Is it bad (black hat) to have an H1 text as a text indent?
-
Is it bad practice to use a text indent through CSS for H1 text on a homepage(basically hiding h1 text)? I'm just trying to compensate for the fact that some text that should really be in the h1 tag is actually an image.
-
Thanks for the advice! That sounds like a good plan B if I can't get the developers to change the image to text. This is definitely one of the most avoidable yet most frustrating on page issues I encounter.
I guess it's time to update my documentation for development.
-
Thanks, I was just thinking that too, but I'd rather be safe than sorry.
-
Hi Mike,
I'd personally say that you're fine, depending how you impliment it.
I personally believe that as long as the text that you add reads what the image contains, you're fine.
SEOmoz even use image replacement!
Good luck!
-
Hi Mike, The text-indent property can be applied to block-level elements (P, H1, etc.) to define the amount of indentation that the first line of the element should receive. The value must be a length or a percentage; percentages refer to the parent element's width. A common use of text-indent would be to indent a paragraph:
**`P { text-indent: 5em }`**
The usage of
text-indent:-9999px
to display a site logo or other image while hiding text should be avoided. It’s a technique used by web spammers trying to game search engines like Google, and is considered spammy behavior. Instead, use an tag and put the text inside itsalt
attribute.According to Matt Cuts (and some other comments) the best solution is to use an image with
alt
andtitle
attributes. Thealt
attribute is for SEO and thetitle
attribute is for accessibility. Using an image also makes sense for semantic markup. A company logo is actually an important piece of content.**`# <a< span="">href="http://stackoverflow.com"> <img< span="">src="logo.png" alt="Stack Overflow" title="Click to return to Stack Overflow homepage" /></img<></a<>`**
<code>Well, recently, I'm thinking about SEO effects with using something like h1 {text-indent: -9999px; background: url('xyz') }...
I dont think I trust this anymore to be good for SEO. And I don't mean that it's actually "good" for it, because that would certainly be bad SEO techniques. I'm just thinking that it wouldn't be too far fetched to believe that in the search algorithms that anything that is negative text indent over ABC pixels, is considered spam and either isn't registered, or even worse, effects your site negatively.</code>Hiding the contents of an H1 tag, such that the search engine is presented with textual content which is not visible to a visitor, is SEO Spamming, and can get the site banned if one of your client's competitors catches you doing it and turns you in! It is, in fact, a form of hidden text spamming (itself "Black Hat", and explicitly banned by all of the major search engines). With the offense made all the worse by the fact you are doing it with an H1 tag, rather than non-emphasized text (Due to both the power of an H1, and the real estate it would take-up if rendered on-screen) Google makes it pretty clear that hidden text spamming is prohibited. In fact, they have a web page in their anti-spam guidelines devoted to it! They also have a check-off box (the first one, in fact!) on their spam report page specifically dedicated to reporting this kind of spamming (see 3rd link - requires login). The fact that Google may not explicitly list every means of hiding keywords does not therefore make a particular spamming technique legit. Indeed, as Google states in their Webmaster guidelines (see 1st link) - "It's not safe to assume that just because a specific deceptive technique isn't included on this page, Google approves of it." However, in this case, this method of hiding content is specifically prohibited. On their Hidden Text Spamming page (2nd link), Google lists examples of various tricks to hide content, including specifically - "Using CSS to hide text" Which is what you are proposing to do here. While implementing this with external CSS files MAY make this a bit harder for Google to detect via automated means, it is also a VERY easy technique for someone to spot. All it takes is for just ONE of your client's competitors (OR their SEO's) to wonder why the site is coming-up higher in the SERPs than they are, notice what you are doing, and turn you in to Google for spamming! Any short-term gain you may obtain from such a technique is not worth the risk of getting your client's site banned from Google. The original quote from the WebmasterWorld discussion referenced by the Search Engine Roundtable link Shaq Ali provided makes the following excellent point - "For those who may be hiding things through CSS or negatively positioning content off screen to manipulate page content, I surely wouldn't do that with any long term projects. ;) The penalty for getting busted using this technique I would imagine is a PERMANENT BAN.* No if's, and's, or but's, you're history. You'll need a pardon from the Governor to be reconsidered for inclusion. ;)" (* - Bold replaced with caps) #### Links: * [http://www.google.com/support/webmasters/bin/answer.py?hl=en&answer=35769](http://www.linkedin.com/redirect?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww%2Egoogle%2Ecom%2Fsupport%2Fwebmasters%2Fbin%2Fanswer%2Epy%3Fhl%3Den%26answer%3D35769&urlhash=woHy "New window will open") * [http://www.google.com/support/webmasters/bin/answer.py?answer=66353](http://www.linkedin.com/redirect?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww%2Egoogle%2Ecom%2Fsupport%2Fwebmasters%2Fbin%2Fanswer%2Epy%3Fanswer%3D66353&urlhash=e5Vy "New window will open") * [https://www.google.com/webmasters/tools/spamreport](http://www.linkedin.com/redirect?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww%2Egoogle%2Ecom%2Fwebmasters%2Ftools%2Fspamreport&urlhash=UReX "New window will open") I hope that your query had been solved.
-
If he put the image within the h1, and set the alt text to what he wanted the H1 would that help? It wouldn't be ideal but it could be a workaround that would yield some results.
I agree the design should encompass the proper tags, especially the H1 and H2.
-
Hiding text through CSS is against Google's TOS. So basically it can be classified as "black hat".
Your H1 should tell your users what your page is about, if you have to hide it for whatever reason, there may be something wrong with your design.
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
-
Are on-site content carousel bad for SEO?
Hi, I didn't find an answer to my question in the Forum. I attached an example of content carousel, this is what I'm talking about. I understand that Google has no problem anymore with tabbed contents and accordeons (collapsible contents). But now I'm wondering about textual carousels. I'm not talking about an image slider, I'm talking about texts. Is text carousel harder to read for Google than plain text or tabs? Of course, i'm not talking about a carousel using Flash. Let's say the code is proper... Thanks for your help. spfra5
Technical SEO | | Alviau0 -
What would be considered a bad ratio to determine Index Bloat?
I am using Annie Cushing's most excellent site audit checklist from Google Docs. My question concerns Index Bloat because it is mentioned in her "Index" tab. We have 6,595 indexed pages and only 4,226 of those pages have received 1 or more visits since January 1 2013. Is this an acceptable ratio? If not, why not and what would be an acceptable ratio? I understand the basic concept that "dissipation of link juice and constrained crawl budget can have a significant impact on SEO traffic." [Thanks to Reid Bandremer http://www.lunametrics.com/blog/2013/04/08/fifteen-minute-seo-health-check/#sr=g&m=o&cp=or&ct=-tmc&st=(opu%20qspwjefe)&ts=1385081787] If we make this an action item I'd like to have some idea how to prioritize it compared to other things that must be done. Thanks all!
Technical SEO | | danatanseo1 -
Deleting 30,000 pages all at once - good idea or bad idea?
We have 30,000 pages that we want to get rid of. Each product within our database has it's own page. And these particular 30,000 products are not relevant anymore. They have very little content on them and are basically the same exact page but with a few title changes. We no longer want them weighing down our database so we are going to delete them. My question is - should we get rid of them in smaller batches like 2,000 pages at a time, or is it better to get rid of all them in one fell swoop? Which is least likely to raise a flag to Google? Anyone have any experience with this?
Technical SEO | | Viewpoints0 -
LSI keywords logic - enter in meta and bold in text?
Hello, In the lack of good info about this on the Internet, let me try here. I know that it is a good idea to put LSI keywords in natural flow in the body text of the article. But shall I also put LSI keywords as a meta? In the same manner as doing with non-LSI keywords? Or shall I only reserve meta for non-LSI keywords? In body text, shall I emphasize LSI keywords in bold? As non-LSI keywords already does. This is a bit confusing as I don't wan't LSI keywords to take over show from my long tail (phrase) keyword. I will appreciate if someone could share a bit light over this. Thanks in advance!
Technical SEO | | SEOisSEO0 -
Are pagination a bad thing for seo
hi i am just checking my errors on my site and it is telling me about duplicate pagination results, so i am just wondering if pagination is bad for seo for example http://www.in2town.co.uk/benidorm/benidorm-news/Page-2 i also have page 3 and page 4. should i stop my site from having this to help with seo
Technical SEO | | ClaireH-1848860 -
Using a non-visible H1
I have a developer that wants to use style="text-indent:-9999px" to make the H1 non-visible to the user. Being the conservative person I am, I've never tried this before and worry that Search Engines may think this is a form of cloaking. Am I worrying about nothing? And apologies if it's already been covered here. I couldn't find it. Thanks in advance!!!!
Technical SEO | | elytical0 -
Duplicate content q - Can search engines tell where the original text was copied from?
I was under the impression that when a search engine comes across duplicate content it won't be able to determine which one is the original. Is this not the case?
Technical SEO | | Sparkstone0 -
Converse.com - flash and html version of site... bad idea?
I have a questions regarding Converse.com. I realize this ecommerce site is needs a lot of seo help. There’s plenty of obvious low hanging seo fruit. On a high level, I see a very large SEO issue with the site architecture. The site is a full page flash experience that uses a # in the URL. The search engines pretty much see every flash page as the home page. To help with issue a HTML version of the site was created. Google crawls the Home Page - Converse.com http://www.converse.com Marimekko category page (flash version) http://www.converse.com/#/products/featured/marimekko Marimekko category page (html version, need to have flash disabled) http://www.converse.com/products/featured/marimekko Here is the example of the issue. This site has a great post featuring Helen Marimekko shoes http://www.coolmompicks.com/2011/03/finnish_foot_prints.php The post links to the flash Marimekko catagory page (http://www.converse.com/#/products/featured/marimekko) as I would expect (ninety something percent of visitors to converse.com have the required flash plug in). So the flash page is getting the link back juice. But the flash page is invisible to google. When I search for “converse marimekko” in google, the marimekko landing page is not in the top 500 results. So I then searched for “converse.com marimekko” and see the HTML version of the landing page listed as the 4<sup>th</sup> organic result. The result has the html version of the page. When I click the link I get redirected to the flash Marimekko category page but if I do not have flash I go to the html category page. ----- Marimekko - Converse All Star Marimekko Price: $85, Jack Purcell Helen Marimekko Price: $75 ... www.converse.com/products/featured/marimekko - Cached So my issues are… Is converse skating on thin SEO ice by having a HTML and flash version of their site/product pages? Do you think it’s a huge drag on seo rankings to have a large % of back links linking to flash pages when google is crawling the html pages? Any recommendations on to what to do about this? Thanks, SEOsurfer
Technical SEO | | seosurfer-2883190