Is Schema the New SEO Spam?

Remember the good old days when SEO pros tried to confuse search engines with “keyword” meta tags?

It might happen again with pattern padding.

This time, though, it could do more damage.

A client had some issues getting their schema on their web page the other day.

I looked at what he does, and his medical practice website has a page for US states.

But instead of emphasizing that the page was about medical disciplines in the state, he told Google that the page was about towns A, B, C, D.

Likely, the company has stores in every location, but I wouldn’t be surprised if that’s not true.

He’s trying to say that what the page is about is actually about something it’s not.

The automation correctly notices that the page mentions all of these towns.

But that’s not a good reason to start populating patterns about towns.

I’ve also seen users add schemas on their blog homepage that might start like this:

This tells search engines that the page is about a blog! In this mode say what the page is about, not what the page is.

Site owners are likely to add every topic under the sun, whether those topics are the focal point of the content or side-by-side.

The “Post on Twitter” icon on the page?

Let’s add “sameAs Twitter”.

Mention Google?

Suppose the page is the same as Google. You can see how the pattern can get out of hand.

Google’s take on incorrectly structured data

In April, Google played a podcast on structured data with Googlers Martin Splitt, Ryan Levering, and Lizzie Sassman.

When Googlers talk about structured data, SEO experts should take note.I recommend the whole podcast, but I want to focus on 60 second clip.

Here, Martin – who may be exposed to the spam side of SEO (as part of Google’s search quality team) – asks Ryan if Google has to compensate (I explain) “overactive SEO adding incorrect architecture”.

I think he’s hinting at the idea that SEO experts are starting to add every topic under the sun to the schema.

Interestingly, Ryan from Google Engineering said that incorrect architecture is not only a problem from a spam perspective, but is more common from a sync perspective.

Often, Google sees schemas that are inconsistent with the core content.

The effect can be the same: negative signals, making your content less, not more, aligned with search queries and user intent.

Ryan’s views on the podcast offer a different idea.

Maybe a web page promoting regular monthly meetups?

During the first month, the author may add event schema Stamped with date and time, but next month date gets updated in content humanization, but now becomes incorrect in mode.

Or worse… more Event mode was added and now tells Google that the event has multiple dates – which may be true, but isn’t much help for Google users looking for the next date.

This can become a problem when SEO professionals start to grasp the pattern without taking the time to understand it.

Should you automate patterns?

I reached out to SEO pros on Twitter and asked if they thought the architecture was ready for automation.

The response is definitely not a horn sound in some way.

Some SEO experts believe that schemas are much better automated, but others believe that machines are not ready to do the job and that hand-coded schemas are preferable.

In the Structured Data Podcast, Googlers are surprisingly optimistic (in my opinion) about the idea of ​​machine-generated patterns.

Of course, some patterns are easier and more accurate to auto-generate than others.

The emphasis here needs to be on the accuracy of the site owner rather than the quantity.

If you’re not at least checking that it’s correct, it might be better to avoid the pattern altogether.

This applies to what the schema conveys to the engine and the syntax of the code.

Many SEO professionals and web developers have become lazy, and web browsers are very tolerant of bad HTML code.

ArchitectureI was led to believe, was less forgiving.

A small syntax error can lead to a complete failure of machine understanding.

For this reason, it is always wise to use a free structured data markup inspection tool on the market.

but that’s why you should Automatically create schema – at least to some extent.

Don’t rely on tools to understand what’s being flagged, but using tools to generate technically accurate patterns should save you a lot of time.

There are many on the market now.

A good example of spam in the knowledge graph

If you think Google is too smart to be fooled by Schema, Bill Hartzer on Twitter Reported blatant spam of knowledge panel results for the phrase “SEO services in India”.

Some enterprising SEO has turned the word into a musical artist and created “songs” with his favorite keywords!

Image via Twitter, May 2022

As a one-off, this spam is just entertainment.

But it shows the dark side of the Semantic Web.

The ability to distort facts and shape reality.

Google must be careful to protect their algorithms.

takeout

• Don’t stuff your modal with content that isn’t something it’s a suggestion.
• Be careful to sync your schema with your human readable content.
• If you automate the schema, look at it manually.

More resources:

Featured Image: Thousands of Actors/Shutterstock