|G+ Authorship for Pinterest in Search results|
Till now we have heard G+ authorship for personal sites only with email or authorship verification but today i found a Pinterest search result with verified Google Plus authorship photo.
But i didn't find any verified URL in this G+ profile even then it's author pic is in search results
The only link that I can find is a link to Google + in other Profiles, Google must be connecting the links not creating a spiders web of all of your online activity through Pinterest, blogs and I'm sure in the not to distant future Facebook and Twitter.
Interesting Spot though
Doesn't look like Google is overly concerned about personal sites, they even use "wired.com" specifically in their instructions:
|they even use "wired.com" |
Wired.com can have verified authors (done by admin) but in Pinterest there is no option and not even admin will do that
Benefits of having a fairly unique name and being in all social networks?
He's active in at least two dozen social networks, all promoting his business site which he links from his pinterest profile. I'd be surprised if Google hadn't connected those dots to be honest, the picture is from a blogspot blog he has which also promotes the business. Google is fairly sure that when they see that name, it's him.
|Wired.com can have verified authors (done by admin) |
Does this mean that Wired has a special arrangement with Google? An arrangement that might give Wired articles an artificial undeserved boost in the rankings in return for promoting Google+.
Several comments in the above suggest possible confusion about authorship in relation to Wired. First, why are we interpreting Wired as a "personal" site? And why would Wired.com's having verified authors suggest some kind of "special arrangement" with Google? Wired is an immensely well known publication and it has a dedicated /author/ directory with author pages, all in compliance with Google's Authorship instructions noted above by coopster...
For the record, Steven Levy did write In The Plex about Google and has a very close relationship of mutual trust with Google....
"In The Plex" - getting a clearer picture of what Google IS
It's very possible that several of Levy's concerns about author credit inspired the author tag, and it's likely that he was a beta tester for it. It's probably a tribute to him that Google is using him as the example author in its Authorship documentation.
|...an arrangement that might give Wired articles an artificial undeserved boost in the rankings |
I don't think they need it, aristotle. It's more likely that the "author" username which sunnyujjawal cited needed the boost. We allowed the post so members could examine it. In this forum, we generally don't allow linking to search results... and, had the search terms been published on this thread, I would have deleted them.
It's unfortunate, IMO, that Barry mentioned the specifics in his SER coverage of this thread [seroundtable.com...] ...as to some extent that mention probably does distort the results.
Barry did check out the connections, though, and he noted...
|The Google+ about page for this user has this Twitter account linked in the profile and also has the Pinterest account linked. So that association is there for Google to make the assumption that the author is the same. |
I should add that the search terms were extremely specific, consisting of the word "pinterest" and a unique username, and even without the links might have been interpreted as navigational.
To me this also suggests, btw, the kinds of uses which Google is making of connected "named entities" within in a limited context. See this recent discussion, eg....
Google's Knowledge Graph Demonstrated with 'Bacon Number'
There are many "layers" in the algorithm at this point, which are putting all these connections together. Ultimately, they will be harder to game, I believe, than any one layer by itself would be.
Robert -- Thanks for the explanation. And you're right -- Wired doesn't need an artificial boost in the rankings.
However, I still think that Google's introduction of this authorship credit is a major step in the wrong direction. And when I see a photo in the SERPs, I'm going to think that it's probably a spammer, and in most cases definitely WILL NOT click on that result.
Several comments about the merits of the author tag and how vulnerable it might be to spam have been split off and moved to this thread, where the topic is already under discussion...
Enhancing Author Rank To Boost SEO?
Let's keep this discussion on the original topic, of what signals Google appears to be using to display authorship photos and connect accounts.