Google+ profiles and Rel Author. Extensive question
-
A bit of a mammoth question for discussion here:
With the launch of Google+ and profiles, coupled with the ability to link/verify authorship using rel=me to google+ profile - A few questions with respect to the long term use and impact.
As an individual - I can have a Google+ Profile, and add links to author pages where I am featured. If rel=me is used back to my G+ profile - google can recognise me as the writer - no problem with that.
However - if I write for a variety of different sites, and produce a variety of different content - site owners could arguably become reluctant to link back or accredit me with the rel=me tag on the account I might be writing for a competitor for example, or other content in a totally different vertical that is irrelevant.
Additionally - if i write for a company as an employee, and the rel=me tag is linked to my G+ profile - my profile (I would assume) is gaining strength from the fact that my work is cited through the link (even if no link juice is passed - my profile link is going to appear in the search results on a query that matches something I have written, and hence possibly drain some "company traffic" to my profile). If I were to then leave the employment of that company - and begin writing for a direct competitor - is my profile still benefiting from the old company content I have written?
Given that google is not allowing pseudonyms or ghost writer profiles - where do we stand with respect to outsourced content? For example: The company has news written for them by a news supplier - (each writer has a name obviously) - but they don't have or don't want to create a G+ profile for me to link to. Is it a case of wait for google to come up with the company profiles? or, use a ghost name and run the gauntlet on G+?
Lastly, and I suppose the bottom line - as a website owner/company director/SEO;
Is adding rel=me links to all your writers profiles (given that some might only write 1 or 2 articles, and staff will inevitably come and go) an overall positive for SEO? or, a SERP nightmare if a writer moves on to another company? In essence are site owners just improving the writers profile rather than gaining very much?
-
Just within the past few weeks I've started to see lots of "author photos" showing in the SERPs. A couple people who I trust tell me that they are getting big traffic improvements where their author photo is showing.
I still don't have an author page (I don't like to build content on other websites unless I enjoy it or am being paid) but am starting lean towards making one.
I think that it is a mistake not to have one. It's on my job list.
-
It's been a few months, I'm curious to see if you've stepped into the Google+ world, and if so, how you handle those rel=author issues as a company. I am facing a very similar situation as described above and landed here in my research.
-
I don't have a google profile as I post anonymously and they don't allow anonymous profiles (those dummies!).
I own a website where most articles are written by staff and no author is listed. (guest content does have author information)
I have thought about creating author pages on the site and pointing author links to them with rel=me. However now it seems that google wants their Google profile pages as the target for rel=me links. (what a way to demand links!)
Eventually, if I see that people are getting definite ranking benefits from Google profile pages, I will create a real profile page on Google. I have tons of content that I could point to it.
-
Thanks for your input EGOL, I was hoping you would spot this and chip in having seen your comments on Cre8asite.
Do you use g+ profiles in this fashion on any sites your run/manage? (or anyone else reading this for that matter?)
For those that have got it implemented - have you seen a rise in traffic from plus.google as a result? and/or a rise in ranking?
It might of course be a little early to tell yet - and googles promise of company profiles on g+ might have a workaround built in.
-
Thank you for this question. I think that it is interesting from multiple perspectives.
I think that we have a technology perspective in... "How will Google handle this?"....
But we also have an employer perspective in... "What do they think that they own and what will they permit?"
As an author I would like to think that I "OWN" the simple fact that I authored an article. The employer might own the article, however, I would like to have credit for writing it.
Some employers would have no problem linking to my profile page with rel=me.
However, other employers might insist that they paid me for the article and "own" all credit for it - since they funded the time that I used to produce it. Some will not want to display a link to my profile page because they worry about losing visitors through it... or PR through it.... and other might allow a link to a profile page but insist that the profile page be located on their domain.
This is a mucky problem, made sticky with issues of ownership, ego and more.
I think that the only solution for authors who write for multiple websites is to be sure that your expectation of a credit link is made very clear when you make a contract for work. That will at least establish your expectation formally but there is no guarantee that a IT person, designer or an SEO will remove your link or the rel=me at some time in the future.
If you are an established author you might be able to explain how the link to your profile page will benefit the websites where your articles appear - as the search rankings for your articles might benefit from your personal authority as an author.... and if they want to control the benefit then they should be the buyer for all of your work.
The best solution (and my personal favorite) is to write only for your own websites where you have total control.
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
-
What are your opinions on the Google News vs Spanish Government Issue ?
Greg Sterling said: "Governments across Europe are justifiably alarmed by the declining fortunes of their respective newspaper industries. However punitive or parasitic taxation measures targeting Google, masquerading as copyright protections, are not the answer." Do you agree?
Industry News | | Tintanus1 -
Now that Google is no longer publicly displaying Page Rank updates, how will this effect Moz's ability to calculate DA and PA?
Hi, How much more important do you guys think that Moz's Page Authority and Domain Authority metrics are going to become now that Google has stopped giving people public access to a site or pages Page Rank? And how accurate is PA and DA as a measurement in comparison to Page Rank..so for example if I was seeking a guestposting opportunity and saw a site as having a PR of 4....if I now looked to Moz's Page and Domain Authority metrics instead...would that still give me equivalent information on the strength of that domain and thus make a judgement on whether it will be a worthy site for a guestpost.. I guess what I am asking is, how close is now looking at Moz's metrics (ie. a third party company) to the info on PageRank that was being updated by Google themselves? Also will the lack of updated public PR info from Google effect the ability for Moz to calculate PA and DA?? Look forward to your replies on this,
Industry News | | sanj50500 -
Manual action penalty by Google
Hello, We have a big well-known brand - www.titanbet.com. This brand is well established and the site has been live for almost 4 years now ranking very well on some very strong KWs. we received a message from Google on Aug 29<sup>th</sup> saying “Google has detected a pattern of artificial or unnatural links pointing to your site” and that “Google has applied a manual spam action to titanbet.com/” The past 2 weeks since the penalty was received we saw some of our major KWs drop in rankings. BUT all brand related KWs were still ranked 1<sup>st</sup> Over the last weekend the penalty has worsen and we no longer rank on any of the brands KWs (we find the site in 5<sup>th</sup> page at best). Moreover, when searching for a sentence from the any of the page on the site in Google, we see other sites ahead of us in the SERPs. Based on the message we originally received from Google we have started cleaning some of the bad links to the site. We found a lot of links from bad sites, some of them are not indexed and probably penalized as well, some are from affiliate websites and some are from some automatic indexation websites based in China and Russia
Industry News | | Tit
we have started reaching out to some of these sites to try and have them remove our links. We are also worried about the duplication of our site. We have found many other sites (mostly affiliate websites) have copied and in some cases completely duplicated our content. Google for some reason has chosen to penalize us for this. Although we do not have control over these other sites. We have run copyscape to try and figure out which pages are the most problematic and we will try to re-write the content on these pages. But what if the other sites copy us again? Any suggestions on the above would be appreciated as we try to understand why Google has penalized us. thank you Titan Bet Team0 -
Google Analytics Tracking Miscount - Originating Around 5/24
Is anyone else experiencing an issue where it seems GA failed to track many of their visitors? This is why I think it's something on GA's end and not mine (and not natural): 1. No changes were made, site wasn't down, tracking code is correct and is "receiving data" 2. Referral, Direct and Organic traffic all dropped at about the same decline over the same period *3. Pinterest Analytics shows me being sent over 10 times more traffic every day than GA shows me actually receiving. In the screenshot, Pinterest shows 584 uniques while GA shows 43 for Sunday. I figure if something was broken, I wouldn't be showing ANY traffic and if it was natural, it wouldn't have happened on the same decline across all traffic mediums and Pinterest Analytics wouldn't be so far off. I saw a few people mentioning similar things on Google's forums and wanted to ask you guys if anyone noticed any issues? y8XAvwz.png pRsRAmK.png
Industry News | | zDucketz0 -
How do you measure impacts of Google Updates Like Penguin 4?
Having a conversation with a fellow SEO via twitter and we were discussing measuring algorithm updates. In the aftermath of Google Penguin 4 how do you determine the effects it has on your site/sites and your respective verticals?
Industry News | | Thos0030 -
Google Product Feeds - New Requirements
We are in the jewelry industry, and for Google product feeds, we list our products under "Apparel & Accessories > Jewelry". As of the new Google feed requirements, they are saying that we have to choose a gender and color for each product that is in the Apparel category. While this makes sense for clothes, it doesn't exactly for jewelry because many items are for both men and women, and there's not always a color associated with each product. I can enter some of these fields manually, but with 5,000+ products, it makes it difficult w/ each update. Anyone have solutions for this? Or a way around it? Can we just include those fields but leave them blank? Any other solutions?
Industry News | | applesofgold1 -
Chrome blocked sites used by Googles Panda update
Google's Panda update said it used Chrome users blocked sites lists as a benchmark for what they now term poor quality content. They said the Panda update effectively took about 85% of them out of the search results. This got me thinking, it would be very nice to discover what are the exact sites they don't like. Does anyone know if there is an archive of what these sites might be? Or if none exists, maybe if people could share their Chrome blocked sites on here we might get an idea?
Industry News | | SpecialCase0 -
Google API's
As you may know Google has API’s http://code.google.com/more/ I can see ones for Blogs, News etc. but not for general search am I being dense? If someone can point me in the right direction that would be great. Justin
Industry News | | GrouchyKids0