• http://twitter.com/kevinmarks Kevin Marks

    This shows Google’s dogmatic insistence on having a g+ account to show authorship is misfiring, and ignores author pages on the site that the article is from, or other sites.

  • http://www.seo-theory.com/ Michael Martinez

    Good thing Google has kept Authorship as a PILOT PROGRAM that is not yet generally released for the public. That gives them time to fix these kinds of errors without incurring undue criticism from people who pay too much attention to Google’s every little nuances.

  • http://twitter.com/jimbeetle jimbeetle

    The Times or any other publisher shouldn’t have to do anything. Six mentions of Bazelon’s name in the source, three in the form of “By Emily Bazelon,” and Google picks up on one mention of Truman Capote? What are all those PhDs doing?

  • Durant Imboden

    Actually, it shows the opposite: If Google Authorship relied solely on authorship markup, this mistake wouldn’t have occurred.

    As for Google’s relying on algorithms to deduce authorship in some cases, that isn’t necessarily a bad idea. Authors of books, magazine articles, etc. might be delighted to get a Google AuthorRank boost from their books, magazine articles, and Web writings that were published without authorship markup. The concept seems reasonable enough, even if the implementation needs refining.

  • http://twitter.com/kolargol Mathias Philippe

    Thanks to have spotted this Matt. It’s astonishing to see Google algorithm relying on a so small “signal” to credit an author.
    It also shows that the first policy of refusing fake names for Google+ accounts is long dead.

  • http://learntipsandtricks.com/ Damu

    Good find which resulted in Capote’s google plus account suspended.

  • http://blog.paulgailey.com/ Paul Gailey

    “not yet generally released for the public” – how so? I thought we had this exchange before.

  • http://blog.paulgailey.com/ Paul Gailey

    Why not, if you’re an author, become pragmatic and markup your identity so precisely to avoid inadvertent misattribution?

  • http://twitter.com/Greekgeek Greekgeek

    This bug has only been true for a few months. Before that time, my authorship was correct. Now, if I mention Seth Godin in an article, his face replaces mine, my article is credited to him, and the links go to his profile not mine.

    Most of the bloggers and online writers I know are running into this problem now. Not all with Seth Godin, of course, but it’s especially a hazard when writing on a multi-author site where one author is better known than the rest. Seth Godin tends to get the Google credit for much of the better content written on Squidoo by others, while Paul Edmondson is getting credit for other Hubpage writers’ articles. Yet on our own blogs, which earn far less, we at least can be assured of our authorship displaying correctly — usually — even if we mention someone else’s name or link to someone else’s article.

    I really don’t understand why Google has started overriding validated authorship codes in favor of any stray name or link included in body content. It did not do this in 2011. Sooner or later it’s going to land itself in hot water by attributing an article to someone the article’s author is taking a stand against,

  • http://twitter.com/Greekgeek Greekgeek

    Some of us have been reporting this glitch to Google’s webmaster forums for months. I got a “We’ll look into it” response. I’ve been hoping that Searchengineland would call attention to this problem, since little Whos in Whoville can’t grt much help in matters like this. SEL, be a Horton for us, please!

  • Deni Gewete

    Looks interesting, just a short opinion that the big G is not perfect at all.

  • Unbound Marketing

    You’d think the NYT would set up their authorship properly! Interesting the way Google picked up on it though.

  • roseberry

    This has been happening on a site i work on for months and I have to email every so often to tell them that the person they have linked is not actually the author. The eventually fix the issue, but it’s very frustrating. But even if they did guess right, what if I don’t want my listing linked to Google plus? They give no option. I’m usually not one to jump on the “Google is force promoting it’s products” bandwagon, but in this case that’s exactly what they’re doing, whether you want them to or not. In effect their associating Google Plus with other big brands (like NYT in this case) and NYT can’t stop them from doing so. When a user sees this picture and profile next to the NYT listing and not others, I think they would reasonably assume some partnership or willing association on NYT’s part. Again, I’m fine with Google doing this by default. Not fine with not giving publishers a way to opt out.

  • cjvannette

    You’ve always been able to create a G+ account with a fake name. You
    cannot, however, create a G+ account with an *obviously* fake name. “Awesome Dude” would probably be immediately flagged, because “awesome” and “dude” are not names. “Truman” and “Capote,” however, are.