更新網站信譽濫用行為政策
透過集合功能整理內容
你可以依據偏好儲存及分類內容。
2024 年 11 月 19 日，星期二
我們致力於打擊垃圾內容並提供優質搜尋體驗，因此於今年稍早推出垃圾內容政策，對抗網站信譽濫用行為。這種策略是指，上傳者在代管網站上發布第三方內容，試圖利用代管網站已建立的排名信號。這麼做的目的是讓該內容的排名比發布在其他網站上高，導致使用者獲得不佳的搜尋體驗。
自這項政策推出以來，我們已審查了可能涉及不同程度第一方參與的情況，例如與白標服務合作、授權協議、部分擁有權協議，以及其他複雜的商業安排。根據已評估的多數案例顯示，即使第一方參與程度很高，內容仍具有第三方本質，或試圖利用代管網站的排名信號，這類行為仍屬於不公平的濫用行為。
我們將闡明政策用語，進一步針對這類發布垃圾資訊的行為採取行動。
我們明確指出，只要在網站上使用第三方內容，意圖利用該網站的排名信號，即視為違反這項政策，無論是否有第一方參與或監督該內容都一樣。新版政策用語自即日起生效，內容如下：
網站信譽濫用行為是指在網站上發布第三方網頁，試圖利用代管網站的排名信號操縱搜尋排名的做法。
評估政策違規情形時，我們會考量許多因素來判斷第三方內容是否遭到濫用，並不會單純接受網站聲稱的內容製作方式。網站擁有者會在註冊的 Search Console 帳戶收到垃圾內容人工判決處罰通知，並可提交重審要求。
請注意，並非所有第三方內容都違反這項政策。詳情請參閱垃圾內容政策頁面，瞭解何者屬於/不屬於網站信譽濫用行為。
除了網站信譽濫用問題之外，我們也設有系統和方法，用於瞭解網站的某個版面是否獨立於網站的主要內容，或與其截然不同。將這些版面視為獨立網站，有助於確保公平競爭環境，避免網站子版面的排名因主網站的信譽而提升。我們會持續改善這些系統，提供來自各種網站的實用資訊。
我們會盡力瞭解網站各版面的差異，如果子版面不再受益於全網站信號，就可能導致流量變化。這並不表示這些子版面已遭到降級或違反垃圾內容政策。即使這些事件位於同一網站中，我們也會個別評估。
這項網站信譽濫用行為政策的澄清說明有助於顯示最實用的搜尋結果、打擊操控行為，並確保所有網站都能根據內容品質獲得相同的排名機會。我們鼓勵網站擁有者熟悉這項新版政策，並專注於打造優質網站，提供以使用者為優先，而非為了提高搜尋引擎排名而製作的內容。
常見問題
什麼是第三方內容？
第三方內容是指由代管網站以外的實體建立的內容。個別實體的例子包括該網站的使用者、自由工作者、白標服務、由非代管網站直接聘雇的人員所建立的內容，以及網站信譽政策中列出的其他例子。
使用任何第三方內容是否違反網站信譽濫用行為政策？
否，單純使用第三方內容並不違反網站信譽濫用行為政策。但如果在內容發布時，試圖利用代管網站的排名信號操縱搜尋排名，這樣就會違反政策。我們的政策頁面列舉了一些不違反政策的第三方內容使用示例。
自由接案內容是否違反網站信譽濫用行為政策？
否，雖然自由接案內容屬於第三方內容，但單純使用這類內容並不違反網站信譽濫用行為政策。但如果一併試圖利用代管網站的排名信號操縱搜尋排名時，才會違反這項政策。
聯盟內容是否違反網站信譽濫用行為政策？
否，這項政策並非針對聯盟內容。這項政策的說明文件明確指出，系統不會將加上適當標示的聯盟連結視為違反網站信譽濫用。
試圖利用代管網站的排名信號操縱搜尋排名，是什麼意思？
這類行為是指將第三方內容放置於已建立的網站，利用第三方內容網站的排名信號 (主要從其第一方內容獲得)，而非將內容放置於缺乏相同信號的其他網站。
如果我使用 noindex 中繼標記，系統會自動移除人工判決處罰嗎？
不會。您還是需要在 Search Console 中回覆人工判決處罰，並說明內容已加上 noindex 中繼標記。建議您採取這項行動，而非讓網站的人工判決處罰生效。
如果我將收到人工判決處罰的內容移至新位置，可以解決網站信譽濫用問題嗎？
或許可以，但取決於您將內容移至何處：
- 將內容移至相同網站網域名稱中的子目錄或子網域：這樣做無法解決潛在問題，且可能會被視為試圖規避我們的垃圾內容政策，導致 Google 搜尋對網站採取更廣泛的行動。
- 將內容移至其他已建立的網站：這樣做可以解決網站信譽濫用問題，因為移除這類內容後，網站的信譽就不會再受到濫用。不過，如果已建立的網站有自己的信譽，且第三方性質未變更，則可能會在移除內容的網站上造成網站信譽濫用問題。
- 將內容移至新網域：如果新網域尚未建立信譽，且您遵守垃圾內容政策，這項操作幾乎不會造成問題。
請注意，如果您移動內容，必須一併提交重審要求，才能移除人工判決處罰。
如果我移動違反政策的內容，可以將舊網站重新導向至新網站嗎？
如果您移動收到人工判決處罰的內容，請勿將網址從舊網站重新導向至新網站，否則可能會再次導致網站信譽濫用問題。
如果我移動違反政策的內容，可以從舊網站連結至新網站嗎？
如果您從舊網站連結至新網站，請在舊網站的這些連結中使用 nofollow 屬性。
發文者：Google 搜尋品質團隊代表 Chris Nelson
更新
- 2024 年 12 月 6 日更新：新增常見問題，回覆網站擁有者對 Google 網站信譽濫用行為政策提出的新問題。
- 2025 年 1 月 21 日更新：根據常見問題的意見回饋，我們更新了網站信譽濫用行為政策的措辭，並在人工判決處罰報告說明文件中加入常見問題中的指引。這些修訂是為了讓政策用語更清楚，政策本身並未實質變更。
除非另有註明，否則本頁面中的內容是採用創用 CC 姓名標示 4.0 授權，程式碼範例則為阿帕契 2.0 授權。詳情請參閱《Google Developers 網站政策》。Java 是 Oracle 和/或其關聯企業的註冊商標。
[null,null,[],[[["\u003cp\u003eGoogle's site reputation abuse policy combats using third-party content to unfairly boost rankings by exploiting a host site's established signals.\u003c/p\u003e\n"],["\u003cp\u003eRegardless of first-party involvement, leveraging third-party content to manipulate search rankings violates this policy.\u003c/p\u003e\n"],["\u003cp\u003eGoogle's systems now evaluate site sections independently, potentially impacting traffic if sub-sections previously benefited from site-wide signals.\u003c/p\u003e\n"],["\u003cp\u003eUtilizing third-party content isn't inherently a violation; it becomes one when used to exploit the host site's ranking for better search results.\u003c/p\u003e\n"],["\u003cp\u003eSite owners should focus on creating high-quality, user-centric content instead of manipulating search rankings for better placement.\u003c/p\u003e\n"]]],["Google is clarifying its site reputation abuse policy, effective November 19, 2024. The policy targets third-party content published to exploit a host site's ranking signals, regardless of first-party involvement. Actions against violations include manual actions and notifications via Search Console. The content also details that while not all third party content violates the policy, sub-sections of websites that differ significantly may be treated as standalone sites. Finally, it describes best practices for website owners who have received manual actions.\n"],null,["# Updating our site reputation abuse policy\n\nTuesday, November 19, 2024\n\n\nEarlier this [year](/search/blog/2024/03/core-update-spam-policies), as part of our\nwork to fight spam and deliver a great Search experience, we launched a spam policy to combat\n[site reputation abuse](/search/docs/essentials/spam-policies#site-reputation).\nThis is a tactic where third-party content is published on a host site in an attempt to take\nadvantage of the host's already-established ranking signals. The goal of this tactic is for\nthe content to rank better than it could otherwise on a different site, and leads to a bad\nsearch experience for users.\n\n\nSince launching the policy, we've reviewed situations where there might be varying degrees of\nfirst-party involvement, such as cooperation with white-label services, licensing agreements,\npartial ownership agreements, and other complex business arrangements. Our evaluation of numerous\ncases has shown that no amount of first-party involvement alters the fundamental third-party\nnature of the content or the unfair, exploitative nature of attempting to take advantage of the\nhost's sites ranking signals.\n\n\nWe're clarifying our policy language to further target this type of spammy behavior.\nWe're making it clear that using third-party content on a site in an attempt to exploit the\nsite's ranking signals is a violation of this policy --- regardless of whether there is\nfirst-party involvement or oversight of the content. Our updated policy language, effective\ntoday, is:\n\u003e Site reputation abuse is the practice of publishing third-party pages on a site in an attempt to abuse search rankings by taking advantage of the host site's ranking signals.\n\n\nWhen evaluating for policy violations, we take into account many different considerations\n(and we don't simply take a site's claims about how the content was produced at face value)\nto determine if third-party content is being used in an abusive way. Site owners who receive a\n[spam manual\naction](https://support.google.com/webmasters/answer/9044175) will be notified through their registered\n[Search Console](https://search.google.com/search-console/about)\naccount and can submit a\n[reconsideration\nrequest](https://support.google.com/webmasters/answer/9044175).\n\n\nIt's important to note that not all third-party content violates this policy. We go into detail\non our [spam policies page](/search/docs/essentials/spam-policies#site-reputation)\nabout what is and isn't site reputation abuse.\n\n\nAside from site reputation abuse issues, we also have systems and methods designed to\nunderstand if a section of a site is independent or starkly different from the main content\nof the site. By treating these areas as if they are standalone sites, it better ensures a\nlevel playing field, so that sub-sections of sites don't get a ranking boost just because of\nthe reputation of the main site. As we continue to work to improve these systems, this helps us\ndeliver the most useful information from a range of sites.\n\n\nOur efforts to understand differences in sections of sites can lead to traffic changes if\nsub-sections no longer benefit from\n[site-wide signals](/search/docs/appearance/ranking-systems-guide).\nThis doesn't mean that these sub-sections have somehow been demoted or are in violation of our\nspam policies. It means we're measuring them independently, even if they are located\nwithin a site.\n\n\nThis clarification to our site reputation abuse policy will help surface the most useful search\nresults, combat manipulative practices, and ensure that all sites have an equal opportunity\nto rank based on the quality of their content. We encourage site owners to familiarize\nthemselves with this updated policy and focus on building high-quality websites that prioritize\n[content created to benefit people, not to gain search engine rankings](/search/docs/fundamentals/creating-helpful-content).\n\nFAQ\n---\n\n### What is third-party content?\n\n\nThird-party content is content created by a separate entity than the host site. Examples of\nseparate entities include users of that site, freelancers, white-label services, content created\nby people not employed directly by the host site, and other examples listed in the\n[site reputation policy](/search/docs/essentials/spam-policies#site-reputation).\n\n### Does the use of any third-party content violate the site\nreputation abuse policy?\n\n\nNo, having third-party content alone is not a violation of the site reputation abuse policy. It's\nonly a violation if the content is being published in an attempt to\n[abuse search rankings](#abuse-search-rankings) by taking advantage of the host site's\nranking signals. Our [policy page](/search/docs/essentials/spam-policies#site-reputation)\nhas examples of third-party content use that doesn't violate the policy.\n\n### Does freelance content violate the site reputation abuse policy?\n\n\nNo, while freelance content is third-party content, freelance content alone is not a violation of\nthe site reputation abuse policy. It is only a violation if there is **ALSO** an\nattempt to [abuse search rankings](#abuse-search-rankings) by taking advantage of the\nhost site's ranking signals.\n\n### Does affiliate content violate the site reputation abuse policy?\n\n\nNo, the policy is not about targeting affiliate content. The\n[documentation](/search/docs/essentials/spam-policies#site-reputation) about the policy\nnotes that affiliate links [marked appropriately](/search/docs/crawling-indexing/qualify-outbound-links)\naren't considered site reputation abuse.\n\n### What does it mean to abuse search rankings by taking advantage of the\nhost site's ranking signals?\n\n\nThis is when third-party content is being placed on an established site to take advantage of that\nsite's ranking signals --- which the site has earned primarily from its first party content\n--- rather than placing the content on a separate site that lacks the same signals.\n\n### If I [`noindex`](/search/docs/crawling-indexing/block-indexing)\nthe content, does that mean the manual action automatically gets removed?\n\n\nNo. You still need to reply to the manual action in Search Console and explain that the content\nhas been noindexed. We recommend doing this rather than letting the manual action remain against\nyour site.\n\n### If I move content that's received a manual action to a new location, will\nthat resolve the site reputation abuse issue?\n\n\nMaybe, but it depends on where you move it to:\n\n- **Moving content to a subdirectory or subdomain within the same site's domain name** : This doesn't resolve the underlying issue and may be viewed as an [attempt to circumvent](/search/docs/essentials/spam-policies#policy-circumvension) our spam policy, which may lead to broader actions against a site in Google Search.\n- **Moving content to another established site**: This will resolve the site reputation abuse issue for the site it was removed from, as the site reputation of that site is no longer being abused. However, it may introduce a site reputation abuse issue to the site the content is moved to if the established site has its own reputation and the third-party nature is unchanged.\n- **Moving content to a new domain** : This is far less likely to be an issue if the new domain has no established reputation and you follow our [spam policies](/search/docs/essentials/spam-policies).\n\n\nRemember if you move content, you need to also submit a reconsideration request to remove the\nmanual action.\n\n### If I move policy-violating content, can I redirect from the old site to the new site?\n\n\nIf you move content that received a manual action, you shouldn't [redirect URLs](/search/docs/crawling-indexing/301-redirects)\nfrom the old site to the new site, as this may introduce the site reputation abuse issue again.\n\n### If I move policy-violating content, can I link from the old site to the new site?\n\n\nIf you link from the old site to the new site, make use of the\n[`nofollow` attribute](/search/docs/crawling-indexing/qualify-outbound-links)\nfor those links on the old site.\n\nPosted by [Chris Nelson](/search/blog/authors/chris-nelson)\non behalf of the Google Search Quality team\n\n*** ** * ** ***\n\nUpdates\n-------\n\n- **Update on December 6, 2024** : Added [FAQs](#faq) to address some new questions we've had come in from site owners about our site reputation abuse policy.\n- **Update on January 21, 2025** : Based on feedback on the FAQ, we updated the [site reputation abuse policy](/search/docs/essentials/spam-policies#site-reputation) language and [manual actions report documentation](https://support.google.com/webmasters/answer/9044175#site-reputation-abuse&zippy=%2Csite-reputation-abuse) to include guidance from the FAQ. These are editorial changes to make the policy wording clearer; there's no substantive change to the policy itself."]]
