Authorship Tag
-
Hi Guys - I asked this Q, on the comments of Joost's blog post on this topic - repeating here, in case I don't get an answer.
I have a question of the rel=author tag. Will Google attach the authorship, even if the Google+ profile is a Company page, and not a personal profile? The mugshot on the profile, is basically our logo - not a personal photo. What's the best way to make use of authorship markup, in a case like this?
Thanks!!
Zak
-
Update:
Thanks for pointing me in the right direction. I starting searching on Google for pointers on enabling the Authorship markup. Came across this really helpful video -
Followed those steps - in linking my personal Google+ profile and enabling the Bio section with myself as Author in the blog posts. And so far looking good. Tested a post with the Rich Snippets Testing Tool in Google Webmaster - and it's picking up the Authorship with the photo quite nicely! Thanks for the help
-
Awesome - Thanks Robert for a very thorough explanation!
-
Zakaria
The 'mugshot' to this point is attributable to the author. So, if you are an author who is a contributor to a given G+, and there is a post/page, etc. that comes up in SERPs, your pic as the author will be shown and not the company. If you have an image that is not a photo of you (or a stunt double!) other images like avatars or art will not come up.
Think of it this way: just as PR is a measure of page validity to query, authorship is a measure of author validity to subject. (I am not saying either is or is not correct at times). So, a company cannot be an author (it can be a publisher, but have not seen logo show yet).
As to what is the best way to make that work for you, I would think it would depend on the situation, the strategy, and the company. We publish a lot for various properties we own and for properties of clients. With clients, we sometimes allow authorship to the copywriter if it in no way effects the client. With our properties (an example is we have a site on local merchants) we allow authorship and encourage it for our copywriters. If you have a good team member who is writing and becoming known on a topic, there is no reason they cannot be granted acknowledgement in the marketplace as knowing the topic. The only argument against it is that they may leave and compete against you and since we employ hidden ninja assassins we do not ever have that problem reoccur with the same employee... Just kidding.
So, over time, your increase in author credit around a given subject should be the benefit you derive.
I hope this helps a bit.
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 -
Meta Keyword Tags
What is the word on Meta Keyword Tags? Are they good to have, or bad? Our biggest competitor seems to have them.
Algorithm Updates | | Essential-Pest0 -
Has Google Authorship been completely removed from SERPs?
Noticed today that when I search (non-personalised search, incognito etc.) some of my pages on Google ALL references to authorship have now been completely removed. Does anyone know when this change occurred? I might be a bit slow this week (or last week) with concentrating on projects. I know like others that photos went some time back but now there are no author details being displayed. Just the page title and description. David
Algorithm Updates | | David-E-Carey1 -
Wordpress Canonical Tag Pointing to Same Page
So I noticed on a few of my clients wordpress tags (via moz) that there are canonical tags on URLs, pointing to that same URL. What is the point of that, and is it harming the website? Is this being done automatically via a plugin? Should I remove the canonical tags or leave as is?
Algorithm Updates | | WebServiceConsulting.com0 -
VRL Parameters Question - Exclude? or use a Canonical Tag?
I'm trying to figure something out, as I just finished my "new look" to an old website. It uses a custom built shopping cart, and the system worked pretty well until about a year when ranking went down. My primary traffic used to come from top level Brand pages. Each brand gets sorted by the shopping cart and a Parameter extension is added... So customers can click Page 1 , Page 2 , Page 3 etc. So for example : http://www.xyz.com/brand.html , http://www.xyz.com/brand.html?page=1 , http://www.xyz.com/brand.html?page=2 and so on... The page= is dynamic, therefore the page title, meta's, etc are the same, however the products displayed are different. I don't want to exclude the parameter page= completely, as the products are different on each page and obviously I would want the products to be indexed. However, at the same time my concern is that have these parameters might be causing some confusion an hence why I noticed a drop in google rankings. I also want to note - with my market, its not needed to break these pages up to target more specific keywords. Maybe using something like this would be the appropriate measure?
Algorithm Updates | | Southbay_Carnivorous_Plants0 -
Meta keywords tag?
Because Google is cracking on spammy keywords should I remove my meta keywords tag altogether? I hear they dont factor it in anyway?
Algorithm Updates | | dfwgolfer0 -
Should I use canonical tags on my site?
I'm trying to keep this a generic example, so apologies if this is too vague. On my main website, we've always had a duplicate content issue. The main focus of our site is breaking down to specific, brick and mortar locations. We have to duplicate the description of product/service for every geographic location (this is a legal requirement). So for example, you might have the parent "product/service" page targeting the term, and then 100's of sub pages with "product/service San Francisco", "product/service Austin", etc. These pages have identical content except for the geographic location is dynamically swapped out. There is also additional useful content like google map of area, local resources, etc. As I said this was always seen as an SEO issue, specifically you could see in the way that googlebot would crawl pages and how pagerank flowed through the site that having 100's of pages with identical copy and just swapping out the geographic location wasn't seen as good content, however we still always received traffic and conversions for the long tail geographic terms so we left it. Las year, with Panda, we noticed a drop in traffic and thought it was due to this duplicate issue so I added canonical tags to all our geographic specific product/service pages that pointed back to the parent page, that seemed to be received well by google and traffic was back to normal in short order. However, recently what I notice a LOT in our SERP pages is if I type in a geographic specific term, i.e. "product/service san francisco", our deep page with the canonical tag is what google is ranking. Google inserts its own title tag on the SERP page and leaves the description blank as it doesn't index the page due to the canonical tag on the page. Essentially what I think it is rewarding is the site architecture which organizes the content to the specific geo in the URL: site.com/service/location/san-francisco. Other than that there is no reason for it to rank that page. Sorry if this is lengthy, thanks for reading all of that! Essentially my question is, should I keep the canonical tags on the site or take them off since Google insists on ranking the page? If I am ranking already then the potential upside to doing that is ranking higher (we're usually in the 3-6 spot on the result page) and also higher CTR because we can get a description back on our resulting page. The counter argument is I'm already ranking so leave it and focus on other things. Appreciate your thoughts on this!
Algorithm Updates | | edu-SEO0 -
Title tag consistency. Is it worth it?
I operate a stain removal website and was wondering how consistent it was worth being from title tag to title tag. To give you an example, here is a group of keyword phrases that I might wish to target: "getting out pet stains with vinegar" "how do I remove water stains from wood" "removing chocolate stains" Does the benefit to be gained (whatever that might be) from making these consistently of the form "how to remove X from Y, " or "how to remove X" outweigh simply giving articles titles based on the exact phrases above? I heard from someone that Google is getting more proficient at spotting "clumsy" title tags, although I'm not sure if any of the above examples would fall into that category, and was thinking that I should then probably proceed on the basis of directly titling articles based on the exact keywords I am uncovering... Any advice much appreciated.
Algorithm Updates | | ZakGottlieb710