Is "Author Rank," User Comments Driving Losses for YMYL Sites?
-
Hi, folks!
So, our company publishes 50+ active, disease-specific news and perspectives websites -- mostly for rare diseases. We are also tenacious content creators: between news, columns, resource pages, and other content, we produce 1K+ pieces of original content across our network. Authors are either PhD scientists or patients/caregivers. All of our sites use the same design.
We were big winners with the August Medic update in 2018 and subsequent update in September/October. However, the Medic update in March and de-indexing bug in April were huge losers for us across our monetized sites (about 10 in total). We've seen some recovery with this early June update, but also some further losses. It's a mixed bag.
Take a look at this attached MOZ chart, which shows the jumps and falls around the various Medic updates. The pattern is very similar on many of our sites.
As per JT Williamson's stellar article on EAT, I feel like we've done a good job in meeting those criteria, which has left we wondering what isn't jiving with the new core updates. I have two theories I wanted to run past you all:
1. Are user comments on YMYL sites problematic for Google now?
I was thinking that maybe user comments underneath health news and perspectives articles might be concerning on YMYL sites now. On one hand, a healthy commenting community indicates an engaged user base and speaks to the trust and authority of the content. On the other hand, while the AUTHOR of the article might be a PhD researcher or a patient advocate, the people commenting -- how qualified are they? What if they are spouting off crazy ideas? Could Google's new update see user comments such as these as degrading the trust/authority/expertise of the page? The examples I linked to above have a good number of user comments. Could these now be problematic?
2. Is Google "Author Rank" finally happening, sort of?
From what I've read about EAT -- particularly for YMYL sites -- it's important that authors have “formal expertise” and, according to Williamson, "an expert in the field or topic." He continues that the author's expertise and authority, "is informed by relevant credentials, reviews, testimonials, etc. " Well -- how is Google substantiating this? We no longer have the authorship markup, but is the algorithm doing its due diligence on authors in some more sophisticated way?
It makes me wonder if we're doing enough to present our author's credentials on our articles, for example. Take a look -- Magdalena is a PhD researcher, but her user profile doesn't appear at the bottom of the article, and if you click on her name, it just takes you to her author category page (how WordPress'ish).
Even worse -- our resource pages don't even list the author.
Anyhow, I'd love to get some feedback from the community on these ideas. I know that Google has said there's nothing to do to "fix" these downturns, but it'd sure be nice to get some of this traffic back!
Thanks!
-
We have informational and retail websites where we put a LOT of effort into our content. We are trying to produce the best-on-the-web. All of this content is created and edited by people who have both formal education and deep experience in the content area.
There is no way that we would allow user-generated content on these websites - even though we are not in a YMYL (your money, your life) type of industry. User-generated content can be excellent, but a high percentage of it is deeply flawed and far, far below our editorial standards. We have experience people in our own industry who want to submit content but we reject it because it is below our quality standards.
The above is why we don't allow user-generated content based upon editorial standards.
I have read information published by Google where they say that a vigorous comment section can be a sign of a quality website. But, I believe that applies to content types where opinion, kibitzing and prattle are acceptable. However, medical sites (and other types of websites) are an entirely different matter. Low quality content can result in problems for the reader - even if it is in a comments section. Nobody knows exactly how Google views this, but I am going to protect my visitors from BS and poor-quality information.
-
Many thanks, EGOL. I agree that the author profiles need to be improved for sure.
What do you think about the possibility that user-generated comments on a health news site are a concern for Google, re: readers reading comments that are not created by established experts? Could user comments now be a negative ranking factor for health sites?
-
Magdalena's example shows that you understand the problem. Implementation might significantly improve your situation. And just as important... implementation will enable your visitors to see Magdalena's credentials. Do it for your visitors even if Google is not a concern. Your authors also deserve to have this work done.
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
-
Do header tags impact the rankings much?
Hi all, I have gone through some posts and comments where it's been mentioned that header tags will be considered as any other content on page. Is that really true? Writing up more relevant header tags as per the page topics doesn't have any impact? I would like to know the updated importance of header tags in today's SEO. Thanks
Algorithm Updates | | vtmoz0 -
Google Search Analytics desktop site to losing page position compared to the mobile version of the site
Looking at Google Search Analytics page position by device. The desktop version has seen a dramatic drop in the last 60 days compared to the mobile site. Could this be caused by mobile first indexing? Has Google had any releases that might have caused this?
Algorithm Updates | | merch_zzounds0 -
What Ranking Factors Impact Google News Visibility?
I'm just at the beginning of a new analysis involving Google News visibility and ranking factors, and thought I could put the project out to you, dear SEO geniuses, to get your ideas and perspectives. Backgrounder: My company operates over 50 niche, disease-specific daily news sites, covering science, research and advocacy news about specific diseases. Virtually all of them are in Google News. They range in age from 3 years old to 3 months old. Varying degrees of page rank / authority Content on the site is completely niche to specific diseases, and we have a lot of sites for rare and orphan diseases. Most of the content is news, but we also have info/resources pages, blogs, and some short-form posts made for use in social media. The Project: I want to do an analysis of keywords in our news headlines and see how certain keywords correlate with articles that do well -- both in terms of search traffic and overall with users. Going to use our Multiple Sclerosis News Today website. Most of our search traffic comes from Google News. What I hope to gain: I'm curious to see if certain sets of keywords that relate to the disease, to therapies, etc. drive the most traffic. I want to compare these keyword lists to how well we rank in organic search for the same keywords (via news articles or info pages) to see if there is a connection. I want to also create a working keyword list of the best-performing keywords in the news as a way of cross-pollinating content production on our blogs, info pages, social content, etc. I want to increase my knowledge base of ranking factors specific for Google News. The last point is really something I wish I knew more about. I feel like there aren't many knowledge resources out there about Google News. Is it safe to assume that the same on-site and off-site SEO best practices that govern organic search engine visibility are at play in Google News, or are there independent factors as well? I'd love to get your thoughts. Thanks!
Algorithm Updates | | Michael_Nace0 -
Is Moz Domain Authority still relvant when it comes to Google ranking?
My understanding of Moz DA is that it is predominantly based on external links. Since Penguin I am noticing more and more websites ranking high in Google with a "low" number of links and certainly a low DA but quality and relevancy of content and also of offering. I understand that there was always more to ranking than DA but is it anymore even relevant to how a site will rank in Google?
Algorithm Updates | | halloranc0 -
Linking to authority / competitor website!? Yes or No?
Here is the dilema .... People say, don't be afraid to link to authority website! What if an authority website in particular niche is actually competing with you in the Search, but you do have a review profile there? Is it ok to link to that profile ? Should I include a no follow tag ? Another case : some other authority high ranked website competing in search with mine directly has a profile page for my company, but this authority website has blocked Google bot to crawl the profile page all the reviews there !? Can I still link to that page and will this be appreciated by Google ? Am I passing PR and link juice from my website to those direct comeptitors / authority websites ?
Algorithm Updates | | montauto0 -
Decent rankings in Google, nothing in Bing and Yahoo
Hi there, I'm in the process of SEOing a site in a very competitive sector, the short term loans market. The URL for the site is http://www.piggy-bank.co.uk. I've managed to get a fair bit of success in Google for some very competitive keywords like short term loans, short term lender etc but in Bing and Yahoo I'm having no luck at all, with only 2 visits in the past month and no decent rankings!! I think I'm doing everything right, with regular new content on the site, decent technical SEO, semantic site structure, regular site map upload, a 10 year old domain, holistic link building through guest blogging etc, but still no luck at all. Looking at the webmaster tools in Bing, 95% of the URLs are indexed, but I'm getting such a low impression count, and obviously, an even lower click through. Am I missing something really obvious? Does anyone have any suggestions to improve my Bing and Yahoo rankings? I've worked on 100s of other sites and Yahoo and Bing tend to be the easy win to make the client happy 😉 Thanks in advance for your help. Dan
Algorithm Updates | | djslimited1 -
301 Redirect has removed search rankings
As per instructions from a SEO , we did a 301 redirect on our url to a new url (www.domain.com to subdomain xxxx.domain.com). But the problem is we lost all the google rankings that the previous url had gained. How can we rollback this situation. Can we retrieve the rankings of the previous url if we remove 301 permenant move redirection ? The new url does not figure in the google search for the keyword that use to fetch the previous url at no 3 in the results Please help ...
Algorithm Updates | | BizSparkSEO0 -
Very Erratic Ranking
Over the last month our ranking for "Web Design in Cumbria" has fluctuated from position 2 to position 10 a couple of times a week on Google UK.It tends to go to position 10 on a Friday but bounces back to position 2 on the Saturday. Then it goes back to 10 on Monday / Tuesday then back to 2 the next day. Does anyone have any idea why, cause it is confusing the hell out of us? Thanks Fraser
Algorithm Updates | | fraserhannah0