Welcome to WebmasterWorld Guest from 188.8.131.52
rel="sponsored": Use the sponsored attribute to identify links on your site that were created as part of advertisements, sponsorships or other compensation agreements.
rel="ugc": UGC stands for User Generated Content, and the ugc attribute value is recommended for links within user generated content, such as comments and forum posts.
When nofollow was introduced, Google would not count any link marked this way as a signal to use within our search algorithms. This has now changed. All the link attributes -- sponsored, UGC and nofollow -- are treated as hints about which links to consider or exclude within Search. We’ll use these hints -- along with other signals -- as a way to better understand how to appropriately analyze and use links within our systems.
That looks to me as if Google struggles to identify paid links, so adding "sponsored" clearly puts the label on it.I think that's probably right.
It's voluntary, says Google's Search LiaisonEr.... As opposed to what? Involuntary? Mandatory? Add these features or we’ll drop your entire site from all indexes? Of course it’s voluntary. It worries me a little bit that they even find it necessary to say so.
Will they penalize those links even if they are NOT paid links? How would they know the difference?
Since Google is "sort of" requiring an ads.txt to be configured and added to your root
joined:June 28, 2016
Google has likely completed a new means of assessing the quality links using the "other signals" and is now getting ready to roll it out (If it hasn't done so already). So by introducing this new "button" it will obfuscate the impact of these actions making webmaster think that their site tanked because more than 21.7% of their links came from UGC and less than 11.3% come from "Sponsored".
When did Google become the web's police person?
Does google only apply these to internal links?The quote from Google says “links on your site”, which only makes sense if it’s interpreted as “links to pages on your site”. Obviously the links are starting from your site, or you wouldn’t be in a position to apply <rel> attributes to them.
On the other hand, what would be the point in flagging an internal link as “sponsored”? Isn’t that just making your whole site look untrustworthy? “Sure, it’s my own site, but I’m not prepared to vouch for all of it.”
using the "sponsored" attribute for internal links (when appropriate) should make your site look more trustworthy, because you'd be identifying links to pages within the site that were paid adsInteresting thought. The moment they find the word “sponsored” anywhere on the site, will they then assume that all links without this word are non-sponsored content? Seems like this could oh so easily be abused: I’ll charge you X for a guest spot, or 3X for a guest spot whose links don’t say so.
The moment they find the word “sponsored” anywhere on the site, will they then assume that all links without this word are non-sponsored content? Seems like this could oh so easily be abused: I’ll charge you X for a guest spot, or 3X for a guest spot whose links don’t say so.
All the link attributes, sponsored, ugc and nofollow, now work today as hints for us to incorporate for ranking purposes.