30 Comments

  1. Matt Orley

    Thank you Sarah for the word. Time to start cutting and streamlining code!!!

    Report

  2. christophermccoy

    this is just author right not the actual ratings schema?

    Report

  3. Derek Springer

    The word on the street is that Google found Authorship was *too* successful: folks would only click on search results with the Google Authorship images.

    Report

  4. tłumaczenia

    I belive that is not a bad move from Google. Personally I never liked this feature.

    Report

  5. Cecily Wiggins

    Too soon to act on a so-called experiment gone bad…if that were the case Google +; is next on the chopping block.

    Report

    • m.e.doane

      I hope so! A lot of people only use it is because they feel their rankings will suffer without it. Horrible reason to use a social network.

      Report

    • Brian Gardner

      “Google +; is next on the chopping block.”

      Funny you mention this, as I just tweeted the same thing. Finding it very difficult to trust Google at the moment.

      Report

  6. Brin Wilson

    I’m no Brad Pitt, so I kind of like the fact that my ugly mug will no longer be seen by the Google-searching masses. lol.

    Report

  7. Seth Miller

    “From a user’s standpoint, seeing an author you recognize can be tremendously beneficial when selecting among similar search results.”

    Well put, there’s plenty of times as a web developer I have used someone’s profile image to go to them for advice on the topic.

    Also as a web developer, it’s nice knowing I’ve never implemented this feature for any of my clients, because I won’t be getting yelled at now.

    Report

  8. John SALAMONE (@Articlesmart)

    I did kind of like seeing a face that went with the article.

    Report

  9. creativecatapps

    I did hear it’s still useful for help in copyright/DMCA claims, and also if you have a Google Plus page, you can still link that to your website, can’t you?

    Report

  10. Pam Blizzard

    I have to agree with Cecily -my first thought was, “what impact will this have on Google +”?

    Report

  11. Norcross

    The full context of what they said was the benefit wasn’t worth the extra resources it took to process it. In addition, it still didn’t get good adoption (approx 30%) and many implemented it wrong. When Google tried to automate it, they ended up applying incorrect authors, the most famous one being Truman Capote to a NY Times article 26 years after his death.

    Report

  12. Tenns

    Does make you wonder about G+. I could honestly do without it, because I don’t get much from it.

    Report

  13. Armin Grewe

    I hope Jetpack is not going to remove the feature. I quite like being able to display my G+ profile so easily on my site, regardless of Google authorship etc. It allows visitors to quickly click through and learn more about me.

    Report

  14. Keith Davis

    “Authorship was an experiment that Google had been running for the past three years.”
    And we all took part in it by learning how to add it to our WordPress sites.

    Maybe @Derek is right…
    “The word on the street is that Google found Authorship was *too* successful: folks would only click on search results with the Google Authorship images.”

    A lot of wasted time and effort taking part in Google’s experiment!!

    Report

  15. leokesler

    The big question still remains: Is Google Authorship a signal for ranking ?

    Report

  16. Tim

    I also only clicked on articles with an authors pic in the results. To me, if they took the time to implement Authorship, they took time to write a useful post.

    Report

  17. Brent

    Gotta love this move by Google! I’ve always thought this feature was unnecessary.. Less clutter = better.

    Report

  18. Vanessa Anne Blaylock

    Nobody is working harder than Google to be as evil as Microsoft once was. And nowhere is this more evident than Google’s threading of Google+ through everything the way Microsoft once threaded Internet Explorer through everything. Ironically the success of Firefox was due in part to how brilliantly bad IE was. To be fair, a lot of people do seem to like G+, but the manipulative ride Google has taken us on for 3 years is inexcusable.

    In a massive corporate manipulation of users Google launched Google+ and Vic Gundotra launched the now legendary “Nymwars” where he literally called for a witch hunt to out and ban pseudonymous users. At first even banning them from products like Gmail and Google Docs that they had been using for the previous 3 years. Meanwhile on the other front, we were all “forced” to adopt Google Authorship if we had any hope of anyone ever clicking on us in search results.

    Fast forward 3 years: Vic Gundotra is no longer with the company. The G+ “Real Name” policy is gone. And now Google Authorship is gone. After so much heavy handed manipulation, a giant, but quiet, “never mind.”

    We live in a new era of Virtual Feudal Lords, and if you aren’t going to pledge your allegiance to Google, then you’re going to have to pledge it to Apple or somebody else. Still, I hope we don’t get fooled again.

    Report

    • Summer

      I wondered about that. Several of us had Gmail accounts that were the names of our podcasts, so there really was no personal information to supply to Google. It was all well and good until I thought it would be a good idea to have a G+ page for one of the shows, and was given all sorts of denials when I tried to set it up, saying that my personal info wasn’t valid, and I thought “well duh, it’s a podcast, not a person”.

      Then later jumped through more hoops converting a couple big sites to use Co-Authors Plus and Genesis Co-Authors Plus, to provide bylines and author boxes for guest authors (and their various social profiles) without needing to add accounts to the WordPress sites… so all that work will be for no search gain going forward? Nice.

      So, the witch hunt was the result of him being angry at being scammed by a Nigerian prince with a sweet deal for him or something?

      That said, I will be floored if Google kills off G+ before the kill off Feedburner… been waiting for them to ring that death bell for 2 years now.

      Report

  19. Dave

    Google: do no evil. Except when it comes to wasting people’s time with authorship and other stuff like that, wreaking havoc on small and large websites and the people that run them, killing advertising for the entire web (look what happened to ad rates when they got involved), and being as opaque as a large rock.

    Too bad Bing doesn’t provide serious competition.

    Report

  20. Piet

    More and more I believe that whatever Google does is an experiment. And whichever experiment they conduct, all are done with one common goal: more advertising dollars, for them.

    So maybe we should just en masse stop the craziness by implementing whatever Google announces as the thing to do and focus a bit more simply on common sense.

    just my 2 cents.

    Report

  21. Dustin @ ventureblend

    Thanks Sarah! Are Google Author and Google Publisher the same thing?

    Report

  22. Kevin

    Not sure how I feel about this. I don’t think it’s going to affect me. Hmmm….

    Report

  23. Ashley Bailey

    I wish and I believe authorship is not dead! Though Author Rank has went hidden, I find it is still worth to Google and it could just make sense to the readers in many ways.

    Report

  24. Elinajones

    There’s no change in traffic after Authorship died. I guess Google is right then. In my point of Google Authorship doesn’t have any impact on ranking and results.

    Report

Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: