Welcome to WebmasterWorld Guest from 126.96.36.199
"We donít use Authorship for ranking," said Google Webmaster Tools Analyst John Mueller in a Google Webmaster Central Hangout broadcast 27 September 2013.
The statement came in response to a question posed at 48:24 in the video recording of the Hangout. A user had noted that scraper sites were able to outrank his original content in Google Search results, even though he had used Google Authorship for the content, and Google was displaying an Authorship rich snippet result for him....
Q: Why can't Google+ authorship prevent scraper sites from showing up above us in the search results?
John Mueller: Well, we don't use authorship for ranking, so it's not... because it's written by a well-known author, or it looks like it might have been written by a well-known author, that we'd show it higher up in the search results....
Q: Could you repeat that once more...
JM: We don't use it for ranking, at the moment. If you're seeing a situation where scraper sites are showing up above you, that's something that I would treat separately from any authorship markup that we have on your pages....
IMO, it's an area that Google wants to get right before using it in rankings.
So it cleverly let loose the myth that Authorship is an important signal,
and also monitors closely those that are using it for manipulating its algorithms.
I don't see them using it as a ranking signal soon.
Ahh guys do you think they would actually tell you it was a ranking factor.
There are still a lot of sites left out of Authorship (yo, ecommerce anyone? or just business or organization sites?) for it to be any kind of ranking factor.
Right, but there are also a lot of areas where these overlap.
There's no reason why authorship couldn't be a ranking factor for searches where authorship is relevant, and not for searches where it isn't.
Google has been moving toward letting its algorithms (not authors or publishers) determine what is or isn't "authored"
suggests that Google doesn't regard Authorship adopters as "manipulators."
EditorialGuy I agree it is helpful for improving CTR from the SERPs... Didn't say it is not helpful, said it isn't helpful to make your site rank.
I do not see this happening until they allow business to take authorship rather than a specific individual.
So... how are companies supposed to provide compelling, best in the field content and articles, with the company taking credit and being the 'face'?
Still, there are plenty of businesses that have jumped on the authorship bandwagon--sometimes in ways that are ludicrous, such as the hotel booking site that stuck authorship markup on a vast number of boilerplate hotel pages a while back. "Authorship abuse" is likely to be a bigger annoyance for Google than lack of interest by businesses.
So, the way I see it unless I'm missing something, it's not even an annoyance. One can try to game the system using authorship tags, but if it doesn't work, who cares?
WHY should a company gain via the authorship tag, when they have the publisher tag
The chances of your having content written by someone who, by virtue of being a real world expert, with connections to many other real world expert articles is slim.
If author starts ruling the rankings then 'businesses, products, brands, and organizations with a public identity and presence on Google+' are going to want to get in the game.
I am an expert in my field and know plenty of others in it, but I will not be writing articles and linking to my personal g+ profile for the world to see, lookup my home address, my home phone, etc.
If authoring influences rank then yes, in a sense, they are.
Would you rather read an article from Nike or from Joe Nobody at someblog.com?
Nike doesn't write. They publish. If Google uses the publisher tag somehow to improve Nike's SERP position, that covers that, but the reality is those companies already rank for EVERYTHING.