Does Google bot read embedded content?
-
Is embedded content "really" on my page?
There are many addons nowadays that are used by embedded code and they bring the texts after the page is loaded.
For example - embedded surveys.
Are these read by the Google bot or do they in fact act like iframes and are not physically on my page?
Thanks
-
If you look at most of the Facebook comment implementations, they're usually embedded with an iframe.
Technically speaking, that is making the content load from another source (not on your site).
As we're constantly seeing Google evolve with regard to "social signals", however, I suspect embedded Facebook comments may begin to have an impact if they pertain to content that is actually located on your website.
-
Thanks!
I'm guessing it will remain a no for me since it is third party scripts - a black box for that matter.
What do you think about Facebook comments then?
Not readable as well? -
I didn't see any recent test for 2013, but it's been analyzed quite a bit, and the 2 links below expand a bit on what I mentioned.
The conclusion on the first one below is that it won't index content loaded dynamically from a javascript file on another server/domain.
http://www.seomoz.org/ugc/can-google-really-access-content-in-javascript-really
Here's the link that talks about extra programming necessary to make AJAX content crawlable and indexable.
http://support.google.com/webmasters/bin/answer.py?hl=en&answer=174992
-
Thank you all.
Here is an example from survey monkey:
There many other tools that look quite the same.
The content it loads is not visible in the view source.
-
Googlebot has become extremely intelligent since its inception, and I'd guess that most members here would probably agree that it's gotten to the point where it can detect virtually any type of content on a page.
For the purposes of analyzing the actual content that it indexes and uses for ranking / SEO, however, I'd venture to guess that the best test would be viewing the page source after the page has loaded.
If you can see the content you're questioning in the actual HTML, then Google will probably index it, and use it considerably for ranking purposes.
On the other hand, if you just see some type of javascript snippet / function where the content would otherwise be located in the page source, Google can probably read it, but won't likely use it heavily when indexing and ranking.
There are special ways to get Google to crawl such content that is loaded through javascript or other types of embeds, but it's been my experience that most embeds are not programmed this way by default.
-
Is it's easier to analyze if you have an example URL. These can be coded many different ways and a slight change can make a difference.
-
What language is the code of the embedded survey?
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
-
Did Google Ignore My Links?
Hello, I'm a little new to SEO, but I recently was featured (around 2 yrs ago) on some MAJOR tech blogs. For some reason however, my links aren't getting picked up for over 2 years - not even in MOZ, or other link checker services. - By now I should have had amazing boost from this natural building, but not sure what happened? This was completely white hat and natural links. The links were after the article was created though, would this effect things? - Please let me know if you have any advice! - Maybe I need to ping these some how or something? - Are these worthless? Thanks so much for your help! Here's some samples of the links that were naturally given to http://VaultFeed.com http://thenextweb.com/microsoft/2013/09/13/microsoft-posts-cringe-worthy-windows-phone-video-ads-mocking-apple/ http://www.theverge.com/2013/9/15/4733176/microsoft-says-pulled-iphone-parody-ads-were-off-the-mark http://www.theregister.co.uk/2013/09/16/microsoft_mocks_apple_in_vids_it_quickly_pulls/ http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-2420710/Microsoft-forced-delete-cringe-worthy-spoof-videos-mocking-new-range-iPhones.html And a LOT more... Not sure if these links will never be valid, or maybe I'm doing something completely wrong? - Is there any way for Google to recognize these now, and then they'll be seen by MOZ and other sites too? I've done a LOT of searching and there's no definitive advice I've seen for links that were added after the URL was first indexed by Google.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | DByers0 -
Can Google read content that is hidden under a "Read More" area?
For example, when a person first lands on a given page, they see a collapsed paragraph but if they want to gather more information they press the "read more" and it expands to reveal the full paragraph. Does Google crawl the full paragraph or just the shortened version? In the same vein, what if you have a text box that contains three different tabs. For example, you're selling a product that has a text box with overview, instructions & ingredients tabs all housed under the same URL. Does Google crawl all three tabs? Thanks for your insight!
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | jlo76130 -
Is Google ignoring my canonicals?
Hi, We have rel=canonical set up on our ecommerce site but Google is still indexing pages that have rel=canonical. For example, http://www.britishbraces.co.uk/braces/novelty.html?colour=7883&p=3&size=599 http://www.britishbraces.co.uk/braces/novelty.html?p=4&size=599 http://www.britishbraces.co.uk/braces/children.html?colour=7886&mode=list These are all indexed but all have rel=canonical implemented. Can anyone explain why this has happened?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | HappyJackJr0 -
Sitemap and content question
This is our primary sitemap https://www.samhillbands.com/sitemaps/sitemap.xml We have a about 750 location based URL's that aren't currently linked anywhere on the site. https://www.samhillbands.com/sitemaps/locations.xml Google is indexing most of the URL because we submitted the locations sitemap directly for indexing. Thoughts on that? Should we just create a page that contains all of the location links and make it live on the site? Should we remove the locations sitemap from separate indexing...because of duplicate content? # Sitemap Type Processed Issues Items Submitted Indexed --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- 1 /sitemaps/locations.xml Sitemap May 10, 2016 - Web 771 648 2 /sitemaps/sitemap.xml Sitemap index May 8, 2016 - Web 862 730
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | brianvest0 -
Google Penalty Checker Tool
What is the best tool to check for the google penalty, What penalty hit the website. ?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Michael.Leonard0 -
Link from Google.com
Hi guys I've just seen a website get a link from Google's Webmaster Snippet testing tool. Basically, they've linked to a results page for their own website test. Here's an example of what this would look like for a result on my website. http://www.google.com/webmasters/tools/richsnippets?q=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.impression.co.uk There's a meta nofollow, but I just wondered what everyone's take is on Trust, etc, passing down? (Don't worry, I'm not encouraging people to go out spamming links to results pages!) Looking forward to some interesting responses!
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | tomcraig860 -
Google Penalty or Not?
One of my sites I work with got this message: http://www.mysite: Unnatural inbound linksJune 27, 2013 Google has detected a pattern of artificial or unnatural links pointing to your site. Buying links or participating in link schemes in order to manipulate PageRank are violations of Google's Webmaster Guidelines. As a result, Google has applied a manual spam action to mysite.com/. There may be other actions on your site or parts of your site. But, when I got to manual actions it says: Manual Actions No manual webspam actions found. -- So which is it??? I have been doing link removal, but now I am confused if I need to do a reconsideration request or not.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | netviper0 -
Google +1 and Yslow
After adding Google's +1 script and call to our site (loading asynchronously), we noticed Yslow is giving us a D for not having expire headers for the following scripts: https://apis.google.com/js/plusone.js
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | GKLA
https://www.google-analytics.com/ga.js
https://lh4.googleusercontent.com... 1. Is their a workaround for this issue, so expire headers are added to to plusone and GA script? Or, are we being to nit-picky about this issue?0