Google says it will require close content parity between AMP and original pages beginning February 2018 to discourage publishers from using AMP pages as teasers
Probably the single best video … Josh Levenson / Phandroid : Google is tightening its AMP restrictions to prevent bait-and-switch content Abner Li / 9to5Google : Google Search combatting publishers and sites that use AMP as teaser pages Greg Sterling / Search Engine Land : Google will require AMP and canonical pages to match as of February 1, 2018 Tweets: Esther Checa / @esther_checa : AMP is not a ranking signal and there is no change in terms of the ranking policy with respect to AMP http://twitter.com/... @seldo : “Oh no we built a technology that gives your shitty website un-deserved prominence in search results and we are SHOCKED to discover that people have been using it as an SEO hack” http://www.theverge.com/... Aleyda Solis / @aleyda : Starting February next year Google Google will require content parity between AMP and canonical URLs - “Where we find that an AMP page doesn't contain the same critical content as its non-AMP equivalent, we will direct our users to the non-AMP page.” http://webmasters.googleblog.com/ ... Aleyda Solis / @aleyda : This means that showing a “preview” of the actual content in your AMP URLs to just refer to the original, longer one, which is done by sites like Reddit, won't be acceptable anymore. http://twitter.com/...
Context & Ripple Effects
Since Google began routing mobile search clicks to AMP versions of pages in 2016, publishers gained a fast-loading format built on the restrictive Javascript and iframe constraints AMP introduced in 2015 — and some used it to show slimmer, ad-heavy 'teaser' versions of their canonical pages. This policy closes that loophole: from February 1, 2018, AMP pages must closely match their canonical content, and Google will send users to the non-AMP page when critical content is missing.
First-order effects
- Publishers running stripped-down AMP pages as teasers must either bring them to full content parity or lose AMP placement in mobile search, since Google will redirect users to the canonical page instead.
Second-order effects
- Publishers now face a cost-benefit decision on maintaining duplicate AMP versions of every page — a tradeoff that foreshadows Google's later move to display publisher URLs in the AMP cache, softening AMP's branding cost.
Third-order effects
- Google's leverage over the format is already eroding within the policy's own arc: it later ends preferential search rankings for AMP pages, and Tribune Publishing's experiment found disabling AMP had little impact on mobile search referrals, pointing toward AMP becoming an optional format rather than a search-tax.
The trend: Google's relationship with AMP is moving from mandatory adoption through enforced quality standards toward voluntary publisher choice, as the format's search advantages are progressively withdrawn.