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 -
Javascript content not being indexed by Google
I thought Google has gotten better at picking up unique content from javascript. I'm not seeing it with our site. We rate beauty and skincare products using our algorithms. Here is an example of a product -- https://www.skinsafeproducts.com/tide-free-gentle-he-liquid-laundry-detergent-100-fl-oz When you look at the cache page (text) from google none of the core ratings (badges like fragrance free, top free and so forth) are being picked up for ranking. Any idea what we could do to have the rating incorporated in the indexation.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | akih0 -
Passing link juice via javascript?
Hello Client got website with javascript generated content. All links there (from mainpage to some deeper page) are js generated. In code there're only javascripts and other basic typical code but no text links (<a href...="" ).<="" p=""></a> <a href...="" ).<="" p="">The question is: are those js links got the same "seo power" as typical html href links?.For example majestic.com can't scan website properly and can't show seo metrics for pages. I know google crawls them (links and pages) but are they as good as typical links?</a> <a href...="" ).<="" p="">Regards,</a>
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | PenaltyHammer0 -
Javascript search results & Pagination for SEO
Hi On this page http://www.key.co.uk/en/key/workbenches we have javascript on the paginated pages to sort the results, the URL displayed and the URL linked to are different. e.g. The paginated pages link to for example: page2 http://www.key.co.uk/en/key/workbenches#productBeginIndex:30&orderBy:5&pageView:list& The list is then sorted by javascript. Then the arrows either side of pagination link to e.g. http://www.key.co.uk/en/key/workbenches?page=3 - this is where the rel/prev details are - done for SEO But when clicking on this arrow, the URL loaded is different again - http://www.key.co.uk/en/key/workbenches#productBeginIndex:60&orderBy:5&pageView:list& I did not set this up, but I am concerned that the URL http://www.key.co.uk/en/key/workbenches?page=3 never actually loads, but it's linked to Google can crawl it. Is this a problem? I am looking to implement a view all option. Thank you
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | BeckyKey0 -
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 -
Pros vs Cons - Navigation/content embedded within javascript
My programmer showed me this demo website where all the navigation and content is embedded within javascript: http://sailsjs.org/#! Google site search returned 51 in results, all pages pretty much unique Title Tags and Meta Descriptions Bing site search returned 24 results with pretty much identical Title Tags and Meta Descriptions Matt Cutts said it's fine but to test first: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Mibrj2bOFCU Has anyone seen any reason to avoid this web convention? My gut is to avoid this approach with the main drawback I see is that websites like this won't do well on search engines other than Google that have less sophisticated algorithms. thoughts?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Rich_Coffman0 -
Google, Links and Javascript
So today I was taking a look at http://www.seomoz.org/top500 page and saw that the AddThis page is currently at the position 19. I think the main reason for that is because their plugin create, through javascript, linkbacks to their page where their share buttons reside. So any page with AddThis installed would easily have 4/5 linbacks to their site, creating that huge amount of linkbacks they have. Ok, that pretty much shows that Google doesn´t care if the link is created in the HTML (on the backend) or through Javascript (frontend). But heres the catch. If someones create a free plugin for wordpress/drupal or any other huge cms platform out there with a feature that linkbacks to the page of the creator of the plugin (thats pretty common, I know) but instead of inserting the link in the plugin source code they put it somewhere else, wich then is loaded with a javascript code (exactly how AddThis works). This would allow the owner of the plugin to change the link showed at anytime he wants. The main reason for that would be, dont know, an URL address update for his blog or businness or something. However that could easily be used to link to whatever tha hell the owner of the plugin wants to. What your thoughts about this, I think this could be easily classified as White or Black hat depending on what the owners do. However, would google think the same way about it?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | bemcapaz0