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
-
Number of internal links and passing 'link juice' down to key pages.
Howdy Moz friends. I've just been checking out this post on Moz from 2011 and wanted to know how relevant it is today? I'm particularly interested in a number of links we have on our HP potentially harming important landing page rankings because not enough 'link juice is getting to them i.e) are they are being diluted by all the many other links on the page? (deeper pages, faqs, etc etc) It seems strange to me that as Google as has got more sophisticated this would still be that relevant (thus the reason for posting). Anyway, I thought I was definitely worth asking. If we can leverage more out of our on-page efforts then great 🙂
On-Page Optimization | | isaac6630 -
Wordpress 'Hide Title' Feature, does this help shorten title length
Im wondering if anyone with some Wordpress experience can help me. I am using Yoast to create my page titles, but yet Moz tells me that my page titles including my actual page title tag which is 'dumfries wedding photography | Hemera Visuals' by clicking on the 'hide title' feature in wordpress will this in turn stop wordpress from automatically adding my page title and therfor bring my title length down drastically? And if so will I have to wait till google next crawls my page to see if this works? Kind Regards Cameron.
On-Page Optimization | | hemeravisuals120 -
Changing existing URL's to improve SEO
Here's a general question: At what PR/page rank (or Moz 'page authority') would you no longer change an existing URL that's cryptic to one that includes the related page keyword or at least relevant terms? Does using a 301 redirect to the new URL preserve the page rank? Thanks!
On-Page Optimization | | flyntime_tx0 -
Google's mobile-friendly update. How significant is the impact for us?
Hi guys. Recently I got an email from Webmaster-tools saying our site is poorly optimised for mobile devices, and that it’s going to heavily affect rankings from April 21st. I’m worried to say the least. We literary cannot afford a hit on traffic at the moment 😞 We rank well for niche terms like ‘customised diary’ and ‘personalised diary’. So question... Because we rank well for these very specific searches will we still take a hit on rankings after the update? Won’t our high relevancy for those search terms be enough to keep us high in the results? Also, do you know if this change is specific to the users device? E.g) Someone on a mobile device will get mobile-friendly results, whilst users on a laptop will get different results altogether? I'm just trying to get a sense of how much this update will effect us. Any isights, suggestion, or thoughts would be greatly appreciated. Our site. Thanks in advance. This community is invaluable to us 🙂 Isaac - TOAD Diaries.
On-Page Optimization | | isaac6630 -
EMD vs brand? I'm new to moz
Hi to all so this is my first month using moz tools. When I check my competitors and keywords, everyone close to google #1 is a emd site But with google always getting smarter, is it smart in order to compete to get an emd? So say I rank first page #9, or not at all for my brand, if since my site is a construction site, if instead of say abc construction.com I find colorado home builders.com etc would I maybe do better? Or would google give me a bad ranking? I am just so lost? One last question? If I did build a emd site then just pointed my brand to it, would this be good or stupid for seo? thank you for all advice and tips chris
On-Page Optimization | | asbchris0 -
Quick question about bold italics keywords in today's SEO world
Hello guyz do you think that , **or **tags still help you in ranking better for some keyword or this method has become obsolete?****
On-Page Optimization | | ksbnok0 -
Excessive Internal Linking...But it's a product page. What to do?
A few of our companies sites' product pages have the warning about excessive internal links. But these pages are product pages (for example). Should we be worried about this warning? Are there ways to avoid it? Or is it just the nature of the beast...? Thanks in advance!
On-Page Optimization | | DevonIntl0 -
Why isn't SEOMoz using File Extensions (*.html etc) on any of their web page URLs?
...and what is the SEO benefit of this? This video from Matt Cutts suggests using file extentions, except for a directory.
On-Page Optimization | | magicrob0