreq in the sitemap). Is it advisable or rather detrimental to use multiple variants that essentially tell browser/search engines the same thing? I.e. should I send a lastmod header AND ETag AND maybe something else? Should I send a cache duration at all if I send a lastmod? (Assume that I can keep them correct and consistent as the data for each will come from the very same place.) Also: Are there any clear recommendations on what change-indicating method should be used? Thanks for your answers! Nico
Technical SEO | | netzkern_AG0 -
Staging site and "live" site have both been indexed by Google
While creating a site we forgot to password protect the staging site while it was being built. Now that the site has been moved to the new domain, it has come to my attention that both the staging site (site.staging.com) and the "live" site (site.com) are both being indexed. What is the best way to solve this problem? I was thinking about adding a 301 redirect from the staging site to the live site via HTACCESS. Any recommendations?
Technical SEO | | melen0 -
Duplicate Content
Hi, we need some help on resolving this duplicate content issue,. We have redirected both domains to this magento website. I guess now Google considered this as duplicate content. Our client wants both domain name to go to the same magento store. What is the safe way of letting Google know these are same company? Or this is not ideal to do this? thanks
Technical SEO | | solution.advisor0 -
Remotely Loaded Content
Hi Folks, I have a two part question. I'd like to add a feature to our website where people can click on an ingredient (we manufacture skin care products) and a tool-tip style box pops up and describes information about the ingredient. Because many products share some of the same ingredients, I'm going to load this data from a source file via AJAX. My questions are: Does this type of remotely-fetched content have any effect on how a search engines views and indexes the page? Can it help contribute to the page's search engine ranking? If there are multiple pages fetching the same piece of remotely-fetched content, will this be seen as duplicated content? Thanks! Hal
Technical SEO | | AlabuSkinCare0 -
Can name="author" register as a link?
Hi all, We're seeing a very strange result in Google Webmaster tools. In "Links to your site", there is a site which we had nothing to do with (i.e. we didn't design or build it) showing over 1600 links to our site! I've checked the site several times now, and the only reference to us is in the rel="author" tag. Clearly the agency that did their design / SEO have nicked our meta, forgetting to delete or change the author tag!! There are literally no other references to us on this site, there hasn't every been (to our knowledge, at least) and so I'm very puzzled as to why Google thinks there are 1600+ links pointing to us. The only thing I can think of is that Google will recognise name="author" content as a link... seems strange, though. Plus the content="" only contains our company name, not our URL. Can anybody shed any light on this for me? Thanks guys!
Technical SEO | | RiceMedia0 -
A rel="canonical" to www.homepage.com/home.aspx Hurts my Rank?
Hello, The CMS that I use makes 3 versions of the homepage:
Technical SEO | | EvolveCreative
www.homepage.com/home.aspx homepage.com homepage.com/default.aspx By default the CMS is set to rel=canonical all versions to the www.homepage.com/home.aspx version. If someone were to link to a website they most likely aren't going to link to www.homepage.com/home.aspx, they'll link to www.homepage.com which makes that link juice flow through the canonical to www.homepage.com/home.aspx right? Why make that extra loop at all? Wouldn't that be splitting the juice? I know 301's loose 1-5 % juice, but not sure about canonical. I assume it works the same way? Thanks! http://yoursiteroot/0 -
How do you add a description to the Meta Description area to Tag Pages in Wordpress? This way I do not get the errors: "Missing Meta Description Tag" from SEOMoz Bot? Thanks!
I tried to add descriptions to my tags in Wordpress (well actually one to test), but I still keep getting the "Missing Meta Description Tag" error. Any suggestions on how to fix this in Wordpress? Thanks!
Technical SEO | | jhblogger0
