Hidden text that's not really "hidden" - seo
-
Hi guys,
I have a question for you about a thing I saw on a website.
I've attached the prints.
They have like "hidden text". It must be good for indexation, they can
target a lot of important keywords in it, and still keep the website
"clean".
Is this penalized by google if discovered? Do they see this as black hat?Thanks,
Ricardo
?name=Captura+de+ecra%CC%83+2012-08-11%2C+a%CC%80s+06.00.36.png ?name=Captura+de+ecra%CC%83+2012-08-11%2C+a%CC%80s+06.00.36.png ?name=Captura+de+ecra%CC%83+2012-08-11%2C+a%CC%80s+05.59.56.png
-
I don't think this is black hat stuff. It looks like some type of rotating banner like lots of sites have. Now, if the so called "hidden" text is just a random list of keywords then this would look more manipulative.
In my mind, hidden text is more like when someone displays the text off of the screen with CSS or uses white text on a white background.
-
When deciding if a technique is black hat, we need to specifically state which one of Google's Guidelines the presentation violates. Google's Guidelines are broken in to three areas: Design and Content Guidelines, Technical Guidelines, and Quality Guidelines. A quick review of the first two areas shows the page does not violate those guidelines. The question is whether this method violations Google's Quality Guidelines.
The only specific Quality Guidelines one would suggest this site violates is "hidden text and links". Clearly, the method used here does not violate that guideline. From the Google site:
http://support.google.com/webmasters/bin/answer.py?hl=en&answer=66353
Hiding text or links in your content can cause your site to be perceived as untrustworthy since it presents information to search engines differently than to visitors. Text (such as excessive keywords) can be hidden in several ways, including:
- Using white text on a white background
- Including text behind an image
- Using CSS to hide text
- Setting the font size to 0
So none of the "specific guidelines" are violated. The next question is whether the site violates any of the "basic principles". There is only one which causes concern:
Avoid tricks intended to improve search engine rankings. A good rule of thumb is whether you'd feel comfortable explaining what you've done to a website that competes with you. Another useful test is to ask, "Does this help my users? Would I do this if search engines didn't exist?"
The question is whether a Google Spam Team member would manually penalize a site solely for this particular issue. The spam team members are highly calibrated and must follow strict guidelines. In my experience they would not presently penalize such a page, but I would love to receive a definitive response. Even if the question was asked directly, we would likely receive general info rather then "yes this violates our guidelines" or "no, it does not". It does not seem to go far enough to violate the guidelines.
Either way, I would state my belief the presentation on this site (scasino.com) is not helpful for users and should not be used in its present format. If it was a rotating banner that automatically cycled through the 5 pages, then clearly it would be fine. The only reason the question arises is the user needs to take an action, clicking one of the numbers, in order for the content to display.
Google has come a long way recently. With their "Above The Fold" update and other changes, I am confident Google understands what content is immediately visible on the page, what content the user is likely to engage with (i.e. scroll down on the page) and what content users are unlikely to engage with (such as pressing these numbers).
I don't believe much in "grey hat". Something either complies with Google Guidelines, or it does not. With that said, this particular issue is subject to the interpretation of Google as to how likely a user is to interact with this setup, and whether they believe this technique was done deliberately to manipulate search rankings.
In summary, my response is NO, it would not draw a manual penalty.
-
I agree with Host1.
Stay away from these practices.
-
Yes, this is seen as black hat by google and will be penalized.
See http://support.google.com/webmasters/bin/answer.py?hl=en&answer=66353
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
-
Blog hasn't ranked since reposting.
Hey Moz fam! I had a blog that was doing pretty well for the target keyword. Unfortunately, to make a long story short, we had an image in it we weren't supposed to so I unpublished it for a few days while we got that sorted out. Since republishing (with all the same content) it has not gotten a single impression. I inspected the URL and it is totally eligible but nothing in the way of organic traffic. Any ideas on how I can recover?
Content Development | | danieldaher1 -
How do I write for SEO?
Hi there, I am starting to write a blog and I wanted to know how to write for SEO correctly? I have been reading a lot about this subject lately and I found very different opinions in terms of length and keyword use. Could you give me some advise about this? Thank you!!
Content Development | | lucywrites0 -
"Get price" vs "Request a Quote"
I've read somewhere that "Request a Quote" can sometimes put people off a little bit and that Ill be better having "Get Price". Were an installation service company. I cna have a PRicing page were the customer can fill some information and be provided with a price on the website. Would this be a better option than having a request a quote page? Has anyone had any positive or negative experience with this strategy?
Content Development | | paulfoz16090 -
If my blog is on Wordpress, and I've installed the AMP plug-in, what do I need to do to get Google to start indexing all my posts as AMP pages?
If I add /amp to the end of any of my posts, I can see that the plug-in is working. It's been months since I installed it, though, and Google hasn't indexed any of the AMP pages. Am I missing a step?
Content Development | | DeanRamadan0 -
Updating blogs - SEO best practice
Thinking of new blog content and one option obviously is to check out historical popular blogposts via Analytics and do fresh versions of those. So my question is what is best practice: 1. Copy and paste the old blogpost copy but edit it to be slightly different while still having the old blogpost live or 2. just update the old one and re-promote I assume it's better to have a new version of the blogpost?
Content Development | | digitalbua1 -
Which is better for seo purposes? site/blog or site/community?
Hi Guys I was wondering if you could help on this one. We are in the process of setting up a wordpress blog for our website to aid our content marketing efforts, and was wondering what main url for this blog is going to be the best for seo purposes? So of the following 2 which one is going to be the better one? site.com/blog or site.com/community If anyone could get back to me on this I would appreciate it. Thanks David
Content Development | | DavidZA10 -
SEO All in One Not Showing Up
I am working at a company that has had SEO All in One installed on our Wordpress blog for awhile, but the Meta data is not being published. When looking at a draft of the post the fields are automatically filled with the blog post (I would like the possibility of manually changing the meta sometimes). However, regardless of that the Meta titles, etc.. on the live site are blank and don't use what is written in the SEO All in One pack at all. Any suggestions for me? Thanks!
Content Development | | theLotter0 -
How to best implement "metered model" on a site
Hi, I'm scratching my head over how to best implement the "metered model" on a site without users being able to game it all too easily. Has anybody in this QA forums implemented one before and is willing to share his/her best practises and findings? Currently I think raising the bar to force everybody to login is a bad idea + we would still need to open the site for google and other engines and can be tricked that way. Also this might lead to some penalty (cloaking)? Using cookies might not be enought as I think almost every Internet user these days knows that this might be the #1 place to look and they are deleted in a second. Counting based on a users IP-adress is also a bit critical as this is not accurate enough. Should we just use cookies and hope for the best?
Content Development | | jmueller0