alt tag vrs. link text?

does the image alt tag count as a themed link?

[keyplyr]

I know that Google parses the image alt tag text; I have seen it displayed in SERPs.

But does the alt tag text for an image link, i.e. banner, weigh very high? If the image alt tag contained the same KW as a text link, would they count the same for themed incoming links? Anyone seen any evidence of this? Thanks.

[troels nybo nielsen]

It is my impression that image alt tag does indeed count with Google but not very much. I must admit that I do not have any real arguments for my point of view, it's just a rather vague impression. But it would seem logical. For the users the alt image tags are good to have but not really very important. And Google likes webmasters to do what's good for the visitors.

If image alt tags counted much with Google they would be a very likely means for keyword spamming.

[bobriggs]

alt tag is a recommended standard by w3.org For visually impaired users, it is definitely usable.

I've seen pages indexed by the alt tag, and if you look at the cache, you'll see the standard phrase 'word' pointed to by links to this page.

But I also get a bunch of hits from images.google.com - And I think that the alt text plays a higher role in that search.

[keyplyr]

My intent for the question, is to aid me in deciding whether I will benefit by giving reciprocal linkers the choice to link my banner (with KW alt) or a KW text link. I'm of the opinion that the reciprocal KW text link will score higher but was wondering if the banner alt would score a close second.

[bobriggs]

I surmise that if you used an image, the alt text would become a very close second IF there was other text on the page to back it up. (who knows, it might be even better based on what I see in images.google.com) if it is backed up with other text links - depends on where you want hits coming from. I just checked, and google has an image that has nothing to do with the alt text on that image linked to a page (in images.google.com) with other text relating to it.

By itself, I would go for the KW text link.

[troels nybo nielsen]

Interesting idea. I think you should try. Some of those people might for irrational reasons like better to link to a banner. And if you carefully edit your alt text it might score pretty well.

[fathom]

<a href="something.com" title="something"><img src="something.gif" alt="something"></a>

or

<a href="something.com" title="something">something</a>

In my experience the weight is the same or insignificantly different, however, I would tend to believe it would be far easier to get a reciprocal link (where you provide the code) that the person uses it verbatim (e.g. - copy and paste).

If you provide an image and code and they don't like the size, color or a multitude of other concerns, there is a greater chance the the "alt" and/or "title" attributes could change to not being there at all.

[Powdork]

If image alt tags counted much with Google they would be a very likely means for keyword spamming.

This is true, in the same sense that text is a means for spamming. If the alt text is related to the page it will count. On two of the sites I manage there exists a link from every page of one site to the homepage of the other. The link is an image link. It used to have alt text of 'click here for unrelated keyword phrase'. Not surprisingly, it ranked #1 for 'unrelated keyword phrase'. The new link was updated in the last update and it now ranks #1 for relevant keywords. It is also important that the alt text match the picture in order to survive any human review.

[fathom]

It is also important that the alt text match the picture in order to survive any human review.

Yup! Totally agree... a "click here" button has nothing to do with widgets, but a...

"for widgets click here",

"click here for widgets", or just

"widgets"

seems logical, if of course the page is about "widgets" and if not should it really be on the page to begin with.

(e.g. -- a page about Earth and its Moon, should really only have images with the Earth and the moon and not one without the other.

[troels nybo nielsen]

Seems that I have somewhat underestimated Google's appetite on alt texts. I had better upgrade my own ones and put one or two more (relevant) keywords in each of them.