div overlaying - any negative effect for SEO?

[UKSBD]

Has anyone any information as to whether using a div overlay has any negative effect on SEO or whether Google doesn't like people using the technique?

 

[herodigital]

people used to hide content from the user for SEO reasons, i.e. a hidden div containing a load of stuffed in keywords that would be read by engines not humans. this is bad and google figures it out straight away.

i think as long as you are using overlays and hidden elements for the right reasons it will not impact your SEO.

 

[Andy Walpole]

I'm only aware of display:none adversely affecting SEO

 

[herodigital]

I'm only aware of display:none adversely affecting SEO

the only way that can negatively affect SEO is if you do what I said in the prevous post and that is load keywords in there purely for SEO reasons.

hiding content is FINE as long as you are not doing it intentionally to bolster SEO page content.

 

[Andy Walpole]

recently I was listening to a Matt Cutts video in which he said that Google bot ignores content with display:none (add: its not included in Google algorithm)

 

[herodigital]

recently I was listening to a Matt Cutts video in which he said that Google bot ignores content with display:none (add: its not included in Google algorithm)

ignoring is not the same as having an adverse effect

 

[Birmingham]

i think as long as you are using overlays and hidden elements for the right reasons it will not impact your SEO.

but google doesn't know your intentions, so my advice is to avoid such code altogether in order to achieve for optimal results, unless it's too much inconvenience

see How not to hide text for an extreme example of suspicious code

i think matt cutts is reluctant to tell us that there is a variable-degree partial-penalty on all sites that use code that plays with critical visibility in a way that can potentially cause accessibility issues

so see Avoid code that could be used for cloaking for general best-practice advice to take as far as you can

 

[herodigital]

but google doesn't know your intentions, so my advice is to avoid such code altogether in order to achieve for optimal results, unless it's too much inconvenience

see How not to hide text for an extreme example of suspicious code

i think matt cutts is reluctant to tell us that there is a variable-degree partial-penalty on all sites that use code that plays with critical visibility in a way that can potentially cause accessibility issues

so see Avoid code that could be used for cloaking for general best-practice advice to take as far as you can

I've used hidden divs with no problems many times. think about it, imagine these two scenarios:

1. View shipping details > roll over or click shows a hidden div

2. hidden div with no option to show it containing 200 keywords

Google is smart enough to know which one is real and which isn't. i certainly would not avoid hidden content just for search engines, especially if it offered something valuable to users.

 

[Birmingham]

but google does not just do black & white penalties these days... that's what i was trying to say matt cutts is reluctant to discuss...

if your site shows so much as a hint of overlapping content, then it will probably get a hint of penalty... indeed the penalty will be on a par with the degree of suspicion around your code... i agree that i wouldn't let a "very slightly" suspicious bit of code stop be from providing a "more than very slightly" useful service to users... it's a case of weighing up the pros and cons, and remembering that there is always some extent of con (partial penalty for suspicious code) whenever there is any code which could potentially be used for cloaking

 

[awebapart.com]

Has anyone any information as to whether using a div overlay has any negative effect on SEO or whether Google doesn't like people using the technique?

Here's a google search which proves that google quite happily indexes content in display none hidden divs on this page, a word in a hidden popup div menu when you click on the member name of a forum post.

Hidden divs are used all over the place, in popups, in expanded/collapsible sections, in in-content tabbed interfaces (e.g. product details tab, product specification tabs in ecommerce sites), and in most of these cases, the content is indexed.

Whether hidden div content, although indexed, is as strong as visible div content, is a different question though.

 

[-Joe-]

It's fine really, as long as you're not cloaking

 

[Birmingham]

It's fine really, as long as you're not cloaking

you make it sound like google are psychic and never make mistakes... i rather treat google like a baby that isn't sure about anything and needs maximum coaching for optimal results

 

[UKSBD]

Here's a google search which proves that google quite happily indexes content in display none hidden divs on this page, a word in a hidden popup div menu when you click on the member name of a forum post.

Hidden divs are used all over the place, in popups, in expanded/collapsible sections, in in-content tabbed interfaces (e.g. product details tab, product specification tabs in ecommerce sites), and in most of these cases, the content is indexed.

Whether hidden div content, although indexed, is as strong as visible div content, is a different question though.

I'm not going to use it for hiding the content of the div, just for overlaying existing content, I don't mind if google don't even see the content in it (will probably just use an image with no alt attribute eventually).

It's basically just a way to make an ad more prominant without having to use a pop up, and with google reading the content under the div.

Click on the "Click Here for phone no." button on this page for an example,
http://www.uksmallbusinessdirectory.co.uk/id.asp?CompanyID=127956

 

[Birmingham]

looks like there's 3 different urls involved there... very dodgy

 

[UKSBD]

looks like there's 3 different urls involved there... very dodgy

Hence the nofollow (and eventually noindex) on the middle 1.

It's basically just throwing in an extra page between the other 2.
I could make it just the ad, but having the other content behind the ad gives it more effect.

 

[Birmingham]

I could make it just the ad, but having the other content behind the ad gives it more effect.

that sounds like the very definition of cloaking ...not a good idea. better to concentrate on a more creative layout. you'll be surprised what you can fit into a well-designed page layout while maintaining a focal point for a key advert for example

i appreciate you're using no-follow to bring ethical balance but google is still gonna smell a rat even when the rat is dead

 

[UKSBD]

Yes, it would be a form of cloaking the way it is at the moment.

I was going to put it all on the same URL though eventually, with the close button closing the overlay div rather than going to a new URL.

Basically the opposite way round to concealed divs.

I've put the div overlay on top of a blank page for now.
so you still get the partial effect, but without overlaying any content,
http://www.uksmallbusinessdirectory.co.uk/id.asp?CompanyID=127956

click the phone button again to see an example.

 

[Birmingham]

ok, that's safer when there's no overlapped content. but still there is code that plays with overlaps that google is always gonna be slightly weary of... and it's also slightly unideal to have any nofollow links on your page -- that's another thing matt cutts will quietly deny & deceive you with... a page ranks higher when it has no nofollow links because the presence of nofollow suggests the presence of stuff that's spammy or otherwise not good for some users. keep up the effort though

 

[UKSBD]

I suppose even safer is not to overlay at all
have a look now.

The effect is not as good though, it's a shame we have to do things with google in mind even when not trying to do anything deceptive

 

[Birmingham]

agreed, the effect was better the first way you had it, to make ur site look like a very commercial & buzzing business portal.

this cache 22 is a typical problem in seo... but then why would google wanna send innocent traffic to a highly-commercial & ad-ridden site?

 

[UKSBD]

this cache 22 is a typical problem in seo... but then why would google wanna send innocent traffic to a highly-commercial & ad-ridden site?

Because 90% of the ads are theirs

 

[-Joe-]

you make it sound like google are psychic and never make mistakes... i rather treat google like a baby that isn't sure about anything and needs maximum coaching for optimal results

Yeah, well obviously they make mistakes, but in the same vein - they often sandbox unfairly. In almost all cases, divs are totally fine, and won't get any kind of sandboxing or slap.

 

[Birmingham]

Yeah, well obviously they make mistakes, but in the same vein - they often sandbox unfairly.

that's a good reason for not messing around too much with a site in order to make small tweaks. i guess my theory applies to people who are aiming for optimal code from the word go, or have a long-term strategy that's ready to suffer temporary broken bricks for an end-of-day improved foundation

 

[UKSBD]

Yeah, well obviously they make mistakes, but in the same vein - they often sandbox unfairly. In almost all cases, divs are totally fine, and won't get any kind of sandboxing or slap.

I notice you say almost.
Would you risk it with a popular site?
Overlay the content google is seeing by using a div with completely different content.

 

[-Joe-]

I notice you say almost.
Would you risk it with a popular site?
Overlay the content google is seeing by using a div with completely different content.

How do you mean? Is this like a lightbox, or something different? It may be classed as cloaking, depending on what you mean.

Mind PMing me the site, so I can have an idea? Is it the one in your sig?

 

[Birmingham]

yes the UKSBD is surprisingly popular, and i guess that's down to age-based authority, in which case the issue of risk is quite on-topic

 

[-Joe-]

yes the UKSBD is surprisingly popular, and i guess that's down to age-based authority, in which case the issue of risk is quite on-topic

Yeah, just saw that, from the whois. I think that does work in UKSBD's favour, as due to the authority aspect, they're much less likely to de-rank him. (although, of course, it is still possible, if it's blatant cloaking)

 

[UKSBD]

How do you mean? Is this like a lightbox, or something different? It may be classed as cloaking, depending on what you mean.

Similar to a lightbox, but with the lightbox open by default instead of closed (i.e. click to close, to view main content behind it, rather than click to open the lightbox.)

It could definately be construed as a form of cloaking, even though it is not being done to be deceptive in any way.

I doubt I will risk doing it without testing on a few other sites first and finding out if someone has been doing similar for a long time with no negative effects.

 

[Birmingham]

you'll be lucky to find someone who can confidently say they did that experiment and have a sure result from it

 

[-Joe-]

Similar to a lightbox, but with the lightbox open by default instead of closed (i.e. click to close, to view main content behind it, rather than click to open the lightbox.)

It could definately be construed as a form of cloaking, even though it is not being done to be deceptive in any way.

I doubt I will risk doing it without testing on a few other sites first and finding out if someone has been doing similar for a long time with no negative effects.

Any examples? Cause I know there are ad platforms that have something similar to what you described as an option to show CPM ads - which I know Google is fine with.

 

[UKSBD]

This is an example doing it with a lightbox.
http://www.uksmallbusinessdirectory.co.uk/z-telephone.asp?CompanyID=127956

I was planning on doing a similar thing with an overlaid (or sliding) div as well.

To a degree both are forms of cloaking.

 

[Birmingham]

this one achieves a good effect... maybe worth keeping

 

[UKSBD]

Yes, the effect is good, but would google class it as cloaking?
And if they don't, what is the difference between doing it that way and doing it with a overlay/sliding div?

 

[-Joe-]

Nah, that looks fine

Only thing I would point out, not from an SEO point of view, but usability, I'd make the next button work not on hover, but be there from the start.

 

[Birmingham]

Yes, the effect is good, but would google class it as cloaking?

like i said it's not black & white, it will be a light shade of grey. there will most likely be a very minor negative seo affect but worth doing for the benefit of user experience and probably outweighed in the long term by a positive seo advantage of people being more likely to link to your site because it's simply a better site.

what is the difference between doing it that way and doing it with a overlay/sliding div?

no difference really, it's all messing with code in a slightly dodgy way... it's a judgement call based on variably weighted factors and in my opinion, considering the nature of your site, i'd go for it.