Concealing text primarily to manipulate search rankings. Legitimate tabs, accordions, and accessibility features are not inherently abusive.
Hidden text abuse involves concealing content so that it is not easily available to people while using it to manipulate search engines. Google’s examples include text hidden behind images or styled to disappear when its purpose is manipulation. The key concern is the deceptive use, not every instance of text being temporarily out of view.
Web interfaces often reveal information through tabs, accordions or other interactions. Accessibility techniques can also provide meaningful text for screen-reader users. Google distinguishes these useful design patterns from hidden-text abuse when they serve people rather than conceal search-targeting material.
That distinction is not a blanket guarantee for every accordion or off-screen style. The content still needs to be useful, appropriately accessible and consistent with the page’s purpose. A component’s name does not make keyword spam acceptable, and an accessibility technique should not be removed simply because its text is not visually displayed.
Takeaway: Keep content available to the people it is intended to help. Review why material is hidden and how users can access it before deciding whether a design technique is legitimate or manipulative.
Example
An order form includes a visually hidden label that gives a screen-reader user the purpose of an input. That is different from a page hiding a list of unrelated search phrases behind a photograph. The first supports access to the form; the second adds material users are not meant to read.
What to check
When auditing, inspect the actual behavior with the relevant input methods, not just a screenshot. Preserve useful accessibility text and interactive content. Remove deceptive search-targeting material through a scoped review rather than deleting every hidden element or promising that any named widget is automatically safe.
For more detail, see Spam policies for Google web search.