Keywords in the ALT TEXT???

[brucemcc]

Is there any truth to the statement that "having your keywords in the ALT TEXT of you images will hurt you with Google"?

Just wondering what the thought is.

Bruce

[Mel]

LOL every time there is a Google shakeup these rumors start to proliferate.

There is of course no way of knowing if it is hurting in some small way, but its easy enough to check yourself if it is making a big difference.

Pick a search term,enter it into googl, go to the highest ranking site listed and view the source to see if they are using keywords in their alt text. Looks to me like there are plenty of top ranking sites using KW in alt tags.

I leave you to draw your own conclusions.

[compar]

The commonly excepted wisdom on this question is that an alt tag on a image does not do you any good in the Google rankings. Because they are so open to keyword stuffing, it is felt that Google just ignores them. My own feeling is if the ignore them why would they penalize for them?

Now the exception to that is alt tags on images used as links. In this case it is commonly believed that Google treats the alt tag much like it treats the anchor text on a text link. In other words Google will look at the alt tags as an indication of what the link is relevant to.

So always put alt tags on your image links. How else is Google going to possibly know what that link is supposed to be about. An image link without an alt tag will contribute to your PR, but it can't possible do a thing for your relevancy rating.

[minstrel]

Originally Posted by compar

The commonly excepted wisdom on this question is that an alt tag on a image does not do you any good in the Google rankings. Because they are so open to keyword stuffing, it is felt that Google just ignores them.

"commonly accepted" by who? based on what evidence?

[compar]

"commonly accepted" by who? based on what evidence?

Try the HighRanking or Cre8asite forums for starters.

Put your money where your mouth is and show us some evidence to the contrary.

[minstrel]

Originally Posted by compar

Try the HighRanking or Cre8asite forums for starters.

Forums are places where people like you and I post opinions - saying something in a forum does not in itself constitute evidence, let alone proof. In fact, the practice of reading something in a forum and then propagating it as accepted fact is one of the ways that myths and urban legends are born.

Put your money where your mouth is and show us some evidence to the contrary.

compar, I asked two questions concerning your previous post and the basis for your opinions - the tone of your response is unwarranted and unnecessarily aggressive.

I have warned you before both privately and in subtle ways publicly to show some restraint in your posts - this sort of language and attitude is contrary to WebProWorld Forum Rules, which in part state:

* Always display a positive, friendly attitude
* Be respectful of others' opinions
* Debates are great, as long as they remain respectful!
* Even if this is just your own personal opinion, RESPECT YOUR FELLOW MEMBERS

Since requests and private warnings don't seem to have been effective, I would ask that you take this public warning as a final warning (assuming you wish to continue your membership here at WebProWorld).

[compar]

Google doesn't tell us how they handle these things. So except by extensive testing one can never be sure. However I have been in the SEO business for a long time. I have talked and discussed these things with many other people who are knowledgable and experienced in the industry. What other basis is there for answering the original question?

If absolute proof was required for every answer then there would be very little discussion on these forums.

I said that in my understanding the "general wisdom" was. That is not an absolute claim to accuracy. I can't give you evidence of the facts I can only give you evidence of the "general wisdom".

Now if you think that my understanding of this point is incorrect then say so and present your evidence. Please don't challenge me for evidence if you are not prepared to give some yourself. Why should I be held to a different standard than you?

[minstrel]

Originally Posted by compar

Please don't challenge me for evidence if you are not prepared to give some yourself. Why should I be held to a different standard than you?

I didn't "challenge you" - I asked what your opinion was based on. To use "general wisdom" as a reference is at best vague - it's rather like saying, "everybody knows" and usually in my experience that isn't the case at all. To say, "I've been around a long time and talked to a lot of people" or "I've seen this stated in a lot of forums" isn't any more specific or any more helpful.

I don't have a problem with you having an opinion, but to claim something as general knowledge without providing a basis for that statement is I think misleading. That's why I asked you what you based the opinion on. I'm not even, at this point anyway, saying you are wrong - I'm simply questioning the basis for your statement.

[fathom]

Originally Posted by compar

Google doesn't tell us how they handle these things. So except by extensive testing one can never be sure. However I have been in the SEO business for a long time. I have talked and discussed these things with many other people who are knowledgable and experienced in the industry. What other basis is there for answering the original question?

If absolute proof was required for every answer then there would be very little discussion on these forums.

I said that in my understanding the "general wisdom" was. That is not an absolute claim to accuracy. I can't give you evidence of the facts I can only give you evidence of the "general wisdom".

Now if you think that my understanding of this point is incorrect then say so and present your evidence. Please don't challenge me for evidence if you are not prepared to give some yourself. Why should I be held to a different standard than you?

It's all fun and games until someone loses an eye! :-)

As a matter of practice alt="" should be used in all images and left emptied for things like spacers and graphical appeal.

There is a burden of proof that Google continues to favor image link anchors and the use of alt="" in replacement of anchor text.

The lack of evidence to support alt="" helps in "non-linked images" does suggest that Google has deprecated this form of page manipulation thus compar does have sound reasoning.

compar might have worded the response a bit differently but his conclusions are supported by the vast majority of SEO firms that conduct and report research findings.

Admittedly though, research and the "lack of" proof is worth three wifes tales, two old sea stories and a rumor - so we should call this a draw! :-)