Hiding body copy with a 'read more' drop down option
-
Hi
I just want to confirm how potentially damaging using java script to hide lots of on page body copy with a 'read more' button is ?
As per other moz Q&A threads i was told that best not to use Javascript to do this & instead "if you accomplish this with CSS and collapsible/expandable <DIV> tags it's totally fine" so thats what i advised my clients dev.
However i recently noticed a big drop in rankings aprox 1 weeks after dev changing the body copy format (hiding alot of it behind a 'read more' button) so i asked them to confirm how they did implement it and they said: "done in javascript but on page load the text is defaulting to show" (which is contrary to my instructions)
So how likely is it that this is causing problems ? since coincides with ranking drop OR if text is defaulting to show it should be ok/not cause probs ?
And should i request that they redo as originally instructed (css & collapsible divs) asap ?
All Best
Dan
-
-
Hey Mick, makes good sense to do it that way so yes crazy if that has changed!!
My client scenario different in that three quarters of entire page of body copy (all well written & good quality) client wanted hidden behind a 'read more' button. Whilst im sure this will always be seen/crawled & indexed (although poss not given some of the recent comments) i think given Muellers hangout response theres a very good chance the hidden text will be seriously devalued.
Do you think advisable for me to recommend client re-show all body copy, im thinking so ?
All Best
Dan
-
I've just had fresh content crawled and indexed that is in this scenario. Basically we are saying to the visitor "if you really want to know some more boring technical information then expand this, but we don't want to spoil your experience by vomiting all the data at you at once". Crazy if that is changed.
-
agreed very worrying indeed !
let me know any findings after next crawl here & ill do the same
-
This is pretty disturbing news actually and it doesn't make any sense to me. If Google wants to promote pages with more and better quality content above the fold but also clean pages that users like - the read more buttons were the only functionality to marry both concepts.
At the moment all my pages are still fully indexed but if I see this change come into life I will have to re-think the content and layout of many pages...
-
Hi
For your info and others on this thread I have just seen this on SERT: https://www.seroundtable.com/google-index-click-to-expand-19449.html
And in the comments seen this hangout with John Mueller referenced where he says they discount non-displayed text (aprox 11 mins in): https://plus.google.com/events/cjcubhctfdmckph433d00cro9as
Having said that the client I have been looking into this for non-displayed text is indexed but then last cache date is 21st October which some people say in the thread will change after next crawl/cache.
Just wandering your (or anyone elses thoughts on this are) ?
All Best
Dan
-
Ah ha ! i see it included the full url in the link code
thanks Rafa yes i see similar flux with all my other clients now and none have dodgy links so presume just algorithmic flux, will review in a week or two
all best
dan
-
Hi Dan,
I have just clicked on the link you provided
Since the new Penguin is still rolling out and most ranking changes are at the moment down to this algo refresh I would suggest looking at your link profile for a start and if there is nothing wrong there, simply wait a couple of weeks until the refresh has officially finished and take it from there...
-
great thanks for the reassurance Mick !
-
yep, sound good.
I was working on a site last year and they switched a DNN module based on your scenario without letting me know, having already tested the existing module. First I saw was when rankings and traffic wobbled. In this case the text was lost in the javascript and accounted for about 25-30% of content on all their main pages. Nightmare!
-
grt thanks Mick
have done this now and all normally hidden body copy/content now shows so presume that means G can see it and i no longer need worry about this
-
You want Settings >> Show Advanced Settings >> (Privacy) Content Settings >> (Javascript) Do not allow any site to run javascript >> Finished.
Reload the site and check what you can see, or open up.
-
ok have done this now and all normally hidden body copy/content now shows so presume that means G can see it
-
yes, if the date of the cache is prior. So I would suggest disabling javascript in the browser reload the page and see if the expected text is displayed. If not that's what Google misses.
...and yes Google should show all the text in the cache version (text only) if the cached version is subsequent to your amendment.
-
Sorry just to confirm ....
if the body copy being displayed in GWT under the "This is how Googlebot fetched the page:" does NOT show the text that's revealed after clicking 'read more' button then thats ok since if was a prob would be listed problem such as javascripts blocked etc etc
OR
it is a problem since Googles not seeing the rest of the body copy ?
thanks
dan
-
Ok thanks Rafa that's good news
Rankings must just be just fluctuation or impact of any recent G algo updates since no other changes to site apart from the addition of some exact match anchor text links to product pages & more copy in prod descrips.
will see how next ranking report performs and look into further then if more drops or no bounce back
Re: 404 your correct how did you know without the domain part of the url ? Thanks ill tell dev
Really appreciate all your help Rafa !! thanks again !!
All Best
Dan
-
Partial doesn't necesserily means there is a problem. Check this article by Google: https://support.google.com/webmasters/answer/6066472?hl=en
If that font is the only thing not loading then it's not a problem for crawlers and it wouldn't have affected you rankings.
Btw that link to the font returns 404 error? Why are you loading fonts from a different website in the first place? Have it loaded from your site or from Google.
-
Thanks Rafa , ok done that and only listed issue is:
Googlebot couldn't get all resources for this page. Here's a list:
/fonts/glyphicons-halflings-regular.woff
so not sure if that refers to actual body copy or just some font style or similar etc etc ?
as i mentioned before the status of the fetch is 'partial' though not 'complete' so presume that means an issue, or does that just relate to 'G couldn't get all resources' ?
thanks, Dan
-
the cache version might still be of the page before they did changes to it Mick
-
Thanks Mick i searched cache:www.yoursite (clients hp url) and is showing as it shows usually, with just the first couple of paragraphs then read more button/link.
Are you saying when doing above (searching cache etc) it should show all the content as if i had clicked 'read more' button ? and if doesnt then there is an issue ?
cheers
dan
-
click on it and look at the list of issues - are there any javascripts blocked, unreachable etc.? is the preview complete or elements are missing? is render of this particular page (that lost rankings) different to other pages on your website? talk to your web developers about this and get them to fix any issues there. If there are no issues then the reason for your loss of rankings is somewhere else
-
Either switch javascript off in the browser or search cache:www.yoursite and see if you spot any content missing.
-
ok ive done that but status is saying 'partial' not 'complete' so i take it that means there is an issue ?
-
thanks Rafal will do that now
-
Collapsible divs use jquery which is a javascript. I don't think the rankings drop has got anything to do with it, unless there is an error which prevents cralwrs to access the text content. Fetch and render the page in WMT to see if there are problems.
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
-
Need to change permalink structure - need advice on these two options
I have a client with a robust Wordpress blog that ranks well for a number of high-volume terms. We are doing a site rebuild, and they are adamant they don't want to lose any SERP ranking. However, their permalink structure contains the date the post was published, i.e. https://www.company.com/blog/2018/10/28/blog-post-title The date inclusion is not ideal for obvious reasons, but also because it's creating 404 links when pre-scheduling with Hubspot. Option 1: Change the permalink structure for all posts, past and future, and implement 301 redirects The only reason I'm not outright doing this is because there will be some slippage in the rankings, given that redirects only pass on a percentage of juice. The client doesn't want any slippage. Option 2: Create a new instance of Wordpress in a new subdirectory and continue the blog from there This will mandate a new structure for the blog posts; now posts will be children of /industry-blog/ instead of /blog/, but the old posts will remain as they are under /blog/ (and with dates intact). But I don't know if this will cause some hierarchical confusion that will negatively impact both the old blog and the new blog. Any advice given is appreciated. Please feel free to correct me if I've gotten anything wrong, I've only been practicing SEO for a few years now.
On-Page Optimization | | Marce5210 -
Ignore SEO and traffic/calls dropped
I got caught up in a disaster of a website that consumed 3/4 of a year, all the while our SEO was put on the backburner with only occasional "massaging" to keep it going. Now our traffic has dropped almost 25% along with our incoming calls. Our rankings have remained steadily good- medium but definitely not bad during this period. My question: Who else has had this experience and how long did it take to rebound? TY
On-Page Optimization | | KevnJr
KJr0 -
Canonical tags in the body?
Hi there, Does anyone know if placing canonical tags in the body instead of the header of a page will still "take"? The system we are on means that making an editable header is no easy business and I was just wondering how big of a difference it makes to have it in a different area. Thank you in advance.
On-Page Optimization | | Whittie0 -
How to Structure URL's for Multiple Locations
We are currently undergoing a site redesign and are trying to figure out the best way to structure the URL's and breadcrumbs for our many locations. We currently have 60 locations nationwide and our URL structure is as follows: www.mydomain.com/locations/{location} Where {location} is the specific street the location is on or the neighborhood the location is in. (i.e. www.mydomain.com/locations/waterford-lakes) The issue is, {location} is usually too specific and is not a broad enough keyword. The location "Waterford-Lakes" is in Orlando and "Orlando" is the important keyword, not " Waterford Lakes". To address this, we want to introduce state and city pages. Each state and city page would link to each location within that state or city (i.e. an Orlando page with links to "Waterford Lakes", "Lake Nona", "South Orlando", etc.). The question is how to structure this. Option 1 Use the our existing URL and breadcrumb structure (www.mydomain.com/locations/{location}) and add state and city pages outside the URL path: www.mydomain.com/{area} www.mydomain.com/{state} Option 2 Build the city and state pages into the URL and breadcrumb path: www.mydomain.com/locations/{state}/{area}/{location} (i.e www.mydomain.com/locations/fl/orlando/waterford-lakes) Any insight is much appreciated. Thanks!
On-Page Optimization | | uBreakiFix0 -
Using example.info when example.com is a link farm. Ok? Bad? Doesn't matter?
Second question of the day- I'm helping a friend with his law firm site. He is using example.info because example.com is being used by a link farm. Is this hurting his search efforts? Thanks
On-Page Optimization | | ahossom0 -
What's the best way to handle crawling of photo gallery?
When you have a photo gallery with many search filters and loads and loads of pages, is it best to block all the filters and use google's pagination code? Ex: http://photo.net/gallery/photocritique/filter This site has pages for many different queries. While the page titles are unique, the pages are showing duplicated content.
On-Page Optimization | | cakelady0 -
Reducing the site's header to get more content Above the Fold
The user bizzer posted the following question on the post (http://www.seomoz.org/blog/guide-to-ads😞 "I've got my above the fold area very light on advertising since Panda. But reading #4 about the "template" makes me wonder if I should go further and reduce the height of my header area and maybe even remove one of my two sidebars, so as to increase the content-to-template ratio above the fold. Make sense?" What do you think?
On-Page Optimization | | rpedri0 -
Pages that show in Open Site Explorer that show as 404's in search
When I use Site Explorer to find our Top Pages there are a whole series of pages like this: http://www.nile-cruises-4u.co.uk/mybestbets/mybestbets-culture.html which I think were created when we had a Bulletin Board on the site. Although they are showing in the Top Pages results when you visit the page you get the following error message: HTTP Error 404.0 - Not Found The resource you are looking for has been removed, had its name changed, or is temporarily unavailable. What implications result from these pages still showing in results and what action should we take without messing up our search rankings? Any advice would be gratefully received.
On-Page Optimization | | NileCruises0