Welcome to WebmasterWorld Guest from 220.127.116.11
Just trying to decide the politest way to debunk the idea that more Google +1s lead to higher Google web rankings. Let's start with correlation != causation: [xkcd.com...]
Hacker News https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6243451 [news.ycombinator.com]
[edited by: Robert_Charlton at 1:24 am (utc) on Aug 21, 2013]
[edit reason] fixed link, added context [/edit]
I'm glad because my target audience don't use social media much. I get a lot of traffic and have great content, but few social media shares because of my target audience.
Well, I mean don't forget that 3 years ago a competitor couldn't possibly ever hurt your website with links.
Will Google be evaluating the use of rel="author" moving forward [youtube.com...]
You'd have to be considering this as part of the overall " authority " mix going forward. But there's no real commitment, just yet, by Google to it's future as a core product as far as I'm concerned. It hasn't become a compelling "must have" success communicated generally, I think, so much that it can be relied upon long term for anything, except as an interim tactic. Even Facebook has some way to go, and that's a core social product with complimentary add-ons.
We may even see Google+ not survive in it's current form. Who knows.
There's no direct ranking impact from Google+ at the moment but there is indirect ranking (from clickthroughs) and if you're already in there you'll be at an advantage later. Ex Googlers [wordtracker.com...]
Some added perspective. Don't use it to spam, and engage with it cautiously until more commitment is shown from Google IMO. Others may see it's emphasis differently.