You did not understand my comment - I said Featured Snippets are NOT necessarily facts and DO link to the source. Featured Snippets drive a lot of traffic to s

You did not understand my comment - I said Featured Snippets are NOT necessarily facts and DO link to the source. Featured Snippets drive a lot of traffic to sites and as a publisher I instruct my writers on how to craft their sentences to make it more likely we will get a Featured Snippet. Yes, Featured Snippets probably reduced the CTR for pages that were previously ranking #1 but that comes with an increase in user experience. Part of the confusion here stems from the fact you used an ambiguous term like "infobox" that has no real meaning and I interpreted as the box that appears on the sidebar when Googling certain topics (like somebody's name). This typically pulls data from Wikipedia and Wikidata as FACTS. So if by infobox you meant Featured Snippet then your comment was incorrect because Google does in fact always link back the original site (maybe in the last they sometimes didn't? I can't speak to that but I'm doubtful) Also I'll just say this - the website in question in that article was relying on Google for all their traffic for a very particular type of query. That is just stupid. I'm a publisher and wouldn't be able to sleep at night if my site was like theirs. Technically Net Worth is a fact and that's why Google was trying to put it in their Knowledge Graph. But since it's not typically public knowledge it becomes more of an opinion. Hence, it's a Featured Snippet with credit to the source. That site is just mad they don't always get the Featured Snippet so their traffic went down. They weren't complaining when Google was ranking them #1 were they?