Google Authorship v Product Rich Snippets
-
Hi Folks,
So ,we have a website that we have fully configured with Product Rich Snippets (its an e-Commerce Store), including product image and the usual.
We are considering verifying the Authorship of the website for the client as they will have an extensive blog.
My question is, if we verify the Authorship of the website, which will Google use in terms of the rich snippet photograph in the SERP, will it use the product image as detailed in the Product Rich Snippet or us the company logo we have on the Google Plus page (Verified Author)
Or is it a case we only add the rel:author tag to pages without products.
Would just like to verify before we continue on as
Thanks in advance
John
-
Right now rel=publisher is being emphasised when it comes to Google+ Direct Connect - where a Google+ profile overview badge is displayed in the search results for a brand.
It's a pretty cool addition to your search results, but right now it's handed out algorithmically. You can't just declare ownership and see it there, so you'll need to build up a bit of authority before it appears.
-
Good luck!
-
Thanks all. I meant rel=publisher , just really wanted to establish that Google verification didn't mess with Rich Snippets, and well that's seems to be the case ,as it doesn't.
Just had a look through a lot of sites with rel=publisher, and there is no image displayed to the best of my knowledge
Guess I'll find out for sure in a few weeks hopefully
-
I did some more research and seems that you are probably right. Publishership shows the big box on the right of the search results. Try googling Moz: https://www.google.com/#output=search&sclient=psy-ab&q=moz&oq=moz&gs_l=hp.3..0l4.430.621.0.822.3.3.0.0.0.0.333.806.0j1j0j2.3.0...0.0.0..1c.1.15.psy-ab.u-o2krTtAw0&pbx=1&bav=on.2,or.r_cp.r_qf.&bvm=bv.47244034,d.d2k&fp=c582336016c8cd9&biw=1745&bih=980
I can really remember seing brand logo's in the search results though. If i ever see one again i will verify whether a rel=author or rel=publisher tag was used.
-
Still not verified whether rel=publisher displays a thumbnail in the search results, though.
-
Happy to help.
-
Thank you for confirming
-
Rel=publisher is for brands, rel=author is for individuals. Google pulls author information from individual Google+ profiles. WMT content guidelines state that each profile should have a clear, recognizable headshot of the author. Hope that helps.
-
I have seen company logo's in the search results from time to time. Can't think of an actual query right now where i found one though..
Unless it were people using it as an rel=author tag it should work (maybe google is still testing it and that's why we see them so rarily).
But that would be against Google's guidelines if i'm not mistaking. I'm not 100% sure that an author needs to be an individuel person. Can anyone confirm this?
-
I've tried that and everything shows up well with the tool but it never populated the search results with the publisher logo. I asked the same question her in Q&A and was told that the rel=publisher markup doesn't yet product a thumbnail in the results. Have you verified that it is actually working?
-
Chris, they do this in a lot of cases. If you have a Google+ company page try including the rel=publisher tag on a page where you did not use a rel=author tag. Use Google's structured data testing tool and you will see that they do show the publisher photo (which should be a company or brand logo.
-
To the best of my knowledge, Google isn't putting the thumbnail image in the results for those using the rel=publisher tag. I'd go with product rich snippet.
-
In my experience Google uses the Rich snippet information above the Authorship(publishership).
One more thing though. You mention a **company **logo and the rel=author tag.
You should create a Google+ company page and use the rel=**publisher **tag.Hope i have answered your question
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
-
How the hell do you get microformat to show up on google serp?
Preface: I implemented Microformat aggregate review (http://data-vocabulary.org/Review-aggregate) for our e-commerce website and included only on the homepage. The vote and count are actually coming from real reviews we are getting from our customers, and in the homepage some reviews are shown prominently and a link points to the full list of all the reviews. Microformat markup is correct, validated in GWT. Have been online for a while (probably a couple of years). Our website: http://www.gomme-auto.it The star rating never showed up. When checking competitors I could see their microformats where not showing up either. But now things changed, if I check one competitor (the market leader www.gommadiretto.it) searching for it with their brand name “gommadiretto” no star rating is showing, but if I search for tires of a specific manufactured like “pneumatici barum” I can see their result in serp is showing the star rating for that specific internal page (the brand page) where they simply put the website overall aggregate review microformat mark up, they actually put it on every page. And that make me scratch my head and start asking myself some questions: is google showing their microformats because they manually awarded them somehow? no other competitor seems to have got the star rating in serp is google showing their microformats because they have so much more reviews than I have? I have around 1700, they have around 11000. is google showing their microformats because their reviews are certified by TrustPilot? is google showing their microformats because they put it in the product page? well of course since I am not putting it there (in the brand page) it's a factor, but isn't it recommended to put the website aggregate reviews microformat only on one page? and shouldn't we show the brand reviews on the brand page? isn't it best practice/recommended to put the website aggregate review microformat only on one page? is google showing their microformats because of some other reasons I can't see? What the hell is google criteria for showing the star rating? Does anyone know?
On-Page Optimization | | max.favilli0 -
My Site's Name Not Ranking in Google
Hey all, I've seen a few posts like this. But I wanted to start a new thread in hopes I may find the underlying issue. I've had my site: http://www.ctrl-alt-success.com for about 2 years. Recently I've started really adding a lot of content to it. (about 2-3 posts a week). I get zero organic views which is fine as I know it's still in the beginning. But here's my main question. If I type "ctrl-alt-success" into google. I get some site that shows up. "ctrlaltsuccess.com" I've been looking at this issue forever. That site has been "coming soon" for nearly 2 years. lol My site doesn't even show up on the first 10 pages of google. However in Bing and Yahoo it ranks on the first page. What could my site be doing wrong that it's not even ranking for the exact domain name? Keep in mind, if I google "ctrl-alt-success.com" my site comes up fine. Any help would be appreciated, thanks!
On-Page Optimization | | Ctrl-Alt-Success0 -
Google Index Report
Hi, I have just checked my google webmaster tools account and viewed the index status of my website and it produced the attached graph, which show quite a big spike in indexing during July and August 2012. Does this look normal or does it reveal anything peculiar? We did have a new website launched in June 2012 and I re-submitted the sites URL's to google as part of the re-launch and so I am unsure if this may account for the spike. Any advice appreciated. Thanks indexing.png
On-Page Optimization | | UnderMe0 -
Wrong sitelinks & landing pages in Google
I've recently launched a well-optimized website with good-content category landing pages and then I've added a blog to the website (as supporting content to the landing pages, the only links pointing to the blog are from the category landing pages) What happened is that Google is now using the Blog pages as the site - sitelinks and also as the landing pages for most keywords I only have inbound links to the reg. landing pages and none to the blog, how do I get Google to change that? I know I can demote sitelink URL's in webmaster tools, but would that help me with getting the right sitelinks, it sure wont help much with the landing pages Thanks
On-Page Optimization | | Plorex
-J0 -
Google Webmaster Tools notice of detected unnatural links
Hi Has anybody else ever recieved this message from Google in Google Webmaster Tools and what action did you take to overcome the problem and get your position back - Dear site owner or webmaster of............... We've detected that some of your site's pages may be using techniques that are outside Google's Webmaster Guidelines. Specifically, look for possibly artificial or unnatural links pointing to your site that could be intended to manipulate PageRank. Examples of unnatural linking could include buying links to pass PageRank or participating in link schemes. We encourage you to make changes to your site so that it meets our quality guidelines. Once you've made these changes, please submit your site for reconsideration in Google's search results. If you find unnatural links to your site that you are unable to control or remove, please provide the details in your reconsideration request. If you have any questions about how to resolve this issue, please see our Webmaster Help Forum for support. Sincerely, Google Search Quality Team
On-Page Optimization | | AMG1000 -
Unique Product Descriptions Vs. Speedy Launch
We are close to launching a new property and are also in the process of writing completely unique product descriptions for every product. This will continue to take a lot of time. We are debating the following two options: A. Launch soon with about 10-15% of descriptions being very unique and the rest being standard (mostly manufacture supplied). Then continue to update product content as we complete new fresh descriptions. B. Wait to launch until everything is unique. This will probably set us back 2 Months. We of course would like to go live sooner than later, but don't want to jeopardize anything as it pertains to rankings. The fear internally with launching now is that product pages get crawled, but don't make our best 1st impression with the engines. The counter argument is that it doesn't matter much, pages will get crawled again, and the fresh new content will be considered. Any inputs on this? Is '1st impression' with Google key, or is there no harm in launching and updating. Everything else is very sound -- architecture, on-site optimization, usability/crawlability etc. It's just the matter of the unique vs. generic product page content. Many thanks!
On-Page Optimization | | SEOPA0 -
Google Will Now Start Indexing Facebook Comments
Interesting article: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/technology/google/8863354/Google-to-index-Facebook-comments.html
On-Page Optimization | | TheVolkinator0 -
Changing page titles and google penalties?
I just recently learned that changing your page title earns you a google penalty. Unfortunately i learned this after playing around with my page titles a bit to get the most optimal page titles. Does anybody know how long this google penalty lasts? is it forever? or just temporary?
On-Page Optimization | | adriandg0