Hidden h1 class="hero-title-h1 mobile-padding hidden" for SEO?

[SEO Lady]

Right guys n gals if I've opened a can of worms I wanna hear your side.

I've been arguing for a solid fortnight with a new client who has seen competitors hide H1's behind an image.

So, the devs have been instructed to hide the H1 and secondary SEO content for geo areas.

I've currently ran out of toys to throw out of my pram. Can anyone link me to a reliable source to say it's not an SEO negative?

You better believe I've thrown the client the Google's dev article, white text, white background, ra ra ra.

Spam Policies for Google Web Search | Google Search Central | Documentation | Google for Developers

The spam policies detail the behaviors and tactics that can lead to a page or an entire site being ranked lower or completely omitted from Google Search.

developers.google.com

"But so many people are doing it"

My argument is

• I don't want to risk it
• It sounds too good to be true
• Just because others are doing it, doesn't mean we should jump off the same cliff
• Their domains are 25 years old and have had SEO for probably 20 years, so that's why they are ranking better than you, you need to keep a clean nose, play by the book, maybe it's not a manual-penalty-worthy action? Maybe it is and the UK Nationals in the industry are flying by the seat of their pants?

Am I overreacting here?

Tagging @fisicx @Tin @zigojacko @WebshopMechanic @OldWelshGuy for starters. Please wade in one and all, I'd be very grateful.

 

[Shopclicks]

Are the H1 and secondary SEO content specific to the image they are hidden behind? Are they using multiple H1 tags on a page?

What are their views on alt text?

 

[fisicx]

Google says don’t do it. So don’t do it.

If you are going to hide an h1 then there is no point in having an h1.

 

[SEO Lady]

Are the H1 and secondary SEO content specific to the image they are hidden behind?

H1 and primary SEO content, rich text, internal linking, CTA, this bit

Are they using multiple H1 tags on a page?

Absolutely not, there aren't any that I've spotted, they have had previous SEO's so that's all in place.

What are their views on alt text?

All of their images either had zero, or irrelevant alt tags. They are exceptionally desperate for me to do this, also optimise their H1's (The only hidden one is the homepage), get the right anchor text for internal linking (not Read More or CLICK HERE as current) plus knock myself out with title tags. I'm overly keen to work with them and I'm not a yes woman, but if I believe something is correct, or incorrect, I'll fight till I drop.

From your questions I guess you think the client knows absolutely sweet fa, multiple H1's and 'views on alt text' are basic 101 SEO. It's important for you to question some lesser known faults to establish for yourself how much the client knows as a test.

I have been doing this too.

Until today, when I discovered something they said which flipped everything on it's head. Maybe they've been testing me this whole time, and the hidden text behind a hero image made me flip out. Like serious wtaf. Then I heard new information that it's a 50-50 split as there has been research in some circles.

Without seeing those sources with my own eyeballs, I'd be 100% no way. But it's not removed from the Google Developer article, the old one that's been around for at least 15 years, the one I linked above. It clearly states, in B&W "Hiding text behind an image"

BUT

There is ambiguity: "Setting the font size or opacity to 0"

It doesn't state "Wrapping the text in a container" so "Hiding behind an image" isn't strictly true, if it's there, just in a container that's technically visible on the front end.

It's very clever, I'm not a developer so this level of coding has me snorkling without a tube.

Do you have any follow on thoughts?

It's not in my interest to sit quiet with business owners who may be making a very dangerous scenario of a manual penalty or whatever is doled out these days, so it is my interest to fight ... if my advice is correct. I'm saying no to hiding H1 on the front end, but they are clear and understand the risk they are taking if they choose to dance at the Google disco.

 

[Shopclicks]

Do you have any follow on thoughts?

In answer to your original question, I don't think you'll get anyone here to find reputable article supporting the practice. I think it's pure and simple manipulation and if and when discovered will be dealt with by Google. The big question is: Is Google as clever at detecting these things as they would have us believe? And are there ways of making this type of manipulation undetectable? Does Google really care?

Personally, I would have walked away by now, but don't blame you for persisting. At least they can't say they weren't warned. Although if you do manage to improve rankings, you probably won't get the credit you deserve.

Are they likely to give you some 'clean' pages to rank, without the hidden rubbish?

 

[SEO Lady]

The big question is: Is Google as clever at detecting these things as they would have us believe? And are there ways of making this type of manipulation undetectable?

I think with AI, one Star-Trek scan would be sitewide in under 24 hours, but only if a manual penalty. AI already implements penalties, but a manual penalty does what it says on the tin. A human reviews the AI recommendation and is the final yay or nay.

What if AI was to be programmed to instantly penalise any website purely based on the source code?

I genuinely do believe this will be the case in under 12 months.

Does Google really care?

It cares enough to scramble their unpolished AI before it was approved by the developers in response to ChatGPT. Google also discontinued Correlate and was laughed out of the bar for Google+.

For a behemoth company, it sure does make some bluster and fade away quick when social media ridicules them. For a long while GSC wasn't indexing all URLs, so several third party apps came to the rescue. Rank Math and Yoast added it to their premium package as a result of Google's failure.

Don't get me started on the AI rewritten meta titles and descriptions that can't be overridden/ Or randomly changing Google Maps for 2 of my clients, both of them had their open hours auto reset to 1-2pm and 23 hours a day closed.

Personally, I would have walked away by now, but don't blame you for persisting. At least they can't say they weren't warned.

Maybe it's the menopause. but I'm really emotionally charged with helping people. Nice people. Clients that pay on time, clients that don't ask for discounts. Lovely business owners with funny personalities, a pleasure to speak with and even socialise with after hours. People who found you on Google and went though 5 other SEO's before choosing me. SME's that have hired in-house SEO's who have been moonlighting on the company dime.

I'm a great SEO. I'm forever hoping that someone will teach me something new for on-page SEO, which hasn't happened in more than a decade. I'm always reading about things first, it's in my interest, it's in my client's bank account interest. The more I'm up to date and banging my drum, the longer I stay hired continuously. Some clients have been with me 15 years, 10 years, 5+ (now you have read this you can see why I respond below)

Although if you do manage to improve rankings, you probably won't get the credit you deserve.

Following on from my emotive paragraph above, I truly believe I can spot a poopy client, poopy ones that don't like invoices, ignore emails, expect you to fix their iphone, try to pay me to fix their Outlook, the ones that refuse pay rises, expect you to defend yourself when they have read an SEO article online, do I know about "Hyperlinking" as you haven't mentioned it before?

The client and I have had several video calls. I have met him and his team in person both business and tentatively business social. My PM is awesome and I know he's as transparent as a six bob note. I trust him implicitly.

Are they likely to give you some 'clean' pages to rank, without the hidden rubbish?

Only the homepage will 'need' to have the hidden text as far as I know. There's a lot of legacy pages I won't need to rewrite completely, but I've been given the go ahead of "Do your thing Nina" like Basement Jaxx.

 

[fisicx]

The whole purpose of headings is to structure the page. The H1 is the main tile and tells the reader what the page is all about and should be one of the first things anyone sees.

You can wrap this in a div, give it a background, use css animations or add images. None of this changes the purpose of the h1.

The SEO value of a heading is minimal - it’s a signpost only.

In this case it may not be hidden so much as disguised. Google may be ok with this or they may have already imposed a penalty but because the rest of the optimisation is good the penalty has little effect. Nobody knows except Google and they aren’t telling.

You won’t ever find an answer to this. All you can do is test it and see what happens.

But as I said before, if you are going to hide a heading there is no point in making it a heading. So really not sure what is gained by doing this.

 

[ProjectOcto]

Personally I'd be increasing my new business outreach with a view to dropping a client that acted like this.

You simply can't win.
- Give in, it works, they doubt you
- Give in, it doesn't work, you're right but they don't like you
- Walk away

 

[Calvin Crane]

I've been arguing for a solid fortnight with a new client who has seen competitors hide H1's behind an image.

Can you clarify with some source code or the competitor links. I have not heard of this technique in my circles before so I am genuinely keen to check it out. I will offer my insight once I understand this from the crawl perspective.

 

[fisicx]

Personally I'd be increasing my new business outreach with a view to dropping a client that acted like this.

You don't know Nina. That's not how she is.

 

[Paul Kelly ICHYB]

Why are you arguing this?

If you are worried about performance, assuming you have a contract in place, get the client to accept an addendum to disclaim the negative results this action could achieve.

Keep doing your job and if (when) things go wrong, wave that in their face!

 

[Paul Carmen]

I'm not sure why this is even an issue, or why they want to argue the point. If you don't recommend it, or in fact are strongly against it, then make it clear in writing (email will do) that this is the case and they do it at their own risk.

Personally, I don't think there is any argument for doing this, it goes back to the early days of Google when people manipulated text, images, links etc in that way, often hiding large amounts of text with the font colour the same as backgrounds, purely in order to manipulate rankings.

You can argue that any form of SEO is manipulating rankings, but Google has been clear for a long time that any text manipulation of this type is against their guidelines. While you may get away with it for a while, it's inviting a manual or algorithmic penalty. Google's stance on hidden text: https://developers.google.com/search/docs/essentials/spam-policies#hidden-text-and-links

 

[SEO Lady]

You don't know Nina. That's not how she is.

Thank you G

 

[SEO Lady]

I'm not sure why this is even an issue, or why they want to argue the point. If you don't recommend it, or in fact are strongly against it, then make it clear in writing (email will do) that this is the case and they do it at their own risk.

Personally, I don't think there is any argument for doing this, it goes back to the early days of Google when people manipulated text, images, links etc in that way, often hiding large amounts of text with the font colour the same as backgrounds, purely in order to manipulate rankings.

You can argue that any form of SEO is manipulating rankings, but Google has been clear for a long time that any text manipulation of this type is against their guidelines. While you may get away with it for a while, it's inviting a manual or algorithmic penalty. Google's stance on hidden text: https://developers.google.com/search/docs/essentials/spam-policies#hidden-text-and-links

That's the URL I linked to in my initial post, Paul

 

[SEO Lady]

Can you clarify with some source code or the competitor links. I have not heard of this technique in my circles before so I am genuinely keen to check it out. I will offer my insight once I understand this from the crawl perspective.

I am not publicly replying with the competitor domain, I'll send you a PM

 

[Paul Carmen]

That's the URL I linked to in my initial post, Paul

Sorry, I didn't see it (that just an area that says loading for me), that's a UKBF bug I now realise from other posts.

 

[fantheflames]

I don't think you're overreacting OP.

That's you best advice on the information you have. But, if the client really wants to try it then do it. You have given your recommendation and if they are still interested, despite the facts and the unknown, then it's something they want to explore regardless of the consequences.

 

[SEO Lady]

It was a month ago when I created this thread, I have an update which is still happening.

TL;DR John Mueller answered my PM on Twitter and he's publishing a statement later this evening so I can share the link with others.

More soon