Author Rank - Using the brand as the author
-
Hi i'm building a new site and want to start building up author rank right from the start.
If you are building author rank for a brand, do you think its fine to use the brand as the actual author of the content, instead of a actual person?
Or using a stage name rather then a persons actual name, and have your writers write under that particular stage name?
Would love to hear peoples opinions.
Cheers,
Mark
-
I think that they could post article under your account/name... so when they leave.. it's yours... it is to build up your authorship, not theirs..
-
Thanks
From what i've read so far, if you do hire a writer/employee and have the articles posted under their name, but then they decide to leave the company, they take the author rank with them?
So how can brand, deal with this potential issue?
-
Why wouldn't you just implement rel=publisher? If it's a brand responsible for the content, my understanding is that that would be the appropriate thing to do.
-
If you are talking about creating authorship linking specifically (i.e. using rel=author markup) you can't do that using a brand, Mark. Google won't let you. Authorship can only be connected to a personal Google+ profile. Which makes sense when you think about it. A "brand" can't write an article. Only a person can.
Forget about trying to create a personal profile that is actually the brand name. Google is very specific that personal profiles must be real people, and quite regularly removes accounts that don't meet the criteria.
If you do want to connect your content to a brand, you'll need to use the rel=publisher markup instead, connected to a Google+ business page Unfortunately at this point that "publisher" connection doesn't yet lead to any kind of rich snippet advantage in the SERP (eg. an image next to the search result as in rel=author).
There is talk that Google will eventually start using a brand image or logo in SERPS associated with rel=publisher but it's anybody's guess exactly when, or if, this will actually occur.
As for creating a fake persona to represent all the contributors of content - since this is diametrically opposed to what rel=author is supposed to represent, I have to assume Google has (or will devise) methods for detecting that kind of manipulation and devaluing or penalising it.
The whole point of authorship is that is supposed to allow creation of a trust relationship with the writing of a particular person. If there's anything we've learned this year from all the algorithm updates, it's that trying to manipulate legitimate ranking/authority signals purely for marketing purposes is a fool's errand. You may get away with it for a while, but when it gets clobbered, all the effort you put into the manipulation will have been wasted. Or worse yet will get you penalised. Trying to represent the work of several writers under one "stage name" is just such a manipulation.
Best suggestion at this point? Use rel=publisher markup for "brand" content (like product descriptions etc) and connect individual authors' content (like how-to articles, blog posts etc) to each individual's personal G+ profile.
In other words - use the tool as it was intended, instead of trying to pervert it purely for marketing benefit.
Paul
-
Dear Mark,
The answer lies in your question and depends on your decision as whom you would like to promote or build reputation for. So, if you want to build the rank for your brand, you go ahead and do so and if you want to build the author rank for a person (he is your brand in this case), you go for it. Let us take a look at a scenario. Suppose, I own multiple brands, I would build author rank for my name so that I would be recognized as the one behind all these brands. I am the brand here. Coming to your case, if I were you, if this brand is going to be my biggest investment or a dream project, I would stick to building the author rank for my brand as going forward, I can leverage the brand name and use it to my advantage. Suppose, I am likely to come up with multiple web properties or brands in future, I would rather build the author rank for my name as I am the one standing behind all these brands or web properties and I want all the recognition and all my current and future brands can leverage my recognition.
Please note that the above opinion is personal.
Best,
Rafi
-
According to the https://plus.google.com/authorship page,
- Make sure that you have a profile photo with a recognisable headshot.
- Make sure that a byline containing your name appears on each page of your content (for example, "By Steven Levy").
- Make sure that your byline name matches the name on your Google+ profile.
- Verify that you have an email address (such as [email protected]) on the same domain as your content. (Don't have an email address on the same domain?
A brand is rarely an "author" - someone did the writing. Google wants that person tied to the work they created. Now, there may be ways "around" this but getting "around" stuff in SEO is why so many people scrambled so badly this year.
This page dissects it further: http://www.optimum7.com/internet-marketing/google-optimization/pros-and-cons-of-google-authorship-for-businesses.html
Most notably:
A company or brand’s Google+ page cannot be designated as the author of any web content. Therefore your company and brand name will not come up as the author in the web results.
**Warning:**If you’ve considered creating a company persona under the guise of a real person in order to have all authorship attributed to that particular Google+… Don’t do it! This really undermines AuthorRank and defeats the whole point of authorship. Google may also penalize you for trying to cheat their system… just as they’ve done for poor SEO practices through Google’s Panda-Penguin algorithm updates.
That's what I would follow. I would not suggest trying to game Authorship at all.
-
I guess this would depend on many instances. What are you selling? What is your site about? Which will benefit you more? If your selling a cd of yourself and your the author then I would say go with the author. If your selling a 1 of a kind brand that no one else in the world has, then go with the brand name.
Eventually you may want to just do both, but since your starting, it's not a bad idea to go with brand, because it will be those are considered the most natural backlinks to your site that isn't your url.
Have a great night.
MB
Browse Questions
Explore more categories
-
Moz Tools
Chat with the community about the Moz tools.
-
SEO Tactics
Discuss the SEO process with fellow marketers
-
Community
Discuss industry events, jobs, and news!
-
Digital Marketing
Chat about tactics outside of SEO
-
Research & Trends
Dive into research and trends in the search industry.
-
Support
Connect on product support and feature requests.
Related Questions
-
Using one domain for email and another domain for your website, but redirects...
We are rebranding and our new name is fairly lengthy. We own all main domain versions of our brand name - .com, .new and .org - There is a very high search volume for the new brand name as it is a merger of 2 popular existing brands so want to take advantage of that and use our full name within our website domain name. However, since the name is a little long as mentioned - 25 characters - we also own the 3 character acronym of the new brand so we are debating on using the acronym for our new email addresses. ie [email protected] so it is user friendly. We would obviously redirect the acronym email domain to point to the longer website domain. Are there any negative SEO effects if we do that? Use the longer domain for the website and shorter acronym for our email? Thank you
Content Development | | shpala1 -
How do I use meta descriptions properly?
Hi there, I am starting to write a blog and I wanted to know, how to write meta descriptions correctly? I have been reading a lot about this subject lately and I found very different opinions in terms of length. Could you give me some advise about this? Thank you!!
Content Development | | lucywrites1 -
What is your take on using Google images for blogs
In your opinion, do you think it is okay to use Google images for your blog posts as long as it credits or includes a link to the site in which you located it? We tried looking at stock art for some license-free photos and had no luck in coming up with good pictures. What rules or guidelines do you follow when looking for pictures for your customers blog (or your own)? A lot of our posts have to do with "what to do in this city" or "Where to go in this city". Do you think it's okay to use Google images for these types of posts?
Content Development | | qlkasdjfw0 -
Does using Articlebase articles on your site push your rank down?
Hello All, I launched a website (www.hrpayrollsystems.net) last year. I'm very new to the SEO world so I'm still seeing what works and what doesn't. We recently republished some articles from articlebase.com that I think may have hurt us in SEO. Does Google see our site as having duplicate content and then penalize us? Our top keyword isn't even ranking anymore when I put it in the sites that tell you where you show up. Help!
Content Development | | HRISGuy0 -
Using syndicated content / videos
Hi all, We are looking at using some syndicated video content on our main category pages. We are an pharmacy and offer prescription medicines (Yes we are NHS registered and no we don't sell generic products). I want to use the videos to increase the UX for the category pages and increase stickiness......however i am a little worried about how Google will see this. We don't have the time or budget to create our own videos but the rest of the content around them is all ours. The videos are provided by the NHS so they are good quality content and should add value to the consumer. Will big G stiff us for doing this?
Content Development | | nicc19760 -
Can you use creative commons non-commercial images on a company blog?
Does anyone know if it is okay to use creative commons images on your company blog if they are under the Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 2.0 Generic license. Technically you are using it on a commercial site, but you are not directly making money from the image or selling it.
Content Development | | ProjectLabs0 -
A truly useful directory
Many directories on the net are just spammy annoyances, but some are quite useful, particularly when someone has really put some effort into a niche market. But how can Google look at that favorably? I would be willing to invest the time to put together a directory for our niche market, but if someone uses our directory, they would come to it, find the link they are searching for, then click and leave our site. They would visit one page on our site, and not stay very long. Is it possible to create and maintain a compelling directory and get credit for doing so? Of course, we would not have any spammy ads cluttering the directory, so that may help. Anything else? Best,
Content Development | | ChristopherGlaeser
Christopher0 -
Archive older, low ranked content to help new content in Panda 2.2?
After watching the white board friday re: Panda 2.2, it got me to thinking about old content. One of the sites that I work with generates 3-10 new articles/day (movie reviews, interviews, guides, event previews, etc) and has been doing so since 2005. Now, they have almost 10k articles, 7k of which are indexed. The quality of the content varies, and much of it is dated (movies, events) much of the amount of older content gets 0-5 pageviews/month, made in the days BEFORE the site was using Google News + social tools to spread the word (and backlinks). Note that those older articles also of course tend to have 100% bounce, and small/zero TOS. Is this hurting the site? With 75-100 articles/month being published, I want to make sure they get maximum exposure. I'm also concerned that crawlers get sucked into the site chasing down old BS content, and that is hurting it as well. What to do with this content? Should I unpublish unpopular, dated content and get it off the internet? Or, do I leave it on, but NOINDEX it so Google won't crawl it?
Content Development | | EricPacifico0