Sitewide rel author for rich snippets a disaster waiting to happen?
-
Hi,
I've been looking at how various sites handle rel author tags linking to Google+ accounts to get rich snippets results. I've found more than a few that have the same code on every page, even though those actual pages clearly have different authors and some may not even mention the rel author's name.
A site I'm working on has different authors for different pages. Although the convenience of putting the same rel author on every page seems dreamy, it also seems like a disaster waiting to happen, since it would appear to be trickery about who the author is and possibly one Google update away from disaster.
Can you call a site owner or employee an author on pages that to the reader appear to be written by others?
Am I being too cautious or what?
Thanks!
Cheers... Darcy
-
Hi Gianluca,
All good info - thanks!
One followup question; What is the point of the rel="publisher" link? If a site is linked to it's Google+ page, aren't all pages in effect rel publisher? Also, does it do anything rich-snippets-wise?
Thanks.. Darcy
-
Hi Darcy,
as Samuel correctly said, it is against the authorships' guidelines to assign the authorship via rel="author" to a owner who isn't.
At the same time, it is against the guidelines assigning authorships via rel="author" to pages that actually aren't posts, articles, white papers, long-forms or pages containing videos, which authorship can be attested.
That means that using rel="author" in the home page, product pages, listings and "institutional" pages (i.e.: about us) is not how Google thinks authorships should be used. For those pages the only "ownerships" allowed is the rel="publisher", which tells Google that the page has been published by the Business whose link in rel="publisher" is linking to.
The Samuel post is a great one, but I suggest you also to check out this official Google page (and the pages linked from that one).
Finally... right now Google is not penalizing the sites not properly using rel="author", but - as told me by an important Googler some time ago - it will come the day that it will something causing, if not a penalization, yes the "disappearing" of every authorships sign in the SERPs for the "cheating" site.
-
I highly suggest using rel=author only on pages and/or posts that have individually-authored content such as blog posts and white papers. Google specifically states that it is against Google+ rules to use rel=author on other general pages such as product pages and contact pages. I'd also not use one rel=author code when it is obvious that the page was written by someone else. It looks weird to website visitors, and it is an attempt to mislead Google.
So, yes, companies that use rel=author sitewide or do other such things to manipulate Google are likely one update away from disaster. I personally think that Google+ abuse is one of the reasons that we've seen a decline in the appearance of authorship in the SERPs and that we have yet to see a concrete "author rank." I'd take a look at this Moz post of mine (and see the linked sources and comments) on one way webmasters may unintentionally be applying authorship in a hurtful way -- and when this is fixed, some people who had lost authorship in the SERPs regained it a few days later.
Got a burning SEO question?
Subscribe to Moz Pro to gain full access to Q&A, answer questions, and ask your own.
Browse Questions
Explore more categories
-
Moz Tools
Chat with the community about the Moz tools.
-
SEO Tactics
Discuss the SEO process with fellow marketers
-
Community
Discuss industry events, jobs, and news!
-
Digital Marketing
Chat about tactics outside of SEO
-
Research & Trends
Dive into research and trends in the search industry.
-
Support
Connect on product support and feature requests.
Related Questions
-
6 months Later - 0 Domain Authority/Page Authority and losing Rankings
Hi Moz, Sorry if this comes across as a "Do My Job For Me" type of post but we are an E-Commerce store that have been live since January but have not seen any increase in performance on our site and over the past month, have even seen our rankings decrease. We have 1300 products on site and about 1500 pages in total. 1. As for on-site optimization, we have got 2 reviews and follow up reviews with a highly reputable reviewer from People Per Hour and solved any issues she has found. 2. Updated the Meta Data for products and Alt Descriptions for images focusing on the keywords we wish to rank for. We post weekly blogposts linking back to our products. 3. Social Media Campaigns with regular campaigns on FaceBook, Pinterest, Google+ and Twitter. 4. Attempted to build FOLLOW backlinks to articles relating to products on our site. We have also considered purchasing backlinks to improve our situation as we have yet to see any of these pages be crawled by Google over a month later. I have read a guides on Moz and other sites on how to improve our authority and improve rankings but none have offered much by way of practical solution. My question being, is this just a matter of patience or should I be worried/improving anything given we have 0 Domain Authority and Page Authority on all pages? Thanking you in advance, SEO Novice.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | csworkwear0 -
Is their value in linking to PPC landing pages and using rel="canonical"
I have ppc landing pages that are similar to my seo page. The pages are shorter with less text with a focus on converting visitors further along in the purchase cycle. My questions are: 1. Is there a benefit for having the orphan ppc pages indexed or should I no index them? 2. If indexing does provide benefits, should I create links from my site to the ppc pages or should I just submit them in a sitemap? 3. If indexed, should I use rel="canonical" and point the ppc versions to the appropriate organic page? Thanks,
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | BrandExpSteve0 -
Can I Use Multiple rel="alternate" Tags on Multiple Domains With the Same Language?
Hoping someone can answer this for me, as I have spent a ton of time researching with no luck... Is there anything misleading/wrong with using multiple rel="alternate" tags on a single webpage to reference multiple alternate versions? We currently use this tag to specify a mobile-equivalent page (mobile site served on an m. domain), but would like to expand so that we can cover another domain for desktop (possibly mobile in the future). In essence: MAIN DOMAIN would get The "Other Domain" would then use Canonical to point back to the main site. To clarify, this implementation idea is for an e-commerce site that maintains the same product line across 2 domains. One is homogeneous with furniture & home decor, which is a sub-set of products on our "main" domain that includes lighting, furniture & home decor. Any feedback or guidance is greatly appreciated! Thanks!
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | LampsPlus0 -
Duplicate Title tags even with rel=canonical
Hello, We were having duplicate content in our blog (a replica of each post automatically was done by the CMS), until we recently implemented a rel=canonical tag to all the duplicate posts (some 5 weeks ago). So far, no duplicate content were been found, but we are still getting duplicate title tags, though the rel=canonical is present. Any idea why is this the case and what can we do to solve it? Thanks in advance for your help. Tej Luchmun
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | luxresorts0 -
Rich Snippets - Easy Come / Easy Go!
Hi Guys, I've been trying like mad to get Rich Snippets (star ratings, price, availability) to show for product page results for www.evo.com. What's very strange is when I test my product page URLs in the Structured Data Testing Tool, the previews look great and the extracted data is what I'd expect. I am however getting "missing price" errors for every item in the Structured Data report in Webmaster Tools - which seems contradictory to what the testing tool shows. The error description says this can prevent Rich Snippets from showing. If anyone here could take a look at the schema.org/Offer markup on one of our product pages and see if they can see anything wrong with our price markup I would greatly appreciate it! The plot thickens.... What's even stranger is that when I submit product page URLs (that have reviews) to Google's index using Fetch as GoogleBot, the Rich Snippets appear - but then disappear sometime in the following day(s). The only thing I can think of is somehow my Merchant Center feed (which contains "product_review_count" and "product_review_average") which runs nightly is somehow 'breaking' the Rich Snippets that are generated after the page has been crawled. Any advice is greatly appreciated!
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | evoNick
Will0 -
Explanation of Drop in Domain Authority: 31 to 26 in Four Months
Dear Moz Community: Domain Authority for my site has dropped to 26. It was about 35 a year ago and has dropped to 26 a few days ago from 29 as recently as last month. In the meantime Google Page rank has dropped from 4 to 2. Page authority for my home page remains pretty stable at about 37. Strangely site traffic increased about 25% in early October after the most recent Penguin update, going form about 130 to 170 visits per day. I ordered a web site audit from a MOZ recommended SEO firm last October. Since November we have focused on implementing suggestions in their audit.We have removed duplicate content from about 30 pages (our site is 500 pages), slightly modified the architecture of the site to allow better indexing of property listings (I run a real estate site), had a mirror site hosted by former developer de-indexed, added structured mark-up language and made some other minor changes. The audit concluded that about 45% of the domains linking to my site were toxic, 45% suspicious and the remaining 10%. I have yet to take action to remove the bad domains and work on building quality links. But these bad links have existed for the last several years. I would like to know if anyone has any ideas as to why the drop in my Domain Authority appears to be accelerating? Is this tied with my implementation of the audit suggestions or could it be something else? I should mention that I have not engages in any social media for about two three months. From January to August I would tweet, Google+, Facebook regularly adding links to my site. Also I have been adding an average of 2-3 blog posts a month, with the exception of November where none were added. How serious is this drop? Can I recover domain authority through link building? Would removing the toxic links result in a partial recovery?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Kingalan10 -
Links from music/celebrity based fansites - sitewide images with no alt text
We're currently in the middle of a link audit on our website OneDirection.net and a large part of our incoming links come from fansites such as the following: ladygaganow.net nickjonline.com justinbieberhood.com joejonashq.com harrystylesfan.org brunodaily.org onedirectiondaily.com onedirectionfans.net Now, our previous way of thinking was that these are very relevant websites in the same niche as us, and therefore should be passing some value? However all of the links on these sites come from sitewide images with no alt-text. Some of the sites are passing 1000+ links to us. We've been wary to disavow or request removal of these links as we've usually gone with the thinking that Google applies "common-sense" based logic in its algorithms, and therefore these backlinks should be ok - in our opinion. However we think we are suffering from some kind of algorithmic penalty with our current rankings, and are now thinking these could be the cause. What are people's opinions on these links? Should we stay clear of sitewide links altogether? Should we contact the site owners and try to get them to mix up the alt-text? Or should we get rid of them altogether? Thanks, Chris.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | PixelKicks0 -
Simple Pagination and Rel Canonical
Hello, I am trying to find a solid solution to this. I think it is simple, but trying to think of a good setup for SEO. If you have a paginated result set, page 1, page 2, page 3, page 4. What i am wondering is, should I point my REL CANONICAL page to Page 1 always, so i'm not loosing power from the first page? Domain structure: www.domain.com/search/[term]/page1/
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | aactive
www.domain.com/search/[term]/page2/ Should I point all pages to page 1, so I don't get watered down as we go farther into the site? Thoughts?0