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
-
Domains and Domain Authority
Looking for some advice 🙂 I have a domain that has been registered since 1999 and currently hosts my website - the problem is that my business has moved in a different direction and my URL is no longer associated with my main product offering. For example in the past I was xyzgarden.com however now something like xyzhomedecor.com is much more appropriate. How should I handle this so that I am not at a disadvantage for SEO. thanks!
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | MainstreamMktg0 -
Ratings Snippets Gone? ( Help! )
Hello We had good traffic from ratings ( stars ) . I have added Offer details in the rich snippets in various currencies - the snippet testing tool likes it , but for some reason the stars on my site have completely dissapeared and been gone for almost a week. I need the offer information in there for google shopping automatic updates and google told me that it's implemented correctly for the shopping part.. but I really don't know what to do about this. Any ideas why would be really appreciated. http://www.return2health.net/yeast-imbalance/threelac-candida-defence/ Thanks 🙂
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | s_EOgi_Bear0 -
Rel=Canonical=CONFUSED
Hey, I am a confused canonical and here's why - please help! I have a master website called www.1099pro.com and then many other websites that simply duplicate the material on the master site (i.e www.1099A.com, www.1099T.com, www.1099solution.com, and the list goes on). These other domains & pages have been around for long enough that they have been able to garner some page authority & domain authority that it makes it worthwhile to redirect them to their corresponding pages on www.1099pro.com. The problem is two-fold when trying to pass this link-juice: I do not have access to the web-service that hosts the other sites/domains and cannot 301 redirect them The other sites/domains are setup so that whatever changes I make to www.1099pro.com are automatically distributed across all the other sites. This means that when I put on www.1099pro.com it also shows up on all the other domains. It is my understanding that having on a site such as www.1099solution.com does not pass any link juice and actually eliminates that page from the search results. Is there any way that I can pass the link juice?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Stew2220 -
Rel=canonical
I have seen that almost all of my website pages need rel=canonical tag. Seems that something's wrong here since I have unique content to every page. Even show the homepage as a rel=canonical which doesnt make sense. Can anyone suggest anything? or just ignore those issues.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | arcade880 -
More authority back links but lower MozRank than competitor
Hi All, I have a basic understanding of SEO and the various factors that contribute to higher search rankings. This question is specifically related to MozRank, which I understand to be defined as: Pages earn MozRank by the number and quality of other pages that link to them. The higher the quality of the incoming links, the higher the MozRank. In my case, I am wondering if somebody could explain to me why I have a lower MozRank score than my competitor when I have both: Larger number of followable inbound links to my siteAND Of my larger number of followable inbound links, the page authority (and domain authority) of these links are greater than the page/domain authority of the lower number of links to my competitor's site. I have attached 3 images to help explain my points.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Rogs.SEO
Comparison Image: My site is on the left.
Competitor Inbound: Shows a snippet of the volume of inbound links and quality of inbound links of my competitor's site (filtered by highest page authority).
My Inbound: Shows a snippet volume of inbound links and quality of inbound links to my site (filtered by highest page authority). Any feedback or help is much appreciated! n5o5lJ4.png?1 KrQAONn.jpg VedgBLI.jpg0 -
Domain authority vs. moz difficulty
what type relationship do you see with domain authority and moz difficulty scores? i'm finding a rule of "tens' usually applies.... meaning if da = 45, then difficulty scores of 40-50 are generally within short term reach (3-6 months of simple onpage optimization and an appropriate # ofinbound links to the page). your thoughts/data? just trying to get a feel for a consensus 🙂
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | DonnieCooper0 -
Does a Single Instance of rel="nofollow" cause all instances on a page to be nofollowed?
I attended the Bruce Clay training at SMX Advanced Seattle, and he mentioned link pruning/sculpting (here's an SEOMoz article about it - http://www.seomoz.org/blog/google-says-yes-you-can-still-sculpt-pagerank-no-you-cant-do-it-with-nofollow) Now during his presentation he mentioned that if you have one page with multiple links leading to another page, and one of those links is nofollowed, it could cause all links to be nofollowed. Example: Page A has 4 links to Page B: 1:followed, 2:followed, 3:nofollowed, 4:followed The presence of a single nofollow tag would override the 3 followed links and none of them would pass link juice. Has anyone else encountered this problem, and Is there any evidence to support this? I'm thinking this would make a great experiment.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | brycebertola0 -
Domain Authority / Page Authority
I manage a site that has home page authority of 69, and overall domain authority of 63. To improve domain authority, would it help to remove some of the pages that have 0 page authority? There are over 1,000 pages to this site, and I always thought that the more pages you have, the better (generally). But, does it actually hurt the site to have pages that Google perceives as having 0 page authority, or does this have no bearing? Any insight would be greatly appreciated.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | DiscoverBoating0