Your Definition of "Rehashed Junk" is...

Although a lot of people might say it's 'old information', I tend to classify it as "folklore that sounds good but never really worked to begin with."

In other words, for me it's the information that gets passed around by people who obviously never tried the technique they're talking about, or heard about this or that from some dubious source and for some reason believe others will find value in it.

A product on "duplicate content", as an example, could easily be rehashed garbage in my book if the myth is touted over the reality.

~Bill

There are two elements.

First, "rehashed." This basically means that nothing new has been added - it was initially stuff that was readily available elsewhere, and it remains stuff that is readily available elsewhere. There's an important point here that "readily available" includes being easy to find... if you compile a lot of scattered and obscure stuff in one place, that is something new - all that stuff is now in one place, which makes it easier to find.

Second, "junk." This means that it has no or limited utility. The average buyer can't or won't receive the promised results or benefits with it, even if he tries with both hands. There's an important point here, too, that if you can't or won't get the results or benefits because you are either not good enough or will not try, this is your fault and not the material's.

Basically, if you buy a product and learn one new thing you can use, it's not rehashed junk. Of course, it still may not be worth what you paid.

But there, again, I drop responsibility on the buyer. When I buy something, it is my job to get my money's worth out of it, and then to make a further five times my money's worth out of it.

If I cannot do this, I have made a bad buying decision, and I am primarily interested in figuring out how and why I did this so I don't do it again. Getting my money back isn't even on my radar.

To me, rehashed junk depends more on the sales copy. If a sales copy promises something new, never before seen, and delivers content that's been around for years then it's rehashed junk IMO.

Not saying the stuff that's been around for years doesn't work, in many cases that's the stuff that actually works! But the seller shouldn't claim it's something new and revolutionary (as you often see in sales copies). Instead write about how you can teach it better than those who've tried before.

Edit: Forgot about the 'Junk' part! I'd define 'junk' as information based on theory instead of real world application.

Text books. All but the ones in cuneiform.

This. Can't tell you how many times I've seen this rehashed junk.

^that translates to "write a bunch of articles for ezinearticles.com and wait for the checks to come in", right?