Is it okay to use hiddencontaining meta information that is a video transcript?
-
I have been using the tools at DotSub.com to transcribe our YouTube videos. They are free, work really great and I highly recommend them. Today I received an email from DotSub with recommendations for SEO on video. I have a question about #5 on their list. Here it is:
"Step 5: Embed the video transcript into the non-visible meta-data of the page"
"Always embed the video transcript in the page meta-data This is done by placing
the content of the transcription within a non-visible HTML element (a hidden
div). While most search engines do not weight non-visible content as high as
visible content, this will still provide additional SEO for your page. Do
this whether you include the full transcript visibly on your page or not."This is something I have never heard before. And, like many of you, I have always heard that putting anything "hidden" in the HTML is a very bad idea. Is this different? Do any of you do this? Is it really a recommended technique?
Thanks all!
Dana
-
Thanks very much Phil. I've gotten so much out of your blog posts and I recommend them to everyone who asks me about video SEO. Yes, flat on the page is working pretty well for us right now. The only times it's impractical is when the video is really long. In those instances we are either including the content via a tab, or even by creating a blog post with the video+transcript (much like what SEOMoz does for WBF videos).
I appreciate you and all the others here responding to this question.
-
I generally concur with the comments so far - it's definitely a good idea to have the transcript within the HTML, marked up with Schema.org and available for users to see.
Set your <div> to style="display:none" and then include a button which will trigger the text display in a drop down, tab or Lightbox overlay.
Alternatively, the Jquery route that Irving suggested is just as good.
Whatever the solution you go with, you just need to stick to the principle of allowing the text to be visible and easily accessible to users if it's also going to be visible to the search enginges.
However, if you're already including transcripts flat on the page, then aside from aesthetics, there's no reason to bother hiding the text .
-
and some people are deaf so you are making your site more handicapped friendly as well as getting that good unique content on your page to boost SEO!
-
That would be redundant. If anything, maybe offer the option to hide the transcript (for people who don't want to read it and it gets in the way). Otherwise, just make sure you mark it up with all the proper mark up.
-
Thanks Oleg. Yes, I totally agree with you and CMC-SD about some users preferring to read the transcript instead of watching the video. We are already including the full transcript on the page with the video itself.
Given that we are already including the text visible on the page, would you still recommend including it in a hidden div? Or is that unnecessarily redundant?
-
I agree! I really like reading transcripts rather than watching videos, so thinking about the user rather than the search engine, I would suggest putting the transcript in a collapsed div.
-
I would not hide text on the site.
a jquery actually shows the text to the user and is spiderable (seo friendly) so i would go that route
click "view transcript" link below the video to see
-
Text in hidden divs is indexed and included in SERPs. The content is still on the page just in video form - I don't see a problem with adding the transcript for SE to "read" the video. I would recommend also offering the option to view the transcript via click for visitors - some people may not have access to sound or prefer reading.
Also be sure to use Schema markup for VideoObject - there is an attribute for transcript that you should apply.
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
-
Scraping Website and Using Our Clients Info
One of our clients on Moz has noticed that another website has been scraping their website and pulling lots of their content without permission. We would like to notify Google about this company but are not sure if that is the right remedy to correct the problem. They appear in search results on Google using the client's name so they seem to be use page titles etc with the client's name in them. Several of the SERP links link to their own website but it pulls in our client's web page. Was hoping anyone could perhaps provide some additional options on how to attack this problem?
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | InTouchMK0 -
Is it Okay to Nofollow all External Links
So, we all "nofollow" most of the external links or all external links to hold back the page rank. Is it correct? As per Google, only non-trusty and paid links must be nofollow. Is it all same about external links and nofollow now?
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | vtmoz0 -
Does Google want contact numbers in the meta description?!
Reading up it seems like there's complete free reign to enter what you want in the meta description and they are not considered a direct ranking signal However I have added contact numbers to the meta descriptions for around 20 reasonably high ranking pages for my company and it seems to have had a negative effect (taken screen grabs and previous rankings) More strangely when you 'inspect' the page the meta description features the desired number yet when you find the page in the serps the meta description just does not feature the number (page has been cached and the description does not carry on) I'm wondering whether such direct changes are seen as spam and therefore negative to the page?
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | Jacksons_Fencing1 -
Is horizontal hashtag linking between 4 different information text pages with a canonical tag to the URL with no hashtag, a White Hat SEO practice?
Hey guys, I need help. hope it is a simple question : if I have horizontal 4 text pages which you move between through hashtag links, while staying on the same page in user experience, can I canonical tag the URL free of hashtags as the canonical page URL ? is this white hat acceptable practice? and will this help "Adding the Value", search queries, and therefore rank power to the canonical URL in this case? hoping for your answers. Best Regards, and thanks in advance!
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | Muhammad_Jabali0 -
Would having a + plus sign between keywords in meta title have an effect on SEO?
I have seen one of my clients' competitors do this in their meta title and it got me a little intrigued... I understand that google uses the + sign as an operator in adwords, and to a certain extent, as a search tool, but would it help or make any difference to the SEO in the meta title/data (eg. 'SEO+Marketing+Services')? Thanks
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | LexisClick10 -
Advice on using the disavow tool to remove hacked website links
Hey Everyone, Back in December, our website suffered an attack which created links to other hacked webistes which anchor text such as "This is an excellent time to discuss symptoms, fa" "Open to members of the nursing/paramedical profes" "The organs in the female reproductive system incl" The links were only visible when looking at the Cache of the page. We got these links removed and removed all traces of the attack such as pages which were created in their own directory on our server 3 months later I'm finding websites linking to us with similar anchor text to the ones above, however they're linking to the pages that were created on our server when we were attacked and they've been removed. So one of my questions is does this effect our site? We've seen some of our best performing keywords drop over the last few months and I have a feeling it's due to these spammy links. Here's a website that links to us <colgroup><col width="751"></colgroup>
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | blagger
| http://www.fashion-game.com/extreme/blog/page-9 | If you do view source or look at the cached version then you'll find a link right at the bottom left corner. We have 268 of these links from 200 domains. Contacting these sites to have these links removed would be a very long process as most of them probably have no idea that those links even exist and I don't have the time to explain to each one how to remove the hacked files etc. I've been looking at using the Google Disavow tool to solve this problem but I'm not sure if it's a good idea or not. We haven't had any warnings from Google about our site being spam or having too many spam links, so do we need to use the tool? Any advice would be very much appreciated. Let me know if you require more details about our problem. <colgroup><col width="355"></colgroup>
| | | |0 -
Embedded videos Youtube or Dailymotion?
We have been ranking No.1 for a nice term for over a year, but in the last few months a competitor has taken 1 and 2 (we are 3rd now). It seems hes using a linking web i.e each of his pages has about 20 text links at the bottom of his page to irrelevant sites which in turn do the same thing giving them a nice PA thats about 5-4 more than mine now. But the interesting thing is that his top 3 links are from videos he has put up on to Dailymotion which has linked back to himself with (no follow links). We use youtube for our embedded videos, but are we missing a trick? should we be using daily motion too? on a side note it looks like he has made some articles from junk submit article sites, that link to his site, his facebook fan page and the dailymotion video.
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | eunaneunan0
