No matter if you automate or hand-code Schema, don’t spam it. Instead, take the time to learn how Google views your content.
Do you remember the days when SEO pros tried to fool search engines using the “keywords” metatag?
This could be due to schema stuffing.
It could cause more damage this time.
A customer had difficulty putting their Schema on his web page the other day.
I checked out his work and found that the page on his medical practice website had a section for a U.S. State.
Instead of highlighting the fact that the page was about the state’s medical discipline, he told Google that it was about Town A and Town B and Town C, and Town D.
It is possible that the company-owned shops at each of these locations. However, I wouldn’t be surprised if this were incorrect.
He tried to claim that the page’s contents were about something else.
The page mentioned all of these places, and the automation was able to spot it.
This is no reason to stuff Schema all over town.
Users also add Schema to their blogs’ home pages.
This tells the search engine (SE) that this page is about blogs. This Schema will tell the search engine what the page IS ABOUT. It is not about what the page is.
The website owner could then add every topic to the site, regardless of whether they are the main focus or an incidental one.
Icon for “Post on Twitter” on the page
Let’s also add “sameAs” on Twitter.
Mentions Google
Let’s assume the page looks the same as Google. Schema can be abused.
Google's View on Incorrect Structured Information
Google hosted a podcast in April about structured data. It featured Googlers Ryan Levering, Lizzie Sassman, and Martin Splitt.
SEO professionals should pay attention to Googlers talking about structured data. The entire podcast is highly recommended, but I prefer a 60-second clip.
Martin, who is likely exposed to spammier SEO (being part of the Search Quality Team at Google), asked Ryan if Google needed to compensate him for (and I paraphrase) over-exuberant SEOs that added incorrect Schema.
I believe he was referring to the idea that SEO experts would start to include every topic in the Schema.
Ryan, a Google engineer, stated that incorrect Schema is a problem from spam’s perspective and a synchronization perspective.
Google often sees Schema that is inconsistent with core content.
The effect may be the same: A negative message, which makes your content less compatible with the search query or the user intent and not more.
Ryan’s podcast point raised different ideas.
Maybe a website advertises a monthly meetup?
The author may add Event Schema markup in the first month with dates and times. However, the dates are updated on the human side of content, but they now have an incorrect schema.
Or worse, more event Schema is added to Google and tells Google that the event has multiple dates. This might be true, but it won’t help users trying to find the next one.
This could become a problem when SEO professionals try to grasp Schema quickly without spending the time to understand it fully.
Do You Need to Automate Schema?
I contacted Twitter SEO professionals to inquire if Schema was ready for automation.
It was not clear that the response was a call to arms.
Some SEO experts believed Schema could be automated better, while others felt machines weren’t ready for the job and preferred hand-coding Schema.
The Googlers seemed surprisingly optimistic about the possibility of the Schema being machine-generated in the structured data podcasts.
Some schemas are more challenging to autogenerate correctly than others.
This website should be focused on accuracy and not volume.
Schema is best avoided if it is not checked for errors.
This is the meaning the Schema conveys to both the engine and the syntax of the code.
Many web developers and SEO professionals have become lazy. Web browsers are extremely accommodating of poor HTML codes.
Schema is, according to my understanding, not as forgiving.
A simple syntax error can lead to a total failure of machine understanding.
It is good to check the market for free structured data marking up tools.
This is why automate schema generation, at least in part.
It would help if you didn’t rely on tools to understand the marked-up content. However, using a device that generates a technically accurate schema can be a time-saver.
Many are available on the market.
A great example of spam in the Knowledge Graph
If you feel that Schema is too clever to fool Google, Bill Hartzer of Twitter reported the blatant spamming in a Knowledge Panel result for “SEO Services India.”
An enterprising SEO turned the term into an artist by creating “songs” from his favorite keywords!
This spam is a temporary amusement.
It also reveals a darker side to the semantic web.
Ability to alter the truth and mold reality.
Google must protect its algorithms.
