<b>, <i>< <strong>, <em>

Which ones provide SEO benefits?

[Made In Sheffield]

I know making phrases bold or italic has benefits for SEO but does Google give the same weight to <strong> and <em> as it does for <b> and <i> respectively.

I've been assuming it doesn't but thought it's about time I checked.

[creative craig]

AFSIK it doesnt add any extra weight if you use them. Stick with Bold and Italics titles :)

[garylo]

As far as I know <strong> will give you some extra points as well as bold text. But this does not make a big difference, there are other, far more powerful factors in the Google algo that will make or break your rankings.

[Made In Sheffield]

I realise that but I'd prefer to use <strong> and <em> over <b> and <i> but I won't if they don't give the benefit.

Every little helps :)

[jomaxx]

These tags have been around forever, so I assume Google can support them just fine. I can't think of any reason they wouldn't. Using EM and STRONG is a widely recommended HTML coding practice, so conceivably these tags could be more important than hardcoded italics and bold text.

I don't think anybody will be able to answer this question definitively, though.

[edited by: jomaxx at 3:39 pm (utc) on April 2, 2003]

[creative craig]

Webmasterworld uses the <b> tag and not the the <strong> if that means anything.

I have never heard of people talking of the strong tag being used with any weight for SEO.

Of course I may not have been paying any attention ;)

Craig

[garylo]

My guess is that <strong> is equal to <b>

[Mohamed_E]

> My guess is that <strong> is equal to <b>

I tend to agree. When looking at this sort of question I think of someone writing the Google program. Why write:

if (font == bold) ...

when for the same price you can write:

if (font == bold ¦¦ font = strong) ...

Surely the people who wrote that code realize that, in one sense, they mean the same thing (OK, I know perfectly well that conceptually they are totally different, but let's be real).

[Rhadamanthus]

Given the way general pattern of Google's behavior, I would be very, very surprised if <strong> and <em> counted for less than <b> and <i>. I would expect them to count for at least the same, and very possibly more.

Why? Because they *are* conceptually different from <b> and <i>. <b> and <i> are formatting tags. In other words, they tell the browser how to make the text look. <strong> and <em> are descriptive tags - they convey conceptual meaning to the browser (in this case, saying that the inclosed text is important).

In a theoretical world operating in the way HTML was originally intended, Google wouldn't count <b> or <i> for anything, but <strong> and <em> would count for a lot, because they designate important text. However, we live in the real world where most people (even those who know better, like me) never use <strong> or <em>, but instead use <b> and <i>. So Google probably accounts for both. But if I were them, I'd give at least a small advantage to <strong> and <em> over <b> and <i>, because whenever they're used, most likely it's by somebody who actually understands their purpose and wants to mark a few words as important. That is, until word gets out on the street that this helps, and then the spam sites will just enclose every other word in them. :)