What prompted Google to eliminate author photos from search results?

What was the original purpose of Google's authorship system?

The authorship system allowed for the association of published content with a verified Google+ profile of its author. In the SERPs, this resulted in the author's photo being displayed next to the organic result, along with their name and sometimes a follower count.

Google presented this feature as a means to enhance user trust and promote content published by recognized experts. The underlying idea was that a human face fosters closeness and signals authority. For publishers, it was also a strong incentive for authors to create and maintain a Google+ profile.

Why does Google mention insignificant conversion rates?

The phrasing is deliberately vague. Google does not specify the exact metrics measured, nor the threshold for “insignificance.” Are we talking about organic clicks, bounce rates, post-click engagement, or final conversion actions?

This opacity allows for several hypotheses. Either the photos did not sufficiently increase the organic CTR to justify their technical and visual costs, or they attracted clicks without improving the quality of traffic. In either case, Google implicitly admits that authorship did not serve its primary goal: to improve user experience and thus its own advertising revenue.

What are the immediate consequences for SERPs and SEO strategies?

The removal of photos has radically uniformed the appearance of organic results. All sites, regardless of their authorship strategy, now have a level visual playing field. Only rich snippets, review stars, or featured snippets still allow for visual distinction.

For publishers who had heavily invested in Google+ and authorship markup, this is a clear disavowal. The message is clear: the author's visual identity no longer carries weight in the click equation. Only the actual authority of the content, measured by signals far deeper than just the presence of a photo, remains.

• Discontinuation of authorship markup: the markup code rel="author" becomes obsolete and can be removed without negative impact.
• Loss of a visual differentiation lever: organic results revert to strictly textual except for rich snippets.
• End of the Google+ argument for authors: the social platform loses its main SEO asset.
• Focus on E-A-T signals: expertise remains key, but it must now be expressed within the content itself, not through a photo.
• Questioning the reliability of Google's statements: a system promoted for years can be removed overnight without warning.

Is this decision consistent with ground observations?

On the ground, many SEO professionals had indeed noted that authorship photos did not systematically boost CTR. Some A/B tests even showed the opposite effect: an unflattering or unprofessional photo could harm clicks. The impact varied greatly depending on the industry, the author's reputation, and the visual quality of the photo.

Google does not publish any quantifiable data to support its decision. [To verify] The “insignificant conversion rates” remain a black box. It is unclear whether Google measured only initial CTR or post-click engagement and final conversions. This lack of transparency makes it difficult to validate independently the relevance of this removal.

What nuances should be added to this statement?

Google presents this decision as an optimization of user experience, but one must also consider the internal agenda of Google+. The social platform never took off as expected. By eliminating authorship, Google reduces its search engine's reliance on a failing social ecosystem.

Moreover, displaying photos in the SERPs incurs a considerable technical and UX cost: image management, moderation, loading time, mobile visual clutter. If the benefit is not forthcoming, the removal becomes logical from a product viewpoint, independent of any pure SEO consideration.

In what cases does this rule not apply?

Be aware: the removal of authorship photos does not mean that the identity of the author is unimportant to Google. E-A-T (Expertise, Authoritativeness, Trustworthiness) algorithms still highly value the demonstrated expertise of authors, especially in YMYL sectors.

The crucial difference: this expertise must now be signaled through clear bylines, detailed bios, verifiable credentials, and not just a simple photo. The schema.org Author markup remains relevant for structuring this information, even if it no longer appears visually in standard SERPs.

What should be done with existing authorship markup?

If your site still uses markup rel="author" pointing to Google+ profiles, you can remove it without risk. This code is now ignored by Google and brings no SEO benefit. However, retain and optimize the schema.org/Person and schema.org/Author markup in your articles.

This structured markup remains useful for other search engines and Google surfaces (Discover, News). It clearly associates content with its author, even if that no longer translates into a photo in standard SERPs. Ensure that each author has a dedicated page with a complete bio, links to professional social media, and a list of publications.

How to maximize author authority without visual authorship?

Focus on on-page E-A-T signals: clear and visible bylines, detailed bios mentioning degrees and experience, links to LinkedIn profiles or external portfolios. Google continues to analyze these elements to evaluate expertise, even without a photo in the results.

For YMYL sites (health, finance, legal), have your content validated or co-signed by recognized experts whose credentials are verifiable. Explicitly mention their qualifications in the body of the article and at the bottom of the page. This textual information carries much more weight than a simple photo in establishing trust.

What mistakes to avoid following this removal?

Don’t conclude that the identity of authors is no longer important. It’s the opposite: since visual differentiation has disappeared, textual credibility becomes even more critical. An anonymous article or one signed with a generic pseudonym will struggle to rank against a competitor who clearly displays their expertise.

Also, avoid completely removing any mention of authors under the pretext that “it no longer serves a purpose.” Google's Quality Raters Guidelines strongly emphasize the clear identification of authors, especially for sensitive content. A site without identifiable authors risks being penalized on E-A-T criteria.

• Remove obsolete rel="author" markup pointing to Google+
• Retain and enrich the schema.org/Author markup with complete profiles
• Create or enhance author pages with detailed bios and credentials
• Clearly display bylines at the top of each article
• Explicitly mention relevant degrees, experience, and professional affiliations
• Link author profiles to verifiable external sources (LinkedIn, university sites, publications)