What is triggering Google account suspensions?
-
Over the past 24 hours many of our clients have had their Google accounts suspended. The explanation has been:
"After reviewing your profile, we determined that it has been used to impersonate another individual or mislead other users. This violates the Google+ User Content and Conduct Policy."
We are NOT impersonating our clients, we have their permission. We are not misleading anyone, simply setting up profiles for our clients on Google+.
This has not affected all of our clients, but a significant number of them. We cannot find a common variable between the clients that have been suspended, and those who have not.
- Some have had other Google+ profiles in the past, in another account, some have not.
- Some have been previously verified via SMS, others by phone.
- Some have posts in their profile, others have only the profile info filled out.
Again, we are not trying to game Google, we are simply setting up authorship for them, with their permission.
I have not seen much in the SEO community about this today, and this is NOT related to fake reviews. We do not partake in that kind of activity.
We have written a post on the topic, and no matter how this shakes out, I think our take is solid. Authorship is changing the game, content is changing the game, trust is changing the game… and Google is getting serious about it.
We have also seen this happen to our clients, to our competitors' clients, and to other marketing firms' clients, outside of our vertical.
Does anyone know more about the topic, especially in regards to the suspensions over the past 24 hours?
-
Another point. It doesn't have to be the business owner who does the verification and uses his own IP address. It can be the receptionist or anyone else. All I need is for the business owner to tell the employee to expect my call and follow my instructions. On one occasion, the employee even called me from home because she had no web access at work.
-
I am completely with Daniel here - IP's can trigger this. I know you say you don't think this is IP related, but there are many other instances of this happening. Why Google might favour some over others is anyones guess, but this is where I would place my bets.
-
Thanks for your feedback Daniel. We've tried this before, but with our volume + limited access to the actual business owners, its very difficult. Again, I don't believe this is a IP issue. The same thing happened to competing company's clients in our vertical that are smaller than ours (including some individual consultants that wouldn't trip an IP filter), within the same 48 hour period.
-
FWIW, I try to have my clients set up their own Google+ accounts, then share the login and password with me.
This is generally done during one of my update calls or web meetings, with me talking them through the process
-
Boy the thought has crossed my mind that the number for verification might get tagged. Going to have to start creating Skype accounts or something?
-
Thanks for your response. I know they can track IPs, but this appears to be something different. It hit our clients, and our competitors clients, on the same day.
I am thinking they targeted our vertical for some reason.
Also, many but not all accounts were affected.
Smells like there's more to this story than just "IP volume tracking", since we deal with that and similar volume issues often (like using the same ph# repeatedly for verification).
-
Hi, Even though you are setting up accounts for your clients, creating too many from the same IP would trigger the suspension. This is nothing new. I remember hearing about this last year. Mash
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
-
Is this a violation of Google guidelines and current industry best practices correct? Regarding Iran Facts
I have read Moz for a good deal of time but I have never been gotten involved, until now... While watching a YouTube video in the app on my smartphone an Advertisement came on Still screen shots located on my website www.dleichtweis.com This is a video of the advertisement: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PCQFm7PjWb8 I have reason to believing this is a violation of numerous polices, procedures, conditions and or best practices. I value Moz as a communities opinion. Google has been contacted in regards to this https://www.en.adwords-community.com/t5/Ad-Approvals-and-Advertising/I-want-answers-to-issue-Re-3-8187000002180/m-p/278355#M14740 I value your response. D Leichtweis
Industry News | | dleichtweis0 -
Google still showing sitelinks from old website
Hi guys, we relaunched our website www.segafredo.com.au a few weeks ago, however google is still showing site links from our old page that no longer exist... Is there anything we can do about this? Sit back and wait or try demoting the old urls in webmaster tools? Looking forward to see your tips! Ciao, Manny.
Industry News | | Immanuel0 -
Did Google Search Just Get Crazy Local?
Hey All, I think it's a known fact at this point that when signed into a personal Google account while doing a search, the results are very oriented around keywords and phrases you have already searched for, as well as your account's perceived location; for instance when I wanted to check one of my own web properties in SE listings I would sign out or it would likely appear first as a false reading. Today I noticed something very interesting: even when not signed in, Google's listings were giving precedence to locality. It was to a very extreme degree, as in when searching for "web design," a firm a mile away ranked higher than one 1.5 miles away and such. It would seem that the algos having this high a level of location sensitivity and preference would actually be a boon for the little guys, which is, I assume why it was implemented. However, it brings up a couple of interesting questions for me. 1. How is this going to affect Moz (or any SE ranking platform, for that matter) reports? I assume that Google pulls locations from IP Addresses, therefore would it not simply pull the local results most relevant for the Moz server(s) IP? 2. What can one do to rise above this aggressive level of location based search? I mean, my site (which has a DA of 37 and a PA of 48) appears above sites like webdesign.org (DA of 82, PA of 85). Not that I'm complaining at the moment, but I could see this being a fairly big deal for larger firms looking to rank on a national level. What gives? I'd love to get some opinions from the community here if anyone else has noticed this...
Industry News | | G2W1 -
Get Google To Crawl More Pages Faster on my Site
We opened our database of about 10 million businesses to be crawled by Google. Since Wednesday, Google has crawled and indexed about 2,000 pages. Google is crawling us at about 1,000 pages a day now. We need to substantially increase this amount. Is it possible to get Google to crawl our sites at a quicker rate?
Industry News | | Intergen0 -
Why Does OSE (Open Site Explorer) have such little backlink data on russian sites in the google.ru index?
OK this seems v strange, but google.ru are indexing far more BLs in their SERPS for a widget than OSE reports. Very little data is found in OSE for russian based sites. Is this the marketing intention? (I could send raw data if needed!) What is filtering this vast google.ru data list out? Is OSE only catered for US/UK?
Industry News | | Turkey0 -
Google Search Quality Team - Commission Based Reviews
I have been busy this past week writing articles for various sources about the recent update on Google. A number of people contacted me about the analysis I was doing and the report. Some were members of the Google Search Quality Team. I knew manual reports were done before - but after the documents they showed me regarding the reports they do and the compensation for doing the reports - I am left in a state of being pretty shocked. May be I have been naive for all these years but I didn't realize that; Google outsourced the review and reconsideration requests to individual reviewers for a compensation Google's position in terms of checking qualification and experience of these "reviewers" was very insufficient at best, The three contacts I spoke to who had done reports had very little training or experience. I went through the GSQT REVIEWERS PDF (a very long and thorough document) that I was sent - with them. We went together through some sites I wanted them to review and their comments that came back were quite astounding to say the least and would have made many of you Mozzers laugh. Obviously I don't want to post said document online here.... BUT, I wanted to know if: a) any Mozzers had ever been part of such a group - the GSQT b) had any dealings with them - in terms of having your website reviewed and known about it. I knew about this group way back - like in 2005 or 2006 or sometime around then - I was told at time it was stopped and Google had stopped paying these sub contractor reviewers. Please don't get me wrong here... totally on board with manual reviews... I would just prefer them done by a trained team that possibly worked for either a professional company that maintain high quality review testing and standards - or for that matter GOOGLE employees that were trained. I just am a little unsure of them being done by individual subbies that get paid for the amount they do. What if that subbie has got some skin in the game for a particular keyword? What if their knowledge about certain aspects isn't up to par or not tested on a regular basis. This space is always changing and as you guys ./ girls on this forum know - it can change pretty quick. I just would want all websites to be judged fairly and equally by a group trained EQUALLY and to the same standards. I don't care if this is a G team or not - I just want it to be a team that is trained equally and trained continuously as opposed to paying outside people based on numbers of reviews done. When the livelihood of a small business is the balance I don't want a commission hungry toe rag with one years experience being the gate keeper for me or any of our clients. Carlos
Industry News | | CarlosFernandes0 -
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?
Industry News | | IPINGlobal541 -
How to achieve the highest global and local relevance in google?
Let's say I have a company that has its main business in Europe for thefollowing languages: English German Portugese French Italian And let's say some other markets (e.g. the Portugese one in south america) is also important. The question now is how should we structure the Domain if we want onlyone top level domain (www.company.com)? a) By using subdomains to target users with Google Webmaster Tools for the relevant country: portugal.company.com/pt (same content) brasil.company.com/pt (same content) germany.company.com/de england.company.com/en etc. or b) by using virtual folders www.company.com/pt www.company.com/de www.company.com/en
Industry News | | imsi
etc. or c) something completely different I do not know about? What do you reckon is best? I appreciate all suggestions!0