Seo style="display: none;" ?
-
i want to have a funktion which shortens text in categorie view in my shop.
apple is doing this in their product configurator
see the "learn more" button at the right side:
http://store.apple.com/us/configure/MC915LL/A
apple is doing this by adding dynamic content but i want it more seo type by leaving the content indexable by google.
i know from a search that this was used in the past years by black had seos to cover keywordstuffing.
i also read an article at google.
i beleive that this is years ago and keywordstuffing is completly no option anymore.
so i beleive that google just would recognise it like the way its meant to be.
but if i would not be sure i would not ask here
what do you think?
-
exactly, so in this case you are completely safe.
-
thanx alot!
-
If you are doing it as a way of formatting the page and still offering an option or button that allows the user to see the rest of the text, then it is not the same thing that you are thinking of in regards to Google. Google states that you should not hide text on the page to purposely try and trick the search engine.
In E-Commerce situations it is very common to hide part of the text, for instance when you have 4 tabs for "description, features, specification, colors, etc." it is a good idea to use a 'display: none' so that all 3 of the tabs are not shown all the time. This is not considered Black Hat, it is considered good design.
Matt Cutts has said quite a few times, if it is good for the user it is good for Google.
It is when you intentionally hide a block of text on the page with no way for the user to view it that you are using Black Hat technique.
-
yes, we have a button with real text layed on it which says more information or so.
the funny thing is google once sayed clearly dont do this and the text is still available. i remeber that this came out something like 5 years ago.
-
I think it really depends on the purpose. I make websites everyday, and i use style="display:none;" on almost ever page of them. I think if it is used for a design purpose it is completely ok, and no i don't think it is keyword stuffing. Is there a function on the site where a user action unhides this content? or are you trying to hide it always?
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
-
SEO Links in Footer?
Hi, One of my clients uses a pretty powerful SEO tool, won't mention the name. They now have a "link equity" tool, which they are using on a lot of their client's sites, which include tons of fortune 500 companies. It involves add footer links to your site that change based on the content of the page they are on. The machine learning tries to figure out the most related pages and links to them with the heading tag of that page as the anchor text. Initially this sounds very spammy to me. But then, it seems a lot like "related products" tools that many companies use. The goal for this tool is to build up internal linking, especially for deeper pages on their site. They have over 10,000 currently. What are everyone's thoughts on this strategy?
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | vetofunk2 -
Disavow or not? Negative SEO
Since last November we have been receiving a lot of low quality backlinks from over 700 websites. It looks like one of our pages from our website has been copied with the links being kept as they are. I have left a link to an example of this here: https://goo.gl/eWQODJ Please note, all examples seem to be copied in the same way. We have also started seeing a decrease in the amount of organic traffic (Analytics Picture), As you can see the decrease is not yet so drastically high, but it is still a decrease and this is the third consecutive month we have seen this decrease. Do you think it is worth it to use Disavow tool for all of these bad link or not? uuuLt
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | Tiedemann_Anselm1 -
More pages is good for SEO? Is this true?
Hi Guys I have a question, I was told the more pages I have the better for SEO, Is this true?
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | edward-may0 -
E-Commerce Cart Migration SEO Advice
Hi all, First time post here. We operate a small ecommerce store and plan on moving cart, most likely from Interspire to Magento or possibly Prestashop. We want to be sure not to damage our current search rankings when making this move and ideally improve our rankings at the same time by utilizing the new cart’s <acronym title="Search Engine Optimization">seo</acronym> functionality as best we can. Stage 1 of the project will see us simply move our current store from one cart to another. For this move we are keeping our existing single domain and intend on moving our current set up without making many, if any changes to content, product descriptions , URL’s etc as we believe this best practice for ensuring our current rankings remain as they are- is such thinking correct? Or should we do otherwise Stage 2 would see us operate a multi lingual, multistore, with 4 domains operating with 1 back end. For the 3 new domains we are looking to set up these storefronts in whichever manner will be most beneficial from an <acronym title="Search Engine Optimization">seo</acronym> perspective We welcome any advice as to what we should consider? What we should and shouldn’t do? and best practices for this project Please advise if any other information is required to best answer our query Thanks for taking the time to read our post, any forthcoming tips and advice will be greatly appreciated
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | StuSol0 -
Recovering from Black Hat/Negative SEO with a twist
Hey everyone, This is a first for me, I'm wondering if anyone has experienced a similar situation and if so, what the best course of action was for you. Scenario In the process of designing a new site for a client, we discovered that his previous site, although having decent page rank and traffic had been hacked. The site was built on Wordpress so it's likely there was a vulnerability somewhere that allowed someone to create loads of dynamic pages; www.domain.com/?id=102, ?id=103, ?id=104 and so on. These dynamic pages ended up being malware with a trojan horse our servers recognized and subsequently blocked access to. We have since helped them remedy the vulnerability and remove the malware that was creating these crappy dynamic pages. Another automated program appears to have been recently blasting spam links (mostly comment spam and directory links) to these dynamically created pages at an incredibly rapid rate, and is still actively doing so. Right now we're looking at a small business website with a touch over 500k low-quality spammy links pointing to malware pages from the previously compromised site. Important: As of right now, there's been no manual penalty on the site, nor has a "This Site May Have Been Compromised" marker in the organic search results for the site. We were able to discover this before things got too bad for them. Next Steps? The concern is that when the Penguin refresh occurs, Google is going to notice all these garbage links pointing to those malware pages and then potentially slap a penalty on the site. The main questions I have are: Should we report this proactively to the web spam team using the guidelines here? (https://www.google.com/webmasters/tools/spamreport?hl=en&pli=1) Should we request a malware review as recommended within the same guidelines, keeping in mind the site hasn't been given a 'hacked' snippet in the search results? (https://support.google.com/webmasters/topic/4598410?hl=en&ref_topic=4596795) Is submitting a massive disavow links file right now, including the 490k-something domains, the only way we can escape the wrath of Google when these links are discovered? Is it too hopeful to imagine their algorithm will detect the negative-SEO nature of these links and not give them any credit? Would love some input or examples from anyone who can help, thanks in advance!
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | Etna0 -
Explain To Me How Negative SEO ISNT Real?
I'm seeing lots of "offers" springing up to do negative SEO on your competitors. I know people keep insisting this sort of thing is just a bogeyman, but follow my logic here: We know the Penguin update PENALIZED, and not just devalued "over optimization." Read: exact match keyword links. We know that if your link profile is too "unnaturally" keyword heavy, (it should be majority your brand or your domain or your company name, etc) you get penalized. Again, not devalued, PENALIZED. Ok. So what is to stop a blackhatter from using one of those software bots to just kill a competitor? Knowing the above two points, lets say a website is ranking for "cool widgets". Why not just create a bunch of exact match keyword spam links for "cool widgets" targeting that website. In a while, the Penguin penalty kicks in and bammo. The thing that scares me about the post Penguin landscape is that google has specifically named an activity ("over optimization") that will get you PENALIZED. So, don't do that, right? Except, that means they've explicitly outlined an activity that will be penalized, and is easy for others to do to you, and that you would be powerless to prevent. I await the usual "this is an age old worry that has never come true" replies. But if you reply that way, ask yourself, can you refute the logic of the points above? And also... oh no... It's happening. I'm seeing it.
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | brianmcc1 -
SEO Experiment with Google Docs
Please check out this doc - https://docs.google.com/document/d/19VS4SnVvq6VJHQAIrB3CX7iL1ivZU4DH6fyfrHLsNFk/edit Any insights will be highly appreciated! Oleksiy
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | wcrfintl0
