Are Google now indexing iFrames?
-
A client is pulling content through an iFrame, and when searching for a snippet of that exact content the page that is pulling the data is being indexed and not the iFrame page. Seen this before?
-
Yeah, I use iframes and if I want to be sure they are NOT indexed, I Just add a "noindex" tag. You may also want to add a "nofollow" tag to avoid spiders to follow links inside the frame. Using iframes may be a good idea to reduce the number of links on a page (Bruce Clay suggestion).
-
I've never seen it before, but like everyone here said, it's not a good idea.
This makes me wonder though:
1. Can you find the original page using a snippet? And if not:
2. Is the page contained in the iframe indexed? (Or better-phrased, is the page that is being framed "noindex"?)
It makes sense to me that if the framed page is noindex, that Google would index the content and attribute it to the page framing it.
One perfect example:
I embed videos using an iframe and then I make the video unlisted in YouTube. My embedded content is indexed and even displayed as a rich snippet....
-
I have noticed content within iFrames being indexed by google and text within those iFrames being attributed to the page/url that is hosting the iFrame. Not sure how often this applies. I avoid iFrames.
Merchant Circle uses them and their pages get credit for content in them.
-
It might have been covered but it does seem that google is ignoring iframes in relation to commets code posted on sites.for instance: our text cached version.: http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:8IZ95GICp7AJ:gaveltek.com/seoblog/&hl=en&gl=us&strip=1
compare the page title to (use headers it easier)
www.gaveltek.com/seoblog the list "comments" and despite there being some the are not posted. However, I do believe general wordpress comments hold some weight. That is not to sayt that facebook comments do not, its just done via different metrics, like social, and trust, and egngagement.
Cheers
TODD
-
A good way to check is go to google.com and type in your full URL like this:
site:www.domain.com
Then you will be populated with your sites pages of course. Now there is a link there that says: "cache" and you can see what it cached.
I think they may be getting better at knowing what's in a iframe. Look at how many sites use facebook comments on the blog and how do you think thats ran? iframes. Do you remember google and adobe working together at reading .pdf's and flash.
The little magnifying glass has some cool technology behind it that I'm sure helped them know whats really on the site. Without getting to far off track I do feel like they are better at reading iframes. Just my .02c in this thread.
-
last thought... i've only ever used iframes in the aforementioned example. Not an ideal way to display your original content if you want it indexed.
-
It is very typical for Google to ignore iframes. I don't know the precise details of your situation but there are several reasons for iframing that might make sense - this is situational - so no hating!
-
you're an affiliate and using another offer (conversion form) that you have to iframe to generate leads, etc
-
you want to hide duplicate content that appears elsewhere on the site (although there are far more elegant ways to do this)
3)You're pulling video or other syndicated content from a publisher who wants to maintain control (ie not let you outrank them with their own content)
*** Remember that the iframed content can certainly be indexed but usually only from the destination URL's originating source. For example: You are www.insuranceaffilifate.com running an offer from www.insurance.com/form_1011 - you will most likely use insurance.com's form via iframe on your landing page. That form, unless it uses a NOINDEX meta tag, will likely be picked by the search engines from www.insurance.com but will be ignored on your site www.insuranceaffiliate.com.
Hope this helps.
-
-
I have to agree with Julich in that you should move the content to be truly located on www.domain.com instead of iframe.domain.com.
-
I totally agree that they shouldn't be using iFrames and it is part of my recommendations to them, but we need to work with what we have at the moment.
So just to clarify, you would say that www.domain.com which is pulling the data through from iframe.domain.com would rank?
Even though all the content except the navigation, footer, etc is on iframe.domain.com.
-
Normally, it would be www.domain.com (unless it doesn't provide any content outside the iFrame).
But it is not abnormal to also see iframe.domain.com in the SERPS, since it may have some backlinks pointing to it.
Anyway, using iframes is a weird technique and I recommend you merge those into www.domain.com if possible (and don't forget to do some 301 redirections to tell Google your pages have definitely moved to www.domain.com).
-
OK, so if www.domain.com was pulling through content from iframe.domain.com which domain would you expect to rank?
I would personally expect iframe.domain.com to rank as that is actually where the content is and the www.domain.com provides the link to that page. I am currently seeing both domains rank, which has lead me to ask the question.
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
-
Is there a way to get a list of all pages of your website that are indexed in Google?
I am trying to put together a comprehensive list of all pages that are indexed in Google and have differing opinions on how to do this.
Technical SEO | | SpodekandCo0 -
Google indexes page elements
Hello We face this problem that Google indexes page elements from WordPress as single pages. How can we prevent these elements from being indexed separately and being displayed in the search results? For example this project: www.rovana.be When scrolling down the search results, there are a lot of elements that are indexed separately. When clicking on the link, this is wat we see (see attachements) Does anyone have experience with this way of indexing and how can we solve this problem? Thanks! LlAWG4w.png C7XDDYS.png gVroomx.png
Technical SEO | | conversal0 -
How can I get a photo album indexed by Google?
We have a lot of photos on our website. Unfortunately most of them don't seem to be indexed by Google. We run a party website. One of the things we do, is take pictures at events and put them on the site. An event page with a photo album, can have anywhere between 100 and 750 photo's. For each foto's there is a thumbnail on the page. The thumbnails are lazy loaded by showing a placeholder and loading the picture right before it comes onscreen. There is no pagination of infinite scrolling. Thumbnails don't have an alt text. Each thumbnail links to a picture page. This page only shows the base HTML structure (menu, etc), the image and a close button. The image has a src attribute with full size image, a srcset with several sizes for responsive design and an alt text. There is no real textual content on an image page. (Note that when a user clicks on the thumbnail, the large image is loaded using JavaScript and we mimic the page change. I think it doesn't matter, but am unsure.) I'd like that full size images should be indexed by Google and found with Google image search. Thumbnails should not be indexed (or ignored). Unfortunately most pictures aren't found or their thumbnail is shown. Moz is giving telling me that all the picture pages are duplicate content (19,521 issues), as they are all the same with the exception of the image. The page title isn't the same but similar for all images of an album. Example: On the "A day at the park" event page, we have 136 pictures. A site search on "a day at the park" foto, only reveals two photo's of the albums. 3QolbbI.png QTQVxqY.jpg mwEG90S.jpg
Technical SEO | | jasny0 -
Google index graph duration in Google Webmaster Tools
Hello guys, I wonder, my sites are currently being indexed every 7 days, exactly. At Index Status page in GWT. However, this new site gets updated almost everyday, how can I ask google to index faster and more frequently/almost daily? Is it about SItemap.xml frequency ? I changed it today to Daily. Thanks!
Technical SEO | | mdmoz0 -
How long does it take for Google to index a new site and has anyone experienced serious fluctuations in SERP within 2 weeks after launch?
Hi guys, I have recently launched my ecommerce jewellery site - www.luxuryfinejewellery.com - and noticed some serious swings in SERP over the last couple of weeks. From ranking No 2, 3 and 4 for the keyword 'luxury fine jewellery' on Google.com, the homepage periodically disappears from the Top 50 altogether. I thought it was the Sandbox, as I recently purchased the domain name, within the last 6 weeks, however the fact that it does rank on the 1st page some of the time is a mystery. Has anyone also experienced this? Could you provide some advice on what to expect until the the rankings settle. Thanks in advance, Satbir
Technical SEO | | deluxebydesign0 -
Homepage/Root domain de-indexed by Google
This morning I discovered that the homepage/root domain of our company site, http://www.collegeplus.org/, has been de-indexed by Google and Bing. Out IT dept. is claiming it's our fault because we changed the meta title on our homepage. But they will not give me access to GWT to see if there's any issues. I believe the issue lies within our robots.txt file - http://www.collegeplus.org/robots.txt I also don't believe we're suffering a penalty because all of our tier 2 pages are still indexed when any type of branded search is performed. We don't do things that can get a site de-indexed like this. Any ideas on what the issue may be? Or at least something to convince our IT dept. that simply changing a meta title won't get your homepage totally de-indexed? Thanks.
Technical SEO | | explorionary0 -
Rel=canonical + no index
We have been doing an a/b test of our hp and although we placed a rel=canonical tag on the testing page it is still being indexed. In fact at one point google even had it showing as a sitelink . We have this problem through out our website. My question is: What is the best practice for duplicate pages? 1. put only a rel= canonical pointing to the "wanted original page" 2. put a rel= canonical (pointing to the wanted original page) and a no index on the duplicate version Has anyone seen any detrimental effect doing # 2? Thanks
Technical SEO | | Morris770 -
Site not indexing correctly
I am trying to figure out what is going on with my site listings. Google is only displaying my title and url - no description. You can see it when you search for Franchises for Sale. The site is www.franchisesolutions.com. Why could this happen? Also I saw a big drop off in a handful of keyword rankings today. Could this be related?
Technical SEO | | franchisesolutions0