29 {{ upvoteCount | shortNum }}
29 {{ upvoteCount | shortNum }}

Anybody Ranking With Spun Content After Recent Updates?

by k.freddy
25 replies
  • SEO
    • |
Do you have any websites built entirely out of spun content still ranking?
#content #ranking #recent #spun #updates
  • Profile picture of the author danparks
    Originally Posted by k.freddy View Post

    Do you have any websites built entirely out of spun content still ranking?
    I don't do money sites, I do SEO for money sites so my answer might not apply.

    I personally don't think it's ever a good idea to use spun content on a money site.

    As for using spun content on sites linking to money sites, from experience I feel that this still works. However, I use content that is 90% or higher unique and is grammatically correct. And I put it on sites that are designed with content relevant to the linked-to money site. I don't know about using fiverr type content that is maybe 50% unique and reads like it was written by a drunken 5th grader. I suspect that doesn't help much at any tier level.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9448220].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author fatchap
      Originally Posted by danparks View Post

      I don't do money sites, I do SEO for money sites so my answer might not apply.

      I personally don't think it's ever a good idea to use spun content on a money site.

      As for using spun content on sites linking to money sites, from experience I feel that this still works. However, I use content that is 90% or higher unique and is grammatically correct. And I put it on sites that are designed with content relevant to the linked-to money site. I don't know about using fiverr type content that is maybe 50% unique and reads like it was written by a drunken 5th grader. I suspect that doesn't help much at any tier level.
      90% unique with good grammar? From spun content? That doesn;t read like rubbish? I find it hard to believe.
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9449893].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author danparks
        Originally Posted by fatchap View Post

        90% unique with good grammar? From spun content? That doesn;t read like rubbish? I find it hard to believe.
        I spin the content myself, for my own use only. Word level, sentence level, paragraph level. If you're a native-English speaker and can write at least fairly well naturally, then it's not really that hard to hit 90%. I don't know if you can buy that. Most people who do spun content themselves hit "auto" and spin garbage. Most people who sell spun content do it for just a few bucks, aren't native-English speakers, and so they crank out crap.
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9449903].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author seosoldier
          Originally Posted by danparks View Post

          I spin the content myself, for my own use only. Word level, sentence level, paragraph level. If you're a native-English speaker and can write at least fairly well naturally, then it's not really that hard to hit 90%. I don't know if you can buy that. Most people who do spun content themselves hit "auto" and spin garbage. Most people who sell spun content do it for just a few bucks, aren't native-English speakers, and so they crank out crap.
          I think when you say you spin the content yourself, what you are actually doing is RE-WRITING the content using a spinner to help you do it faster.

          That's why I like Best Spinner better than Spin Rewriter - because for me the manual re-writing goes easier/faster with Best Spinner. I actually own it but have never used it on a site, I've just played around with it.

          But if something is manually spun, even to the level of re-organizing paragraphs and adding some content as you go, and changing the content to what the spinner software says is 80-90% I really don't see how Google could recognize it as spun content and punish you for it.

          What I don't believe in is Auto-spinning, ending up with pure crap, and then posting those pages/articles/whatever to point back to your money site. Sooner or later (now?) Google is going to catch on to the fact you are spinning and pointing webspam at your money site and so they'll de-index or de-rank your money site as a result. IMHO.
          Signature
          > My Promise To You: I will never promote any offer I do not truly believe to be 100% worth buying and using!
          https://bestwaterfilter.us
          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9450104].message }}
          • Profile picture of the author MikeFriedman
            Originally Posted by seosoldier View Post

            But if something is manually spun, even to the level of re-organizing paragraphs and adding some content as you go, and changing the content to what the spinner software says is 80-90% I really don't see how Google could recognize it as spun content and punish you for it.

            I'm not saying Google would necessarily recognize it as "spun" content. I'm saying the "unique percentage" that spinning tools feed to you have nothing to do with how unique Google sees the content. In Google's mind, it might look like an almost exact copy of an article they already have indexed.

            As the internet keeps getting bigger and bigger, there is going to be less and less "unique" content.
            {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9450130].message }}
            • Profile picture of the author seosoldier
              Originally Posted by MikeFriedman View Post

              I'm not saying Google would necessarily recognize it as "spun" content. I'm saying the "unique percentage" that spinning tools feed to you have nothing to do with how unique Google sees the content. In Google's mind, it might look like an almost exact copy of an article they already have indexed.

              As the internet keeps getting bigger and bigger, there is going to be less and less "unique" content.
              Oh, okay I can see your point now that you've explained it more.
              However, I have no evidence to suggest that google is not able to recognize original content, and when one manually uses a spinner to rewrite content, it becomes original content if you do it right. At least that's what I think.

              I think google is smart enough to tell badly spun articles from well written articles and to know if something is unique or not. "Unique" is just a matter of changing enough words and the order, adding content from your own brain (which itself can be a "spinner", consciously or unconsciously) and putting it all in a context that fits the article.
              Signature
              > My Promise To You: I will never promote any offer I do not truly believe to be 100% worth buying and using!
              https://bestwaterfilter.us
              {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9450669].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Dennis Ray
    I know there was a time where spun content was all the rage and it was working too.

    But I have not been involved in SEO for a while so I couldn't tell you.

    All I can say is that if you do it and it works, great. If it doesn't work, hope Google doesn't penalize you for it.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9448256].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Tim P
    What's value of spun content for visitor ?
    If spun content can rank, I think it just sort term.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9448505].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author devinesoul186
    Spun content is worst in reading. How search engines can rank such a waste that helps nobody.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9448860].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author SEO Power
    You can still rank websites with spun content. I've never tried to rank a spun article and never will, but I know for a fact that as long as an article is unique, it will rank, whether it makes sense or not.
    Signature
    ONE HOUR INDEXING - STOP WASTING MONEY ON LINKS GOOGLE NEVER FINDS
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9449273].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author serpyre
    It doesn't matter how you do it, Google will catch up with you Medium to Long term, Short term you can game them but most leave some trace - it only takes one mistake such as not clearing your browser to using the same WMT and you come unstuck. Never used spun content, enough rubbish on the internet that it didn't need one more. They are cracking down on it, and cross-analyze now so it is becoming progressively useless, plus the risk levels are increasing. Spun content is spam - all there is to it really.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9449334].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author SocialDemon
    Yes I did it and is not that buggy as other are saying here. Actually it works.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9449339].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author MikeFriedman
    90% unique.

    Those statements always crack me up. Nobody has any idea what Google sees as unique, especially not well enough to put a percentage on it.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9449934].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author danparks
      Originally Posted by MikeFriedman View Post

      90% unique.

      Those statements always crack me up. Nobody has any idea what Google sees as unique, especially not well enough to put a percentage on it.
      Who knows how Google calculates uniqueness, or what point is a cut-off for considered non-unique? Percentage may be far from perfect, but if a person is interested in spun content (I assume you aren't), then there's a need to apply some kind of metrics for comparison purposes. It may not be close to perfect, but it's helpful. If I run two spun articles through the same software and one comes back as 20% unique and the other comes back as 90% unique, I think that's certainly helpful in determining which one is more unique. In the end the percentage doesn't matter to me. If I read two versions of a spun article and they both make sense, and they seem like they were written by two different people, and they don't bear a hint of any copy/paste of any content, I'm happy. And I'm guessing that with the current state of duplicate content detection Google's automated software is happy enough too.
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9450002].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author paulgl
      Originally Posted by MikeFriedman View Post

      90% unique.

      Those statements always crack me up. Nobody has any idea what Google sees as unique, especially not well enough to put a percentage on it.
      Exactly. Just about every article out there on anything is spun content.

      Every reporter, writer, correspondent, etc. puts things in their own words.

      Very hard to find a "unique" article about Ferguson. They all just re-hash the same stuff.

      I rehash rehashed regurgitated warmed over stuff all the time. Why not?

      Paul
      Signature

      If you were disappointed in your results today, lower your standards tomorrow.

      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9450086].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author seosoldier
      Originally Posted by MikeFriedman View Post

      90% unique.

      Those statements always crack me up. Nobody has any idea what Google sees as unique, especially not well enough to put a percentage on it.
      90% etc comes from the spinner software which shows you how many unique words are used in the finished spun product.

      If it's 90% unique AND reads well with decent grammar, then there is really no way for google to see or do anything about it. Even legally this would qualify as original content.
      Signature
      > My Promise To You: I will never promote any offer I do not truly believe to be 100% worth buying and using!
      https://bestwaterfilter.us
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9450095].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author MikeFriedman
        Originally Posted by seosoldier View Post

        90% etc comes from the spinner software which shows you how many unique words are used in the finished spun product.

        If it's 90% unique AND reads well with decent grammar, then there is really no way for google to see or do anything about it. Even legally this would qualify as original content.
        Yeah that is not true at all. So it is 90% unique from the original? Who cares?

        That tells you nothing about how Google views the content or how it compares to every other piece of content on the internet. It might be 90% different from what you started with but 75% the same as something else that exists on the internet already.

        The point is it is not something worth even looking at.
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9450099].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author seosoldier
          Originally Posted by MikeFriedman View Post

          Yeah that is not true at all. So it is 90% unique from the original? Who cares?

          That tells you nothing about how Google views the content or how it compares to every other piece of content on the internet. It might be 90% different from what you started with but 75% the same as something else that exists on the internet already.

          The point is it is not something worth even looking at.
          Which part is not true at all?
          I found your post unclear but I'm pretty sure I respectfully disagree.
          But to each his own.
          Signature
          > My Promise To You: I will never promote any offer I do not truly believe to be 100% worth buying and using!
          https://bestwaterfilter.us
          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9450108].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author yukon
    Banned
    The LA Times has a bot (QuakeBot) that creates news pages based on usgs.gov data. It's basically spun content/data. Those bot news pages rank in Google SERPs.

    I've thought about building a Windows app with VB.net & creating webpages from an offline MySQL database then automatically posting the finished HTML webpage to an online Wordpress site. I can already post from a Windows app. to a WP site, new webpages, text & images.

    I think it would be interesting to basically build a site like the LA Times is building quake pages but instead of one category, build the entire site with a bot pulling data from a database, or even multiple databases.

    I'm talking about useful content, not spun IMer pages.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9449969].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author markowe
      Originally Posted by yukon View Post

      The LA Times has a bot (QuakeBot) that creates news pages based on usgs.gov data. It's basically spun content/data. Those bot news pages rank in Google SERPs.

      I've thought about building a Windows app with VB.net & creating webpages from an offline MySQL database then automatically posting the finished HTML webpage to an online Wordpress site. I can already post from a Windows app. to a WP site, new webpages, text & images.

      I think it would be interesting to basically build a site like the LA Times is building quake pages but instead of one category, build the entire site with a bot pulling data from a database, or even multiple databases.

      I'm talking about useful content, not spun IMer pages.
      Sounds like a variation on something I asked about a few months back and got muted responses: database sites pulling in data from different sources and mashing them together into something unique, e.g., I dunno, a big list of healthcare institutions/hospitals whatever that you mash together with Google Maps, bla bla. Black hatters have been doing this for years, and it's pretty much churn-and-burn as that stuff often doesn't rank for long, and it takes millions of pages sometimes, but maybe with more thought put into the content, and some user-generated content.. Not the same as spun content, more like thin or unoriginal content. I guess without the domain authority of the LA Times or similar, success is far from guaranteed.

      There are a LOT of these kinds of sources of data around though which I believe are not widely used (though you might have to be careful about commercial use etc.)
      Signature

      Who says you can't earn money as an eBay affiliate any more? My stats say otherwise

      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9451014].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author yukon
        Banned
        Originally Posted by markowe View Post

        Sounds like a variation on something I asked about a few months back and got muted responses: database sites pulling in data from different sources and mashing them together into something unique, e.g., I dunno, a big list of healthcare institutions/hospitals whatever that you mash together with Google Maps, bla bla. Black hatters have been doing this for years, and it's pretty much churn-and-burn as that stuff often doesn't rank for long, and it takes millions of pages sometimes, but maybe with more thought put into the content, and some user-generated content.. Not the same as spun content, more like thin or unoriginal content. I guess without the domain authority of the LA Times or similar, success is far from guaranteed.

        There are a LOT of these kinds of sources of data around though which I believe are not widely used (though you might have to be careful about commercial use etc.)
        It would have to be a public domain content/database before I would even consider messing with it.

        I did once take an indexed public domain book from Google Books & outranked Google Books in the SERPs, even had a double SERP listing for the main keyword. I didn't monetize, only used it for testing silos.

        The thing I like about QuakeBot is the finished webpages are short & to the point. That would speed up the back end when setting everything up.
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9456799].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author MikeFriedman
    Like I said, it basically has nothing to do with how Google sees the content.

    Most of the tools that measure "uniqueness" are using Copyscape. Copyscape's index pales in comparison to Google's.

    Just another silly metric IM'ers keep clinging to.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9450032].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author StanfordSherrill
    Nope, spun content is totally ban from Google, but I am using a software that spun content totally new. You will see 90% difference between original and spun content. So that my websites are ranking good on Google in spite of spun content.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9450868].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author seosoldier
      Originally Posted by StanfordSherrill View Post

      Nope, spun content is totally ban from Google, but I am using a software that spun content totally new. You will see 90% difference between original and spun content. So that my websites are ranking good on Google in spite of spun content.
      I really don't think spun content can be recognized nor banned if it is rewritten correctly, using spinners to manually rewrite it.

      Now if you click the Autospin button and get totally bad grammar and virtually unreadable and useless writing, then yeah, google can no doubt recognize it and penalize you for it. The key is to end up with readable, grammatically correct content that is substantially unique as compared to original content.
      Signature
      > My Promise To You: I will never promote any offer I do not truly believe to be 100% worth buying and using!
      https://bestwaterfilter.us
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9456766].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Daily Info
    I have a wordpress blog created in order to make some good links with spun content it is ranking on first page for a keyword and has got PR 1 in last eight months without any link building.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9456856].message }}

Trending Topics