How soon before author rank becomes a major ranking factor?
-
Hi,
I wanted to pose a question
How soon do guys think itll be before author rank becomes a one of Googles major ranking factors?
From what I can see the way they have designed it signals that it is only matter of time, before they start using it as a major ranking factor...
And I have a question on Author ranks impact on the ability to sell a blog/site in the future. Surely if the blog is tied to an author(s) and the ranking of the site in the search engine is somewhat based on this authors author rank who is a part of the site/blog, then it becomes harder to sell the property if the author is not going to be a part of the property after the sale?.
I look forward to your responses on this,
-
Good response Paul.
-
A.J. Kohn just posted last week about how, from his information, the Authorship Project at Google is actually dead. Not that the concept of authorship is going away completely, but that there will be "a change in tactics from Authorship markup to entity extraction as a way to identify experts and a pathway to using Authorship as a ranking signal."
http://moz.com/community/q/trending-bugs-in-moz-analyticsIt's a really interesting read, and makes great sense, especially considering the direction Hummingbird has taken toward improving the Knowledge Graph. Given the amount of work still ahead on the entity extraction process, I suspect it will some time (a year?) before we start seeing authorship elements begin impacting rankings. And with the way the SERP pages are going, by then there may not be any actual "ranking" process to speak of.
As far as "ranking of of sites in search engines" with regard to selling sites, etc... Google essentially tries to rank pages, not sites. Obviously a site's other pages benefit from the halo effect of other strong pages and brand recognition, but if we follow their logic on author influence, as long as the "good" author's content remains on the site, it should still rank, regardless of whether or not the author still writes for that site (see current implementation of Authorship and how it references sites and author as a "former contributor").
I suspect the algorithm may be taught how to detect when the newer content on a site isn't as "influential" or trustworthy as the older content, and adjust the "halo effect" accordingly.
Google's got their work cut out for them to implement some sort of "authority ranking" (my term) that takes into account the famous, but doesn't burn the smart but lesser-knowns the way their current focus on big brands burns the often-more-valuable smaller sites.
As Takeshi says - building authority and trust in all the organic ways possible is a beneficial strategy, regardless of the specifics of how authorship plays out.
Good question, and as always in web marketing... interesting times ahead.
Paul
-
This is definitely on Google's todo list, but who knows when it will be an actual factor. As AJ Kohn says, build your authority, not your authorank. Focus on becoming an authority in your niche, and you will see benefits for SEO & your business regardless of whether Google implements authorank or not. And if they do, you should be well positioned to take advantage of it.
There are definitely things you can do to prepare for the coming changes (build up your profile on Google+, use rel=author on content you create, create a Wikipedia page), but as far when Google will roll it out, I doubt even Google's engineers know about it at this point.
As far as selling a blog, the question of author has always been an issue. If a famous author sells their blog to someone less well known, will people still read it? As far as search, the impact of authorrank should be minimal, all the old posts would still have the authorship boost of the old author, only newly authored posts would not. If the blog has a high enough authority, I could even see people buying blogs to increase their own authority in the niche.
-
This is something that I've had many heated debates about, but I think I proved that Author Rank is a factor, and this is how I did it...and it was a mistake by the way. But you could try it too.
(Unfortunately, because my client data is confidential, I can't share too many intimate details.)
I had a client who has a responsive WP theme. However, they have so much content, the responsive theme just isn't the best solution-- not as good as a mobile site-- for this particular client.
I put up a mobile site at mobile.example.com and I set up the canonical link to point to the main domain, just as it should. The mobile site was also a WP site.
However, when I made the mobile site, I accidentally left myself as the author. (I built the mobile site before I added the site owner as a user.)
A couple of weeks later, MY FACE started appearing in the Google results instead of the attorney. In other words, the attorney used to rank on page 2 for "What are the consequences of DUI in Arizona?"
And it was at something like: example.com/consequences-dui-az-something
But suddenly mobile.example.com/consequences-dui-az-something appeared on page one of Google, with my face. The rankings changed and Google preferred to believe that I was the author, rather than the attorney with his brand new authorship.
So even though I added duplicate content and a canonical tag, Google preferred the content that was authored by me, and chose to display that over the identical content that the attorney wrote and had been previously indexed and given author credit for. All of a sudden, the mobile site took precedence. When I changed authorship back to the attorney, rankings dropped slightly again and Google chose to display the MAIN site (as it should have), rather than the mobile.
I don't care what anyone (even Matt Cutts) says about Authorship. I've seen a real life example. Perhaps they are using it in certain markets and not others. But when it comes to attorneys, my primary client, I've seen it matter.
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
-
Bad Dates in SERPs, YouTube & Rankings (Nov. 10-18)
We've seen a lot of reports, including Q&A questions, of sites showing bad dates in Google SERPs. I've verified this bug in the wild. There are also reports of bad dates being caused by YouTube embeds, with Google taking the video date instead of the page date. I can also confirm this is happening, although I don't know if it accounts for all of the bad dates. Some people are reporting that these bad dates showing up corresponded with ranking drops. Usually, I would treat that as a coincidence (Google could easily launch an update and have a glitch on the same day), but in some of the reported cases, removing YouTube embeds led to ranking recovery soon after. I can't verify this, but I can't disregard it. There seem to be multiple reports of this recovery. I'm in communication with a Google rep, and they are unaware of any direct connection between a bad date and ranking (such as some kind of QDF effect). I've passed along some data, and they are investigating, but there may have been multiple updates in play that are making for noisy data (even for Google). There did seem to be heavy algorithm flux on November 10th and 18th, with some people speculating the latter spike was a reversal of the former. I have no evidence to support this, but MozCast data and chatter do seem to support both spikes. If you've been affected by this problem and the ranking drops are severe, it's worth temporarily removing YouTube embeds (if feasible). Replace them with direct links (or maybe a linked thumbnail) and have Google re-fetch the page. I can't guarantee it will work, but the risks are low. It's easy to restore the embed. Update (11/22) - Gary Illyes is saying on Twitter that the date problems have been fixed. If you see the proper dates cached, but have not seen rankings recover, then these may be unrelated events.
Algorithm Updates | | Dr-Pete2 -
Use of http://schema-creator.org boost ranking
Hello all if we use http://schema-creator.org for structured html will it increase our ranking too. has it any benefit for SEO?
Algorithm Updates | | adnan11010 -
What is the importance of listing score at Getlisted.org regarding higher local 7 pack rankings ?
What is the importance of listing score at Getlisted.org regarding higher local 7 pack rankings ? My listing score is 60% and i am trying to improve it. I am on 2nd page on local map results. So maximum score will help to get place in 7 pack ?
Algorithm Updates | | mnkpso0 -
Can a google data refresh knock your pages out of the rankings?
I see that around mid November 2013 a handful of my sites pages dropped off of Google completely. It was around the data refreshes in November, and while everyone says it doesn't effect that much I was wondering if anyone knew if it could knock some of my pages out of the rankings for a specific keyword. Note - we had previously held muliple listings for different pages on our site for this particular keyword. Google kept the highest ranking and knocked the lower ones off. See attached image of our keyword ranking history to see what I mean. DcJJM0M
Algorithm Updates | | franchisesolutions0 -
Please provide tips and tricks to improve alexa rankings.
Even though we have constant traffic our alexa is flickering between 9000 to 10000 Please let me know what should i do to get 7000 rank. Here is the link to our website. http://www.teluguone.com saikiran
Algorithm Updates | | saikiranvijay0 -
How long does it take for a website to starting ranking once the website becomes live?
I am in the process of finishing the last touches on my new company's website and I am wondering about the process of getting my new website to rank on google. I've heard many different things from many different people who believe they know everything about SEO, but they can't all be right. Is there a definite timeline? Thanks
Algorithm Updates | | uofmiamiguy0 -
Any insight on what factors Penguin is looking at?
Anyone have insight into what specific factors penguin is targeting and how it works? Matt Cutts seemed to infer that the site was targeting things such as spun content, keyword stuffing, etc. but most of the sites that have been hit that I've seen aren't doing any obvious content spamming like that. For example: Is penguin looking primarily at onsite or backlink factors? Does Penguin just discount spammy backlinks, or does it apply an additional penalty to sites that have poor quality backlinks? Anyone noticing specific onsite or offsite factors that correlate with whether a site has been hit or not?
Algorithm Updates | | AdamThompson3 -
Ranking Riddle Who Gets the #1 Spot?
Out of these two competitors, who should receive the #1 spot on Google for Furniture Stores in Delaware and why or why not? [see attached images] fb-url-data.png cohen-url-data.png fb-anchor.png cohen-anchor.png fb-on-page.png cohen-on-page.png
Algorithm Updates | | Getz.pro0