Javascript
-
Hi there,
Quick question:
Does Google parse javascript?
I have a html ad which contain the anchor text linking to one of our product pages, however the ad unit are javascript based and from this the code is not visible on page source through the browser.
Kind Regards
-
Yeah, I know can you believe it Anyway, look we know lots of websites are doing it, yes even the big brands and are ranking well due to this strategy, I suppose having a big budget to play with, the temptation is just too much.
I am paranoid also, isn't everyone in this industry, I mean if you do follow Google's guidelines, there is no way you are going to rank well for competitive keywords, I look across all industries, especially retail and they are all it.
You have got to be more aggressive I think to gain good SERPs
-
What? Google allows people to rank who have exact anchor text on sites they are so clearly paying for links on? Get out! No, I totally agree with you. It is pretty ridiculous what gets let through. It makes it really tough to do the "right" thing and follow Google's standards.
If I were you, I would look at how high value this domain is where you are placing the ad. If it has a really strong domain authority and a good reputation overall (it ranks, it gets traffic, it has decent social performance, etc.) then I would definitely keep the ad link set to "nofollow" just because it is more likely to be found since that site is higher profile. A low profile site you might get away with it.
That being said, I'm paranoid and I tend to err on the side of "nofollow" because I don't want to ever tell a client "Uh, yeah, you know that thing I did on that link...yeah, sorry Mr. Client, it got you penalized." Despite many flaws, Google is getting better at detecting these things so I don't want to put sites I manage in a situation where they could be at risk as a result of some Panda-on-steroids type change.
As for guest posting, is that really forcing it in a spammy way? I mean, if you build a relationship with a webmaster and get a guest post there as a result of that, then the guest post is a result of a natural relationship. If you are paying for the guest post, that would be spammy.
-
Thanks for the reply Matthew.
Is it really that spammy? I'm just trying to get the most out of my advertising.
Look it's far less spammy than what my competitors are doing, these guys are big brands, they have exact anchor text links on non-relevant websites, all the big players are doing it, i'm not saying monkey see monkey do, I just thought it was thinking outside the box a little rather than putting exact anchor text links on non-relevant websites, and the bizarre thing is, my competitors are ranking well for these keywords, and yes it's the only link building strategy they have and been doing so for years.
I'm sure it's not a big surprise to hear the above, even with the panda update, it just does not catch these websites out.
One of my main strategies is writing guest posts and these are improving the SERPs for the target keywords, if you sticking to the guidelines, even guest posting would not be allowed, I mean your deliberately forcing the back-link, Google says everything should come naturally, yeah right!
-
On the PR fall, was it just one link or several links? If it was just one link, it would be hard to believe the penalty for just that link was that severe. What about other factors - like domain authority in OSE, rankings, organic traffic, etc.? Did that change as a result of the follow/nofollow?
Gary, in response to your question - you are right, you do lose that second opportunity from having SEO value and traffic value. Honestly though I would play by Google's rules on this one and nofollow that link. I don't think the penalty would be so severe that you would lose rankings immediately but you don't want to get caught doing something spammy - there is no long term value there.
With that link no followed though what other link opportunities are on that site other than the ad? For instance, if it is a news website or blog (let's say) where this ad is placed, can you talk to the editors of that site about them interviewing you about the product you are promoting? Or, if it is a blog, can you write a guest post? What I'm getting at is then you can have the link from this website along with having the ad. That way you get the SEO value plus the traffic value from the same website.
-
I doubt that the fall in PR was because you did not have a nofollow.
-
Well, if you don't use the nofollow for a promotional link you risk your site to be penalized.
I experienced that, a fall from PR 5 to PR 4 for my home page at www.jobintourism.it. Then, a few days after that I had changed the link, filling in the correct value for the rel attribute, the PR was 5 again. It may be a dangerous game. -
Hi Matthew,
Thanks for the reply.
Ok, the ad is on an external website, usually these ads are just images pointing to our website, however I thought that by producing the ad in a way that the text on the ad can be read by search engines, I would get 2 benefits, first of all the ad will generate traffic to the website, plus it will pass SEO value to the website with the ability of being able to read the anchor text, OK, yes I have paid for this ad, however if I use a nofollow, surely this is a great opportunity lost in gaining a great back link from an authority website.
Thanks
-
Google does crawl some JavaScript. Here is a brief news update on that from last November: http://searchengineland.com/google-can-now-execute-ajax-javascript-for-indexing-99518
I have seen JavaScript elements get indexed in Google on some of my client's websites - especially simple JavaScript (for example, deep pages linked to using the document.write() method do get indexed and those deep pages are not linked elsewhere).
All that to say, if you are trying to use the link for pure SEO value then you really should pull the link out of JavaScript just to be 100% certain Google crawls that link and reaches the page. After all the link building and site architecture work, why risk Google not seeing an important link?
One final question back to you. You mentioned that this was an HTML ad. Is this an ad internally on your website or an external ad? If it is an internal ad, trying to drive traffic deeper into your website, then I would change that to plain HTML instead of JavaScript so that Google has the ability to access that page easily (and sees the internal promotion easily).
However, if it is an external ad that you are paying for on somebody else's website, that link should have a rel="nofollow". Here is Google's webmaster support section and they say very plainly "Links purchased for advertising should be designated as such." They go on to say that one of the ways to designate a paid link as advertising is by "[a]dding a rel="nofollow" attribute to the <a>tag". If that is the case, within the JavaScript, you can include the rel nofollow as part of the</a> <a>tag that is output.</a> <a></a> http://support.google.com/webmasters/bin/answer.py?hl=en&answer=66736
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
-
How to solve JavaScript paginated content for SEO
In our blog listings page, we limit the number of blogs that can be seen on the page to 10. However, all of the blogs are loaded in the html of the page and page links are added to the bottom. Example page: https://tulanehealthcare.com/about/newsroom/ When a user clicks the next page, it simply filters the content on the same page for the next group of postings and displays these to the user. Nothing in the html or URL change. This is all done via JavaScript. So the question is, does Google consider this hidden content because all listings are in the html but the listings on page are limited to only a handful of them? Or is Googlebot smart enough to know that the content is being filtered by JavaScript pagination? If this is indeed a problem we have 2 possible solutions: not building the HTML for the next pages until you click on the 'next' page. adding parameters to the URL to show the content has changed. Any other solutions that would be better for SEO?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | MJTrevens1 -
Does google credit links from iFrames or created by Javascript, if so, is one more powerful than the other?
Consider this example, because I want to be clear about what I mean. You have two websites. Lets all them www.a.com and www.b.com. On www.a.com/some/page, there is an iframe something like this:
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | adriandg
<iframe src="www.b.com/some/special/path"></iframe>
Then content of this iframe is a bunch of pictures, text and numbers, as well as a group of links, linking each picture to www.b.com for example the links might be:
www.b.com/content/1
www.b.com/content/2
www.b.com/content/3 Questions: When google crawls **www.a.com/some/page, **does it pass link juice to www.b.com/content/*? Does google instead consider these to be internal links within b.com itself. because links to www.b.com/content/ ** are actually from b.com itself, since the domain of the iframe is actually: www.b.com/some/special/path 3) Is there any amount of link juice passed from www.a.com/some/page to* www.b.com/some/special/path **because this is the src= element of an iframe that a.com is hosting? Consider an alternative setup. Where instead of using an iframe the contents of the above described iFrame is actually added the the page dynamically using javascript, and a call to an API endpoint at b.com. Resulting in these links being added directly to the body of a.com without being wrapped in an iframe element. Questions:
4) Do these links that were created after page load still get crawled and credited by google? (i have heard in the past that google was going to start crawling javascript, i just don't know if this is known for a fact yet).
5) Do links created on the client side hold the same weight as a link that was served directly via the backend html generation? If both the links within the iframe and the links within the javascript embed method pass link juice. Is one preferred over the other? is one known to be more effective than the other? Thanks!0 -
Javascript onclick redirects / porn sites...
We noticed around 7 websites which with domains that were just recently registered (with privacy protection). They are using our website keywords/titles and brand name and the sites are mostly porn / junk sites. They don't link to our website directly but use a javascript onclick redirect which is why we think we aren't seeing them in our backlinks report. We've been in business for over 12 years and haven't come across sites like this before. We recently lost our first page rankings for a few of our highest converting key phrases and have been digging in to possible causes. Just wondering if these sites could be impacting our results, and how to figure out if there are more like this? Examples: nesat.net
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | EileenCleary
flowmeterdirectory.biz
finnsat.net
dotsjobs.net0 -
Can Googlebots read canonical tags on pages with javascript redirects?
Hi Moz! We have old locations pages that we can't redirect to the new ones because they have AJAX. To preserve pagerank, we are putting canonical tags on the old location pages. Will Googlebots still read these canonical tags if the pages have a javascript redirect? Thanks for reading!
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | DA20130 -
Alternative HTML Structure for indexation of JavaScript Single Page Content
Hi there, we are currently setting up a pure html version for Bots on our site amazine.com so the content as well as navigation will be fully indexed by google. We will show google exactly the same content the user sees (except for the fancy JS effects). So all bots get pure html and real users see the JS based version. My questions are first, if everyone agrees that this is the way to go or if there are alternatives to this to get the content indexed. Are there best practices? All JS-based websites must have this problem, so I am hoping someone can share their experience. The second question regards the optimal number of content pieces ('Stories') displayed per page and the best method to paginate. Should we display e.g. 10 stories and use ?offset in the URL or display 100 stories to google per page and maybe use rel=”next”/"pref" instead. Generally, I would really appreciate any pointers and experiences from you guys as we haven't done this sort of thing before! Cheers, Frank
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | FranktheTank-474970 -
Internal Javascript Links
Hi, We have a client who has internal links pointing to some relatively new pages that we asked them to implement. The problem is that instead of using standard HTML links, their developers have used javascript - e.g. javascript:GoTo... The new pages have links from the homepage (among others) and have been live for about 3-4 weeks now - yet are still to be indexed by Google, Bing & Yahoo. Is it possibe that Javascript links are making them difficult to be found? Thanks in advance for any tips.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | jasarrow0 -
Static homepage content and javascript - is this technique obsolete?
Hi Apologies beforehand for any minor forum transgressions - this is my first post. I'm redesigning my blog and I have a question re static homepage content. It used to be common practice in the online gambling sector (and possibly others) to have a block of 'SEO copy' at the footer of the homepage. To 'trick Google' into thinking it was directly underneath the header, web devs would use javascript to instruct the html to load the div with the SEO copy first. The logic was that this allowed for the prime real estate of the page to be used for conversion and sales, while still having a block of relevant copy to tell the spiders what the page was about, and to provide deep links into the site. I attended a seminar just over a year ago at which some notable SEOs said that Google had probably worked this one out but it was impossible to tell. However, I've recently noticed that Everest Poker has what I think is the code commented out, and on PokerStars I can't find it at all (even in the includes). I would be happy to post the Everest code but, while I've read the etiquette, I'm not 100% whether this is allowed. So my question is... for the blog I'm redesigning, do I still need to follow this practice? I would prefer search engines saw some static intro text describing the site, rather than the blog posts, the excerpts of which will probably be canonicalized to the actual post pages to avoid duplication issues. But I would prefer this static content to appear below the fold. What is current best practice here? Alex
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | alextanner0 -
Can obfuscated Javascript be used for too many links on a page?
Hi mozzers Just looking for opinions/answers on if it is ever appropriate to use obfuscated Javascript on links when a page has many links but they need to be there for usability? It seems grey/black hat to me as it shows users something different to Google (alarm bells are sounding already!) BUT if the page has many links it's losing juice which could be saved....... Any thoughts appreciated, thanks.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | TrevorJones0