I started as a Flash designer in high school (circa 1998). I thought Flash was possibly the coolest thing in the world (and at the time it just might have been).
I would show people websites like www.GaboCorp.com and www.Eye4U.com any chance I got – and they blew people away. They’re still pretty impressive. My own stuff? Well, let’s just say I soon realized that my strengths lie in other areas.
When it’s done well Flash can be jaw-dropping (check out this Flash interface created by Gabo Mendoza of GaboCorp.com). It also powers many of the sites we use every day (YouTube.com, Hulu.com, Mint.com, etc). Without Flash the web wouldn’t be nearly as great as it is.
But Flash can create some real problems for your website’s search engine visibility. If you’re considering having your business website built in Flash there are a few things you need to know.
While Google announced last year that they were teaching Googlebot to index Flash the main problems still exist. I found it rather irresponsible of Google to tout their own Flash indexing abilities this way – it sends the wrong message, because the truth is that most Flash websites are still not SEO-friendly (or user friendly, but that’s another issue).
Good Flash developers know how to make a Flash website SEO-friendly. The problem, however, is that the people who hire developers don’t – and they’re probably not expecting the budget increase an SEO-friendly Flash site can create.
For the non-developer, here’s a simplified explanation of the problems Flash can create for your SEO.
The single URL issue
I’d estimate 95% of the business websites I see that were built in Flash behave this way.
What’s the problem?
The entire website in this case loads on a single URL. That means:
- One URL for Google to index
- One URL for users to link to or bookmark
- One URL that can (possibly) rank for a given keyword.
Graceful Degradation
The principle of graceful degradation means your website should be built in such a way that when a browser without the highest level of support loads your page it is still functional.
As you step down in browser functionality the website should follow – offering up less-advanced versions until you hit the rock bottom (a plain vanilla HTML experience that still works).
In other words, if your website is driven by Flash a non-Flash version should be displayed for browsers without Flash support.
While I don’t want to paint with too broad a brush I must say that in my experience fewer than 5% of business websites built in Flash degrade gracefully.
The common argument against building your Flash site this way is that some 95% of browsers have Flash support – so there’s no real issue since 95% of your visitors will be able to use your site.
This argument makes sense if you’re not concerned with getting search engine traffic through relevant keywords.
Search engines are browsers without Flash support
So how do you combat this if you’re building a site in Flash? Enter Flash replacement.
Shaun Inman developed the IFR (Inman Flash Replacent) method to allow webmasters to serve up Flash for those browsers with support and a non-Flash version of their content for browsers without support (such as search engine crawlers). The method simply uses JavaScript to determine whether the browser supports the proper Flash version, and, if so, loads the Flash movie into a target location. Browsers without Flash or JavaScript support (again, search engine crawlers) see the plain vanilla content.
The SWFObject method is another way to use Flash replacement to make your website visible to search engine crawlers.
Here’s a simple visualization of how this works:
The bottom line is that Flash websites can definitely be SEO-friendly – with the right steps. The two potential problems with implementing these steps:
- Awareness
- Budget
If you’re looking to have a new website developed and are considering Flash it’s a good idea to understand all of its implications. Flash can make for a brilliant online experience, but many business owners haven’t considered the downside of missing out on search engine traffic or the increased cost of building an SEO-friendly Flash website.
Additional reading on the Flash SEO issue:
- A great article on “How to SEO Flash” by Jonathan Hochman
- Rand Fishkin of SEOmoz provides 7 reasons Flash and search engines still don’t mix
- GrowMap.com offers some great points and links on using Flash for web development
{ 3 trackbacks }
{ 14 comments… read them below or add one }
Nice article Mike. I would like to add to the negative side by pointing out the higher costs associated with maintenance and expansion of a Flash site. Unlike more basic sites that many people can edit and add to on their own, Flash sites require flash developers in many cases.
IMHO the incorporation of Flash elements is OK, but entirely Flash sites are best left to big brands and huge budgets.
Thanks Tim.
The additional costs of maintenance are certainly worth mentioning. Avid SEO developers will tell you that Flash websites can be database driven with a backend like any other website. It’s true, but this adds another layer to the dev process (more $$).
I agree – the bigger brands, like Nike, Bicardi, etc, probably aren’t worried about search engine traffic for [generic related phrase]. They’re established, and that’s why it works for them. They can also afford the Flash development teams to put together an SEO-friendly solution.
I think Flash has a time and place just like everything. The car mechanic probably shouldn’t be thinking about having Flash on his website, but the local DJ who wants to show video’s of his work and offer up some entertainment value from his website should.
I’m still not convinced that there is ever an effective argument for having an entire website in Flash. I personally feel that Flash is overused, and thankfully we are starting to see more reasonable uses like banner messages, marketing messages etc. However, I still find myself stumbling across the site that has their navigation in Flash which needs to load on each page (probably the most annoying use of Flash IMO).
Used appropriately and in combination with the right tactics, Flash can be incredibly effective. Used inappropriately and you’ve made things that much harder on yourself when it comes to marketing and upkeep.
Nice post.
I totally agree – the trouble is that some car mechanics have it in their heads that a total Flash website will be a good thing. Not much to be done about that beyond educating anyone possible – which I do every chance I get – about the downside of a full Flash website (and it’s a big downside).
I think a full Flash website is a great way to say, “hey look at what we can do!” So for a Flash developer – sure, build it in Flash, impress people. Think http://www.2Advanced.com.
For everyone else, a full Flash website isn’t the best approach IMO.
Thanks for the comment.
Mike,
Great article. I must say I agree with all posted.
I myself am in the market for a new website.
Been researching open source software like, Wordpress, Joomla, Konpozer, Drupal, Gimp. Trying to educate myself on the technologies and protocol to properly engage with folks like you when ready.
Still working on content and design visions.
Cam across one I haven’t heard of: Silex. http://osflash.org/silex
It boasts SEO automation etc…
In fact when I google Silex, they came up number one.
It seems to be a WCMS as well, making it easy to update.
Please let me know your thoughts or experiences with Silex.
@Rick thanks from stopping by.
Open source is definitely where it’s at for most applications. I try to stay up to date on what’s out there and available myself – although it’s tough to keep up sometimes!
WordPress is great in my experience – we use it for this website.
Drupal is awesome as well – but it will take a little more to set it up, and depending on your needs it might be overkill.
I have zero experience with Silex so my comments/observations wouldn’t hold much value.
I’m no SEO expert but the flash backlash seems a bit backward as google moves forward, together with adobe, in developing an algorithm that explores Flash files the same way a person would, by clicking buttons etc. collecting content to be indexed… but I know what you mean it’s tough to keep up sometimes.
And it hasn’t quite happened yet. There are definitely important things to consider in choosing construction materials, and you touch on some good ones.
@Stefan I certainly don’t want to give the impression that I’m interested in “backlashing” against the use of Flash. Rather, my intention is to do my part to educate people about the implications of using Flash.
I’ve explored the functionality Google and Adobe have developed. While it is a great step forward, they really glazed over some of the details.
Even the ability to browse/index content cannot make up for the lack of URL changes (and therefor the lack of individual pages to index/bookmark), the fact that text in Flash files has often been “broken apart” and can’t be read and a few other issues.
On the other hand, there is nothing but smart development standing in the way of a fully SEO-friendly Flash website. My concern is simply that most business owners don’t understand that, and many developers aren’t prepared to recommend it.
But I certainly don’t want to paint with too broad a brush, and I appreciate your point – we want to work with the technology as it’s being developed, not rail against it because we’re stuck on aging principles.
hey Mike – the backlash comment wasn’t personal, rather the sum of the parts including comments… You’re right about the details still being glazed over – I think that’s part of any development process, not knowing – yet. And hopefully, when all the chips have fallen, they will (i’m being optimistic). And certainly like any process, there will be imperfections. But like you said, clear eyed development is the best course one could ask for. Even once the chips have fallen…
Thanks for laying out some good points.
Stefan
@Stefan No worries – I didn’t take your comment personally (or think you intended it that way).
I also think your point is a good one. It’s an easy mistake to simply write Flash off as “not SEO friendly” and get stuck in that way of thinking. Understanding the technology and what is possible is a much better approach.
Additionally, my general opinion is that it’s not a great idea to develop in hopes that search engines will eventually “get it right.” In the mean time you’ll likely miss out on valuable traffic.
Thanks again for your comments.
I have never come across such a succinct article regarding SEO and flash. Thanks for this.
Maybe now I’ll be able to explain (in a clearer manner) how Flash is viable, but there must be more planning involved for clients that would like to be found and indexed by the search engines and don’t want to compromise delivery design.
@Santa Clara SEO – Thanks! There are definitely ways to make Flash SEO-friendly (that article from Jonathan Hochman linked above is a great source) – it’s just important to weigh the costs against the benefits since it certainly adds more work to a project.
@Mike
How far along do you think it will be before Google (who is the leader at search and SEO) will figure out the best way to index Flash developed sites?
Its not like Flash has only been around for 5 minutes, right? I’m just ranting right now, but I’m seriously impressed with this article and for the reference to the other one mentioned above.
I think there are some problems with the way generic Flash-driven websites are built such that the right information will never be there, no matter how deep Googlebot can crawl a Flash file.
For example, you’re never going to have semantic markup inside most Flash files that indicates different page titles, headings, etc. Additionally, when Flash designers break text apart (a common task) any information about the words occurring in that text block is gone. And the single URL problem (which means you can’t have separate, optimized pages with most Flash sites) isn’t going away.
Could Google feasibly develop technology to work around these problems? It’s possible, but, in my opinion, quite unlikely. The reason: resources. Jumping through these hoops to detect page content and structure would spend precious system resources that Google wants to conserve to save costs. Only the most central websites (with the strongest link profiles) would justify spending that level of resources to index.
The new crawling developments have likely already helped Flash-driven websites – with newly-indexed text on the home page, for example, I expect many Flash sites are seeing increased traffic through the long tail. That’s a positive we shouldn’t ignore. I just have my reservations about it getting any better.