Authorship image
-
Do you understand google authorship? They removed the image from google but left the name. Cant understand what is wrong. It still shows up in testing.
-
Can't get mine to work either no matter what I do ughh!
-
Google did just make some changes in authorship, and is not showing it for as many sites. http://searchengineland.com/confirmed-google-reduces-authorship-rich-snippets-in-search-results-180313
-
I have a heck of a time with authorship. I have one site I cannot get it to work for even though Google's rich-snippet testing tool says it's active, proper, and functioning. It most certainly isn't in true SERPs. So... Bleh
-
turned it on for ya.. send it over and I'll take a look
-
I would like to send the link private but you have not enabled that option
-
Can I see the link to look at the code?
Also make sure the image on your G+ account is a headshot and follows the authorship requirements.
-
It is working in the test but in google, only the name not the image. Don't know why. Any one has advice?
-
Can we see a link to check the code?
A number of people have been having issues with Google Authorship lately. I believe there was an announcement recently that Google made changes to their authorship algorithm to try and focus on more "trusted" writers.
Also try the snippet test, if it works there, then authorship is working and it's up to Google to display it:
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
-
Images on their own page?
Hi Mozers, We have images on their own separate pages that are then pulled onto content pages. Should the standalone pages be indexable? On the one hand, it seems good to have an image on it's own page, with it's own title. On the other hand, it may be better SEO for crawler to find the image on a content page dedicated to that topic. Unsure. Would appreciate any guidance! Yael
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | yaelslater1 -
Image Audit: Getting a list of *ALL* Images on a Site?
Hello! We are doing an image optimization audit, and are therefore trying to find a way to get a list of all images on a site. Screaming Frog seems like a great place to start (as per this helpful article: https://moz.com/ugc/how-to-perform-an-image-optimization-audit), but unfortunately, it doesn't include images in CSS. 😞 Does the community have any ideas for how we try to otherwise get list of images? Thanks in advance for any tips/advice.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | mirabile0 -
Underscores, capitals, non ASCII characters in image URLs - does it matter?
I see this strangely formatted image URLs on websites time and again - is this an issue - I imagine it isn't best practice but does it make any difference to SEO? Thanks in advance, Luke
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | McTaggart0 -
Does alt tag optimization benefit search rankings (not image search) at all?
The benefits of alt tag optimization for traditional SEO has always been a "yo yo" subject for me. Way back in the day (2004 to 2007) I believed there was some benefit to alt tag SEO. However as time went on I saw evidence that the major search engines were no longer considering alt tag SEO as a ranking signal. However I later had the pleasure to work on a joint project with a high end SEO firm in 2011/2012. My colleagues fully believed that alt tag optimization was still a very important strategy for traditional SEO at that time. Is there any evidence available that alt tags still help with traditional SEO nowadays? I'm fully aware of the benefits of optimized alt tags and image search. However could optimized alt tags be one of those ranking factors that Google removed due to abuse and later quietly resurrected?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | RosemaryB0 -
Given the new image mismatch penalty, is watermarking considered "cloaking"?
Google has released a new penalty called "Image mismatch". Which actually penalizes sites that show images to Google than are not the same as the ones offered to users when accessing the site. Although I agree with those sites that the image is completely different that the one shown in image search, lately I've seen lots of big sites using some king of watermark or layer that reads something like "To see the high quality of this image, click here" in order to "force" the user to visit the site hosting the image. Considering the latest changes to Google's image search, which made lots of sites lose their "image search traffic", are these techniques considered part of the new penalty Google is applying? Or does it only apply to the first scenario when the image is completely different? You can read more on this new penalty here.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | FedeEinhorn0 -
Google+ Authorship for Multi-Author Company Blogs
Can a company's Google+ page be designated as the author of web content (as can be done with individuals) so that the COMPANY comes up as the author in the web results? Is it preferable for company bloggers to create individual Google+ profiles and be listed as the author of the posts that they write? Or rather is it a smarter move to create a company persona (under the guise of a real person) and have all authorship be attributed to that personal Google+ profile. AuthorRank is going to become more and more important to Google's algorithm. As bloggers write for a company, if they are listed as the author of the work, they create trust for their own personal brand. If and when this employee leaves, this equity is presumably taken with them instead of remaining with the company. Is this assumption correct? How are companies dealing with this potential issue?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | AnthonyMangia0 -
Using Images Instead of Text to Control Keywords on Page
We have recently updated a key page on our website. It is a template page that is used many times to display search results. The words "price", "revenue", and "cash flow", "not disclosed" are used for each listing on the page -- to minimize their impact on keyword density on the page we used images for these words. Here you can see some examples: http://www.businessbroker.net/State/Florida-Businesses_For_Sale.aspx http://www.businessbroker.net/City/Los Angeles-Businesses_For_Sale.aspx http://www.businessbroker.net/Industry/Auto_Car_Wash-Businesses_For_Sale.aspx You will note these words on this page are images and not regular text. We are certainly not doing this to "dupe" the visitors or Google -- we just want to ensure that each page has keywords pertinent to what the page is about. Bottom line question -- is this an OK practice? Are we running any risk with Google by doing this? I'm particularly nervous these days with all of the Google changes. Your thoughts and guidance on this issue would be much appreciated. Thanks. MWM
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | MWM37720 -
Image and Content Management
My boss has decided that on our new website we are building, that he wants all content and images managed by not allowing copying content and/or saving images. Some of the information and images is proprietary, yet most is available for public viewing, but never the less, he wants it prohibited from copy and/or saving. We would still want to keep the content indexable and use appropriate alt tags etc... I wanted to find out if there is any SEO reason and facts to why this would not be a good idea?Would implementing code to prohibit (or at least make it difficult) to save images and copy content, penalize us?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | KJ-Rodgers0