Is hidden content bad for SEO?
-
I am using this plugin to enable Facebook comments on my blog:
https://wordpress.org/plugins/fatpanda-facebook-comments/This shows the comment in an Facebook iFrame. The plugin author claims it's SEO friendly, because the comments are also integrated in the WordPress database. The are included in the post but hidden.
Is that bad for SEO?
-
Providing an alternative way for search engines to access content that is not otherwise available to them, but is clearly available to anyone who "sees" the page is a legitimate use of the Display: None tag. Here is what Google has to say about it: http://www.seroundtable.com/google-hiding-content-17136.html .
-
Hm, I admit it's not so easy to explain the topic. Let me summarize it like this:
My site: WordPress
Issue: Regarding comments on a blog postComments: Usually WordPress uses it's own commenting system. Google can see the comments and this helps for SEO.
Comments on Facebook: To increase my comment rate, I am using a Facebook commenting plugin.
How does it work: Facebook uses an iFrame for comments, so they are visible in Front-End, but not in source code. But: The plugin is smart and takes those comments and puts them into the WordPress database. So WordPress shows the comments in the source code, but not in the Front-End. Only the Facebook comments are shown in the Front-End, but since it's an iFrame not in the source code.
So from Googles perspective the comments are visible in the source code, but they can't find them displayed in the front-end. The question is if that's a bad thing. The reason for me asking is, that some time back I read that lot's of black hats are using hidden content and that you should not do it.
-
Now I'm confused, you said "But it's not visible on front end side (except the Facebook comment iFrame)." Then "the hidden text is not inside the iFrame"
In the source code do you actually see the word iFrame?
-
In this case the hidden text is not inside the iFrame (WordPress comment database), and visible in the source code.
But it's not visible in the front-end.
-
Generally speaking anything in an iFrame will not be indexed for your site and therefore will provide no SEO benefit. So if the hidden text is within the iFrame this will have no positive or negative effect for your site.
-
That's a cool tool, didn't know that yet.
I used it and also checked in the source code. The hidden content is there. But it's not visible on front end side (except the Facebook comment iFrame).
Now is that bad?
-
A quick test for this would be to test your site in http://seo-browser.com and compare it to the same page source code (in browser right click 'View Page Source' or 'View Source' depending on browser) as I'm not sure what elements are being hidden
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
-
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 -
Which URL is better for SEO?
We have a URL structure question: Because we have websites in multiple countries and in multiple languages, we need to add additional elements to our URL structure. Of the two following options, what would be better for SEO? Option 1: www.abccompany.com/abc-ca-en/home.htm Option 2: www.abccompany.com/home.abc.ca.en.htm
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | northwoods-2603420 -
Frames and SEO
In the old days frames were a problem because they could end up being orphaned pages that get indexed and appear in the SERPS but had to navigation so they were useless. Are frames still a problem with Google and if so what are the suggested solutions?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | siteoptimized0 -
404 for duplicate content?
Sorry, I think this is my third question today... But I have a lot of duplicated content on my site. I use joomla so theres a lot of unintentional duplication. For example, www.mysite.com/index.php exists, etc. Up till now, I thought I had to 301 redirect or rel=canonical these "duplicated pages." However, can I just 404 it? Is there anything wrong with this rpactice in regards to SEO?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | waltergah0 -
Duplicate content mess
One website I'm working with keeps a HTML archive of content from various magazines they publish. Some articles were repeated across different magazines, sometimes up to 5 times. These articles were also used as content elsewhere on the same website, resulting in up to 10 duplicates of the same article on one website. With regards to the 5 that are duplicates but not contained in the magazine, I can delete (resulting in 404) all but the highest value of each (most don't have any external links). There are hundreds of occurrences of this and it seems unfeasible to 301 or noindex them. After seeing how their system works I can canonical the remaining duplicate that isn't contained in the magazine to the corresponding original magazine version - but I can't canonical any of the other versions in the magazines to the original. I can't delete the other duplicates as they're part of the content of a particular issue of a magazine. The best thing I can think of doing is adding a link in the magazine duplicates to the original article, something along the lines of "This article originally appeared in...", though I get the impression the client wouldn't want to reveal that they used to share so much content across different magazines. The duplicate pages across the different magazines do differ slightly as a result of the different Contents menu for each magazine. Do you think it's a case of what I'm doing will be better than how it was, or is there something further I can do? Is adding the links enough? Thanks. 🙂
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Alex-Harford0 -
Can a Hosting provider that also hosts adult content sites negatively affect our SEO rankings on a non-adult site hosted on same platform?
We're considering moving a site to a host that also offers hosting for adult websites. Can this have a negative affect on SEO, if our hosting company is in any way associated with adult websites?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | grapevinemktg0 -
Mobile Site - Same Content, Same subdomain, Different URL - Duplicate Content?
I'm trying to determine the best way to handle my mobile commerce site. I have a desktop version and a mobile version using a 3rd party product called CS-Cart. Let's say I have a product page. The URLs are... mobile:
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | grayloon
store.domain.com/index.php?dispatch=categories.catalog#products.view&product_id=857 desktop:
store.domain.com/two-toned-tee.html I've been trying to get information regarding how to handle mobile sites with different URLs in regards to duplicate content. However, most of these results have the assumption that the different URL means m.domain.com rather than the same subdomain with a different address. I am leaning towards using a canonical URL, if possible, on the mobile store pages. I see quite a few suggesting to not do this, but again, I believe it's because they assume we are just talking about m.domain.com vs www.domain.com. Any additional thoughts on this would be great!0 -
Text-indent=-9999em = Bad SEO ?
Since we weren't the ones who designed above mentioned website there is something we really don't understand. They have replaced images with text using css as below examples. CSS ---------> div#logo { background: #fff url(../images/logo.gif) no-repeat 20px 0px; margin-bottom: 30px; } div#logo a { height: 148px; text-indent: -1000em; display: block; } HTML ----------- > ****************** What my question is out of 100 scale how much does this affect SEO ? What if we keep H1 tags black without putting any text between tags ?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Osanda0