Hidden Text? Part of the game or a major faux pas?
-
Hey all...
I've been doing some competitive analysis lately on different niches in different cities, and upon looking at source code have noticed MANY sites(typically 2-3 of the top listed sites in each niche) who have hidden text, blocked by a box/logo, colored the same as the background, or both.
Is this a typical practice?
My understanding is Google seriously frowns on this, so is it worth reporting competitors who are doing such things?
I don't see any grey areas in this matter and think it's a serious violation, but here these sites are at the top.
-
Major No-No.
Most likely they will eventually be found out and knocked down. It is painful to wait for that day to occur, I know. Just write more and better content
-
With a few of the sites I am thinking of, they have done an excellent job with SEO and the site actually looks great.
They have done hidden text in ADDITION to all the best practices which seems to have put them over the top.
Two sites in particular, with hidden text, have not been punished in over two years. Go figure.
-
Oy.... this is not good at all. I understand why people do this, but I don't understand how they sleep at night knowing this just isn't ethical. Funny part is, if they got their content in place properly they wouldn't have to resort to these sorts of practices anyway.
-
Major faux pas, never part of the game.
It's definitely a serious violation and at some point there will be a penalty for it. It will arrive in a spam workers list of sites to go through some when, and they'll see it and slap it. There's just not enough spam workers for that to be fast, and maybe it hasn't been reported enough or even at all to get into their lists yet.
It's too much of an old trick to ever work, and keyword density, etc... doesn't do squat now anyway so there's no point.
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
-
Should you bother disallowing low quality links with brand/non-commercial anchor text?
Hi Guys, Doing a link audit and have come across lots of low quality web directories pointing to the website. Most of the anchor text of these directories are the websites URL and not comercial/keyword focused anchor text. So if thats the case should we even bother doing a link removal request via google webmaster tools for these links, as the anchor text is non-commercial? Cheers.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | spyaccounts140 -
Is there a way to no index no follow sections on a page to avoid duplicative text issues?
I'm working on an event-related site where every blog post starts with an introductory header about the event and then a Call To Action at the end which gives info about the Registration Deadline. I'm wondering if there is something we can and should do to avoid duplicative content penalties. Should these go in a widget or is there some way to No Index, No Follow a section of text? Thanks!
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Spiral_Marketing0 -
Is there a way to rel = canonical only part of a page?
Hi guys: I'm doing SEO for a boat accessories store, and for instance they have marine AC systems, many of them, and while the part number, number of BTUs, voltage, and accessories change on some models, the description stays exactly the same across the board on many of them...people often search on Google by model number, and I worry that if I put rel = canonical, then the result for that specific model they're looking for won't come up, just the one that everything is being redirected to. (and people do this much more than entering a site nowadays and searching by product model, it's easier). Excuse my ignorance on this stuff, I'm good with link building and content creation, but the behind-the-scenes aspects... not so much: Can I "rel=canonical" only part of the page of the repeat models (the long description)? so people can still search by model number, and reach the model they are looking for? Am I misunderstanding something here about rel=canonical (Interesting thing, I rank very high for these pages with tons of repeat descriptions, number one in many places... but wonder if google attributes a sort of "across the site" penalty for the repeated content... but wouldn't ranking number 1 for these pages mean nothing's wrong?. Thanks)
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | DavidCiti1 -
Diversifying anchor text question
Hi, I've seen a new article by Dr. Pete on diversifying links for 2013 (http://www.seomoz.org/blog/top-1-seo-tips-for-2013), now my question is this: Dr. Pete talks about mixing up the anchor text for links, is so we don't get caught out by Google or actually mixing it has a better impact? For example: 1. 20 anchor text links targeting just the target term. 2. 20 anchor text links targeting 4 variations of the target term. Is number 2 recommended so things look natural or does it actually have a better impact on SEO. Thanks
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | activitysuper0 -
Can use of the id attribute to anchor t text down a page cause page duplication issues?
I am producing a long glossary of terms and want to make it easier to jump down to various terms. I am using the<a id="anchor-text" ="" attribute="" so="" am="" appending="" #anchor-text="" to="" a="" url="" reach="" the="" correct="" spot<="" p=""></a> <a id="anchor-text" ="" attribute="" so="" am="" appending="" #anchor-text="" to="" a="" url="" reach="" the="" correct="" spot<="" p="">Does anyone know whether Google will pick this up as separate duplicate pages?</a> <a id="anchor-text" ="" attribute="" so="" am="" appending="" #anchor-text="" to="" a="" url="" reach="" the="" correct="" spot<="" p="">If so any ideas on what I can do? Apart from not do it to start with? I am thinking 301s won't work as I want the URL to work. And rel=canonical won't work as there is no actual page code to add it to. Many thanks for your help Wendy</a>
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Chammy0 -
UK Company Major drop in traffic & rankings on one primary keyword since March
I am helping out a small UK company who have had a sudden drop in organic search traffic since March 24th. Investigation highlights some issues with the site,e.g. Potential canonicalization of home page, a few html errors, some inbound links to the /index.html version of the homepage rather than /. But, nothing particualrly major and nothing that is different to pre-March 24th. The indexed pages looks ok in Google (although Bing is ranking the non-www version of the homepage) but this does not appear in Google's index. Searches for the company name on Google.co.uk show it as top result & some keywords are ranking reasonably well (based on homepage). Selecting blocks of text from the homepage and it ranks #1, but its Google rank for the primary keyword has gone from #2 pre-March 24th to not in the top 100 results since. SEOMOZ is grading the page A for the keyword which appears prominently on the page & keyword is the first characters of the title. It is not a particularly competitive keyword. Adding UK to the keyword and the page is Google.co.uk ranked #3. It's almost as if they are being penalised for a single keyword which I've never seen or heard of before. Any ideas? ** The company has never carried out any SEO - white hat or black hat. The site is perfectly normal, nothing dodgy or concerning about it at all.** Thanks in advance for your advice.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | bjalc20110 -
Undocumented anchor-text API result
Regarding the anchor-text api, there is no definition for *imr on the wiki:
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | sycorr
http://apiwiki.seomoz.org/w/page/13991127/Anchor Text API ie. http://lsapi.seomoz.com/linkscape/anchor-text/google.com?Scope=phrase_to_page&Cols=2048&Sort=domains_linking_page&Expires=1329770786.46868 returns "[{"apuimr":5.422834471373288e-12},{"apuimr":4.785130890652429e-13},{"apuimr":2.922901387480201e-09}]" What is *imr?0 -
Internal Anchor Text Penalty Clarification
I believe we may be seeing the initial stages of a penalty for over-using internal anchor text on our ecommerce site. Per Rand and other training, we added related product links and popular category links to our product and category pages. At the time, we did not have an html sitemap in the footer. We're a small to medium sized site with 1,700+ products. We have since added an html sitemap of our categories to our footer. Now we have category links in the sitemap and category pages and product pages with targeted anchor text. I'm beginning to see downward movement on some of those targeted categories. If I have an html sitemap in the footer (category index) should I get rid of the popular category links throughout the rest of the site? Also, with more frequency, I'm seeing a "product index" and "category index" in footers. Is this a best practice? Thanks.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | AWCthreads0