|Google+ Adds Author Attribution and Post Embedding|
|Starting today we’re integrating Google+ Sign-In with Google’s Authorship program. So if you sign in to WordPress.com with Google, for instance, the articles you publish will now be associated with your Google+ profile automatically. |
With this association in place, we can look for ways to surface your info when it's most relevant. For example, today users may see your name, picture and/or a link to your Google+ profile when your content appears in Search, News and other Google products.
|We’re piloting this integration with two major platforms today: WordPress and Typepad. We’re also working with a variety of other sites — including About.com, WikiHow, and Examiner — so we can learn and expand the pilot to all kinds of sites and apps using Google+ Sign-In. |
|In addition to sites like WordPress and Typepad, many of you (in fact, millions of you) are posting content on Google+. We want to make it easy to expand your audience across the web, so today we’re introducing embedded posts. |
With embedded posts, site owners can now add your public Google+ posts to their web pages — as a primary source, for example, or to highlight your point of view. Text, photo and media posts are all supported, and the embeds are fully interactive, so visitors can +1, comment and follow you inline.
Now, if only they'd get the rich snippets to work reliably!
It's all buggy, needs some more coding work. Maybe they should try some Russian coders, they are quite cheap.
I prefer to stay annonymous, thank you. I don't even use my real name online, and I certainly do not post pictures of myself.
|I prefer to stay annonymous |
That's perfectly understandable and many of the very good reasons behind that have been expressed on this forum many times.
But with all the major brands appearing at the top of the SERPS nowadays it might be that G will only place websites at the top of their SERPS which it trusts. And maybe a good way to gain that trust as a small publisher is to allow yourself to be directly associated with and openly accountable for what you write and publish.
This move on G+ may be a further nudge from G to encourage publishers to be clearly associated with their work. I'm not suggesting that the desire for anonymity on the web isn't a reasonable view to hold for many but if it doesn't suit G then there will be a cost to that anonymity.
You may upload fake picture and info. I don't think that there is any verification process to verify your photo and information.
Probably getting to the point where you'll have to make a pen name if you want to rank soon... including a fake online profile ;)
(For those not wanting to attribute their articles to their real name for various reasons.)
This is changing with the web. The reason to say anonymous is probably due to not wanting to be associated with certain activity, that is fine and your choice. I am looking down the road the day of being anonymous is or will be soon over. You may believe your anonymous but you are leaving footprints. There are ways to remain anonymous for now but that is quickly going away.
|I prefer to stay anonymous |
Google is going to use this as a way to stop how other sites rank better than the content provider. Claim it stop the bots.
Getting back on topic:
This is a way of generating signals. Those signals may allow better profiling of online material. If you are generating such material, it seems to me that the opportunities are to increase opportunities for exposure, and to raise the profile of the business represented.
It's google's way of making it easier for them, too, to feature what may be seen as legitimate content. After all, scrapers are less likely to have a high profile, thereby making your legitimate sites perform better.
The collateral damage of google's move, however, is the small mom-n-pop store without the budgets and time to play in this new google field.
More and more people want to be anonymous, which is perfectly ok. Thats also the way the web will go over time, when we create a site, it has the option of using normal usernames and if that person dont want to be a member anymore, that person has the option of have everything deleted what he has posted or to leave it as is. Also the option for every member is to block google to spider there content. Its really getting a good accept with the users. Also regarding blocking google, is popular, be cause here in Europe there has not been any good news from that company in years, so its not that popular. Yes people still use google.
Duplicate content is evil, unless powered by Google?
...hmmm, a replacement for RSS feeds?
This may be part of why GOOG shut down Google Reader back in July:
...maybe trying to kill RSS so they can push G+ syndicated content.
There are a number of great reasons for remaining anonymous:
- A company doesn't want to highlight one writer employee rather than the brand.
- You're a content writer for 12 different websites in various niches and none of them want to have you publicly associated as the author of their content.
- Your site uses several different content writers, but you want readers/visitors to see your content as coming from one unified voice.
Nothing nefarious going on there. It has always made business sense in many cases to use pen names or attribute written works to a corporate entity rather than an individual. Google doesn't patent stuff in their employee's names, so they know it's not a real trust issue.
I personally don't think they will ever rank you lower for not using one of their tools, since that would violate anti-trust laws. But if they do - whatever. It's way past time to be marketing your site beyond Google.
Question: What about some anonymous authorship? I mean, instead of "yourname" on a G+ profile, using a "Content widget writer 2013". Serious question. Your name would be out of that profile... of course.
What do you think?
I understand some obvious reasons G has to approach the authorship, it's easy to see if one tries to handle authorship, scrapping, finding the true and original source, etc. There are derivations from this but it's not the case to list them, I believe one can see it. BUT there are lots of reasons that will not favor the content writers, being one of them: how easy will be for others to find them and track them... to get a hold of other sites to scrap.
About the gazillion good reasons to stay anonymous, I don't believe the internet and your sites are made so you can get a NEW JOB blocking emails and unwanted contacts. One does not write with that goal in mind.
Last night after my earlier response to this thread, I discovered that Google had created a Google+ page based on a Google account of mine, without my permission or desire. I decided to explore it, and it looks like maybe I CAN keep my own name completely hidden from the public and just keep "MyDomainName" visible. If so, I'm fine with that - that's how Facebook pages work (Facebook knows the individual behind the page, but my visitors just know the brand). I was under the impression Google+ forced you to make your legal first and last name visible to everyone, and that doesn't work under the circumstances I mentioned before.
With Google+, would you need a separate Google account for every website you manage?
diberry I build pages under my main business account for our websites. I suspect the page you discovered was built from Google places account is this correct?