dupe content a.k.a. Google doesn't care if you own the content
Ideally this would be well-edited editorial on our new blog, but I don't want to wait 4-6 more weeks to get this written up.
In one of many business ventures I'm involved in, a particular project has me working with some field experts. And we have several of them willing to write some content for the related websites, which will long-term help us both. ..... However, the first one submitted copies of papers he already had published! Most SEO experts already know where I'm going with this, but I've decided to share it here, as I know there are (at minimum) several dozen folks reading in on this new web content/planning forum regularly -- and they're probably not SEO experts (yet). Although Google has a very complex algorithm in place for locating content and doling out search result rankings via PageRank, it also uses what I'd refer to as "caveman logic". Google is both incredibly smart and incredibly stupid at the same time. All search engines are, in one way or another, but I'll only be picking on Google today. So here I am with an article that was published on www.ezines.com already, and then stolen from there and used on at least 10 other sites -- something confirmed by using a quick www.copyscape.com search. There are probably more, but I didn't want to pay for the Copyscape search -- 10 was enough. None of the "copier" sites returned by Copyscape came up in Google, likely meaning they've been punished. Although a few were scraper sites, others were not. In fact one of the sites was for a venture similar to our own! If that site was punished, odds are we would be too! (Not to mention, if we had wanted just any old article, we could have gone to a free content site long ago, and bypassed the time required in schmoozing and sometimes coddling the "experts".) The immediate response from the expert was: Quote:
This is an excerpt from an internal email I wrote to one of the partners, who didn't quite understand why publishing the already-published as-is stories was just not going to help us. I'd rather not publish them than be punished by Google. Quote:
Here's a perfect example, a comment I read on Matt Cutts blog: Quote:
.... oh, did I mention that the expert submitted multi-page novel-length "articles" for our blog? We're trying to get him to edit about 5 pages down to 5 paragraphs. If he's not willing, then we'll just move without him. That alone will probably solve the "dupe content" issue. |
Looking back at some old posts...
Thankfully Panda and other Google updates have somewhat addressed this now. :) The "big, old, popular" sites that pumped out mountains of useless crap have been downgraded. This means all the "article" sites are going to have a hard time getting to rank for certain words. EzineArticles, in the example above, barely ranks these days. The author, for example, would no longer have to fear the "multi-content" site, as they're are not as valued. The in-house niche sites would be able to later publish the content and be just fine. As of 2013, at least. And it's not always true, but it can be now. |
Site design, images and content © 2002-2024 The Digital FAQ, www.digitalFAQ.com
Forum Software by vBulletin · Copyright © 2024 Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.