Patrick Stox on Twitter: "Google then: Injecting canonical tags with JS doesn't work. Me in 2018 years ago: Yes, it does. Here's the tweet with the test. Google 4 years later: Oh yeah, that works but we don't recommend it. https://t.co/jl71ckVslb 🦥" / Twitter

Google then: Injecting canonical tags with JS doesn't work. Me in 2018 years ago: Yes, it does. Here's the tweet with the test. Google 4 years later: Oh yeah, that works but we don't recommend it. developers.google.com/search/docs/ad 🦥

Quote Tweet

Patrick Stox

@patrickstox

Aug 3, 2018

What does the URL Inspection tool say about JavaScript inserted canonicals? Here's one for stoxseo.com (no canonical in html), which was definitely respected and switched in the SERPs a while back but now even the tools are telling me they see and respect it. @JohnMu

4:41 PM · Jul 5, 2022

Replying to

Over the years I’ve injected every possible SEO element into a page for one reason or another. It’s never not worked. Not advisable, but works.

Kristine (@Schachin on Spoutible too)

@schachin

Jul 5, 2022

Replying to

@patrickstox

I had a client who did this had raw and client side .. Google wants it in the raw HTML and not the render client side, but if you do the JS client side they will read it, but it will cause confusion.

Conversation