Is this misuse of scheme data?
-
A directory list page that uses the individual business page review data.
Instead of the scheme markup indicating the a particular business page has a review, the page that lists all of the businesses gets the review instead.
This means the list page can get hundreds of reviews which could potentially affect its SERPs.
A competitor is doing this now.
Is this an abuse of the system?
Should it be reported?
How does on report this kind of this?
-
Thanks for the insighful responses.
I need to clarify one point.
They are not aggregating reviews from around the web. Instead they have business profiles which include reviews. Instead of the business' profile page using the mark up, the directory page that lists each of the businesses uses the mark up.
So if there are 50 businesses in a category with 1 review each, the category page shows up in SERPs with 50 reviews.
This would affect CTRs as you pointed out.
Is this considered manipulation?
-
Does the directory page show ratings and reviews (or review snippits) that are viewable by visitors to the page? If so, wrapping those elements in schema.org (or other structure schemes that correctly tag the structured data) does not feel like abuse.
The follow-up questions becomes, does that site have the right to show the reviews/ratings they are showing? This is a somewhat grey area at the moment. Google themselves, used to frequently summarize reviews from other sites without those sites permission (http://techcrunch.com/2011/07/21/google-places-stops-stealing-reviews/) and when they did so, they certainly did wrap the reviews in structured data tags. The IP owner usually wants Google (and other media) to promote its site, and is usually happy for them to use small snippits of their content to do so (that's the whole premise of Google Search). Where the grey area comes in, is when the "promotional" or "editorial" use starts to compete with the original content owners use-case (as happened when Yelp reviews were showing up on Google Plus Places pages).
At the very least, you could use google to see who else has the same reviews as the directory page you are competing with, and then see if one of those sites is the intellectual property owner, and if they want to assert their rights.
So in summary, I don't think using schema.org is abuse (if the data marked up, is in fact accurately tagged), but the site does need to have the rights to the review content they are using.
-
Hi there
First of all, it should be remembered that the schema markup itself will not effect rankings - it is not a ranking factor. However, it will most likely effect click through rate - and so any gaming of the system would be seen as manipulative.
I think what you have described does exactly that - it manipulates the rich snippet in Google search by aggregating reviews of hundreds of other websites to pass off as its own. Pretty clear cut and shouldn't be happening.
Google's algorithmic detection of this appears to be lacking at the moment, but they do have a rich snippet spam reporting tool, which you can find here, which allows you to report anything that you think is spammy.
Hope this helps.
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
-
Structured data? Confused
I understand the basic concept of structured data (guiding engines onto how to view the content) but how do I implement this? After creating a product page with images, content, links, etc. What do I do to make sure we are good on all the different structured content types? Is there a tool to make it happen? Sorry for not understanding it...
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Jamesmcd030 -
Will google merge structured data from two pages if they have the same canonical?
Will google merge structured data from two pages if they have the same canonical? The crawler should be able to get to the tab through an ahref. The tab in question is "Cast & Crew." Thank you in advance for any insight! szmOmj8.jpg uM8qUfi.jpg
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | catbur0 -
Would a mass data update have a negative effect on SEO?
We have a large eCommerce site with the ability to do an export, change data, and import new data in mass. Over the 15 years that this site has been growing, it has accumulated several inconsistencies in product titles, descriptions, title tags, etc. The question is: If we were to update thousands of product titles ( 's on those pages) and some of the descriptions, would it have a negative SEO impact because of the groundbreaking number of products effected? Or would it only be for the better if they were all technically improvements (both in SEO and UX)? Thanks!
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | frankandmaven0 -
Best Format to Index a Large Data Set
Hello Moz, I've been working on a piece of content that has 2 large data sets I have organized into a table that I would like indexed and want to know the best way to code the data for search engines while still providing a good visual experience for users. I actually created the piece 3 times and am deciding on which format to go with and I would love your professional opinions. 1. HTML5 - all the data is coded using tags and contains all the data on page in the . This is the most straight forward method and I know this will get indexed; however, it is also the ugliest looking table and least functional. 2. Java - I used google charts and loaded all the data into a
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | jwalker880 -
Website Isn't Ranking & I'm Not Sure Why Based On The Data
Hi Moz Community,
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | ErrickG
I am having an issue that has been killing me for some time and I could really use another opinion. One of my client’s websites hasn't been ranking for some time and I can't put my finger on it. There are no issues showing up in the webmaster tools. If you compare the site with the tops ranking sites for the websites number one keyword, the website is just as good as everyone else. My clients website is the first one on the left in the attachment. We have better quality content but instead of showing up on page 1,2,3 the site is on page 21. I am just at a lost. Anyone have any thoughts outside looking in. Thanks,
Errick rrLJZ2G0 -
Do Google webmaster tool and other backlinks analysis tool ignore the disavow data ?
Hello, Lots of site i have disavow so if i download backlinks of my site from google webmaster so google will ignore the disavow data and give me backlinks other than disavow data? Same if i use backlink tools like moz or semrush or ahref etc for checking backlinks of my site or competitor site so will this tool ignore the disavow data? If such tools not aware of disavow then it is worthless to check competitor links? Thanks! dev
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | devdan0 -
Hacked - Lost Meta Data
Our website was hacked last night and all data lost. I've worked over night to replace the destroyed data which was essentially things like all of our prices, testimonials, etc, etc. Got that sorted but now notice that all our page meta data has disappeared, title, description, etc. I'm worried that if I dont' enter the correct data that corresponds to Google "records" that we will lose our page one ranking. I've gone into Webmaster Tools and also I've used SEOQuake but the pages found have their meta data stripped when I go into "source". Before I start re-entering what I think would be the correct data I wondered if anyone had any advice please? Thanks, Colin
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | NileCruises0 -
Strange Linking Data in Webmaster Tools
I run a site that was a Wordpress blog with Edirectory software for a directory on the back end. I've scrapped the Edirectory and built the entire site on Wordpress. After the site change I'm seeing about 700 404 Not Found crawling errors, which appear to be old Edirectory pages that no longer exist. My understanding is that they'll cycle out eventually. What troubles me is the linking data I'm seeing. In the "Links to My Site" area of Webmaster tools, I'm seeing 4,430 links to the "About" page, another 2,900 to an obscure deleted directory listing page and only 2,050 to the home page. I show 1,700 links to a terms and conditions pdf and other strange data. To summarize, I'm showing huge numbers of links to obscure pages. Any help would be greatly appreciated.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | JSOC0