Google Sucks: Proof That They Favor Corporations Over The Little Guy

by tpw
57 replies
I hate bashing Google, but they are such an easy target!!!

Their website is famously quoted for saying, "Do no evil", yet it seems that they don't always practice what they preach...

So here is the deal. Google has this thing that is called the Duplicate Content Penalty. Google apparently uses it to diminish some websites in their search results...

You know they do, because people talk about here all the time.

Yes Dennis Gaskill, I am in one of those moods.

In essence, Google says that if you have two URLs on the same site with basically the same content, then they will filter out the second URL from their search results, so that they will not show the duplicate pages on your site.

Of course, others say that the Duplicate Content Filter is more diabolical than even that.

These folks are quick to explain that the Duplicate Content Penalty is used against those of us who syndicate content online.

Those of us who write articles for syndication and send them to other websites in an effort to find a larger audience for our articles are the ones that seem to be hurt most by the Duplicate Content Penalty.

I am really straight forward about why I syndicate my articles. I do it to get my finely-crafted content in front of larger audiences of people -- people who are more likely to buy what I am selling.

If I can get published on a website with a lot of traffic, then I can potentially get a lot of people to read my article then look at my signature or author's resource box. When done well, people will click the link in my signature, visit the sites I am promoting, and buy what I am selling.

But here comes Google with their silly Duplicate Content Penalty... OMG!!!

According to those "people in the know", Google is penalizing my articles and my website for finding those larger audiences.

Yet, while it appears to be wrong for you and I to engage in that behavior, it seems perfectly suitable for the major media companies to do that without penalty.

Example:

The following news story (Economy facing headwinds, but Bernanke hopeful | Reuters) was syndicated by Reuters this week.

A search for a specific phrase within the article yields 134 search results in Google: "headwinds for an economy that Federal Reserve Chairman" - Google

A short list of news sites that have carried this particular news story includes:

* NPR
* Yahoo
* Comcast
* News Daily
* Business Spectator - Australia
* Google News
* and many others

What do these companies have in common that we do not? A huge marketing budget, a corporate parent, and the ability to get Google's respect.

You can play this game with Google any time you want by checking a phrase within a news story as found at Business & Financial News, Breaking US & International News | Reuters.com that Reuters is syndicating to other news agencies.

It comes down to this:

Either Google is playing favorites and letting the major media companies do what they will not let the little guys do, OR more likely, the Duplicate Content Penalty by Google is one of the biggest loads of horse manure to every get traction in the psyche of online publishers.

As most of my regular followers know, I tend to be in the second group.

If you have an opinion on this subject, join the fun and please speak up...
#corporations #duplicate content penalty #favor #google #guy #penaties #proof #sucks
  • Profile picture of the author VanessaB
    What's good for the goose is not always good for the gander. But there's more than one way to skin a cat you know.

    -Dani

    P.S. Loosely translated, that means, people need to quit their bitchin' and just find some creative detours AROUND a roadblock, instead of trying to plow through it with one of those little Prius things.
    Signature
    The Recon Report
    Reliable Results, Predictable Profits
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3177756].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author Brandon Tanner
      I think people really miss the point by getting hung up on whether the duplicate content penalty exists or not.

      The real question should not be whether it exists or not, but rather --> what kind of content gives me the best long-term results... duplicate, or original?

      And I think we all know the answer to that one.
      Signature

      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3177945].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author tpw
        Originally Posted by Brandon Tanner View Post

        The real question should not be whether it exists or not, but rather --> what kind of content gives me the best long-term results... duplicate, or original?

        And I think we all know the answer to that one.

        Yep. Both.



        Originally Posted by kimkay View Post

        So, if you had an approved G News site and a syndication deal with Reuters then you could do the same thing.

        I think my point was that I can achieve the same as the news sites do, without getting into Google News.
        Signature
        Bill Platt, Oklahoma USA, PlattPublishing.com
        Publish Coloring Books for Profit (WSOTD 7-30-2015)
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3178103].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author webapex
    Authority sites are rightfully given precedence, assuming they repeatedly have the first and best information on a subject, it happens that the sites with multiple writer-reporters are corporate sites, though I do see universities and borderline examples, like the Huffington report that are not backed by fortune 500 companies.

    There is the relatively new internal linking issue some gurus are addressing: first link priority, it seems that the first link to a given internal page found by spiders gets more weight than links found later.
    Signature

    “An expert is a person who has made all the mistakes that can be made in a very narrow field” Niels Bohr

    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3177822].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author wtatlas
      Personally I quite enjoy bashing Google whenever I get the chance...

      I would like to think that I am in the favored "Corporation" group as I have had the exact same, word for word, article (sent to two article directories) ranked number 1 and 2 on Google's first page for a competitive term. However, I think it's more likely that the Duplicate Content Penalty is one of the biggest loads of......, and I am really just one of the little guys.
      Signature

      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3177828].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author Bill Farnham
        Are you saying my new blog I just put up won't get the same favoritism the heavyweights get?

        I'm slitting my wrists...

        ~Bill
        Signature
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3177879].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author Lee Wilson
      Originally Posted by webapex View Post

      Authority sites are rightfully given precedence, assuming they repeatedly have the first and best information on a subject, it happens that the sites with multiple writer-reporters are corporate sites, though I do see universities and borderline examples, like the Huffington report that are not backed by fortune 500 companies.

      There is the relatively new internal linking issue some gurus are addressing: first link priority, it seems that the first link to a given internal page found by spiders gets more weight than links found later.
      If authority (or news) sites are given precedence then why is that if I search for something like "rolling stones brown sugar lyrics" with or without the quotes, the first page is full of sites that break all the terms of Google. They all break copyright laws, all have the same content sitewide as each other and don't let you close your browser without putting up a fight, leaving a mess of pop up windows behind.

      The true authority sites like Amazon, Musicroom, Hal Leonard, to name a tiny few of the genuine authorities selling legally published lyric books, are nowhere to be seen on a lyric search. My guess is Google figured out it's not what a person is looking for when searching for songname+lyrics.

      For what it's worth, the whole "duplicate content on the same site" is also a myth. Google have never said that duplicate content on the same site carries a penalty, unless it is used to manipulate the search engines.

      People don't give Google enough credit for figuring this stuff out. I have a site that has around 500 pages of virtually all duplicate or very similar content. The content of many pages only differ by one or two letters (not words, letters!) and nearly every page is indexed and gathering around 50k uniques a month but guess what? It's all genuine content. Each page is very different to a human being but very little difference to a robot. Human reviewed? maybe, but my site is one of many thousands that do just this so I doubt it.

      I stopped worrying about duplicate content years ago when I took a chance and started taking Google's own word for it. So far I've found no evidence that Google are holding anything back and neither has anybody who touts the penalty, or at least none of them have been able to show any evidence to back up their argument.
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3178292].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author King Shiloh
      Banned
      Originally Posted by webapex View Post

      Authority sites are rightfully given precedence, assuming they repeatedly have the first and best information on a subject, it happens that the sites with multiple writer-reporters are corporate sites, though I do see universities and borderline examples, like the Huffington report that are not backed by fortune 500 companies.

      There is the relatively new internal linking issue some gurus are addressing: first link priority, it seems that the first link to a given internal page found by spiders gets more weight than links found later.
      You sound more like the spider. Are you the one crawling the web, webapex?
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3178732].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author kimkay
    As you pointed out these sites have something in common that most of us are not...they are approved Google News sites...and that is the difference.

    As you said, these sites have syndicated deals with other new organizations, such as in your example with Reuters.

    Google allows for duplicate content through syndication on G News sites and even has meta tags to recognize the syndication and original source.

    So, if you had an approved G News site and a syndication deal with Reuters then you could do the same thing.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3177999].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author JohnMcCabe
      Geez Louise, Bill...

      Here I am, finally got rid of all that unique content to avoid the Unique Content Penalty, and now you tell me I have to do an IPO just to please Google?

      Well, I guess if I hafta, I hafta...

      It'd be a lot easier to just walk around the road apples, but...
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3178036].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author JonWebContent
    It's a corporate world and we all just live in it!
    Signature

    Get an affordable and reliable Web Content Writer to help grow your online business.

    Learn how to play WINNING poker from me!

    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3178015].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Colin Palfrey
    Still so many skimmers. Maybe I'll drop the whole writing gig and start on videos.

    Better yet get me some crayons! I'm going to draw a bestseller in keeping with current reading habits.
    Signature

    I write articles and eBooks - PM me for details!
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3178211].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author tpw
      Originally Posted by Colin Palfrey View Post

      Still so many skimmers. Maybe I'll drop the whole writing gig and start on videos.

      Better yet get me some crayons! I'm going to draw a bestseller in keeping with current reading habits.

      It really makes it hard to stay motivated to write great content when you realize how few people actually read what is written, doesn't it?

      I think I am going to change my signature from "read by millions" to "skimmed by millions".
      Signature
      Bill Platt, Oklahoma USA, PlattPublishing.com
      Publish Coloring Books for Profit (WSOTD 7-30-2015)
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3178235].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author Colin Palfrey
        Originally Posted by tpw View Post

        It really makes it hard to stay motivated to write great content when you realize how few people actually read what is written, doesn't it?

        I think I am going to change my signature from "read by millions" to "skimmed by millions".
        I think I am going to laugh every time I see your signature from now on.
        I hope you realize I just poured a cup of tea over myself, right after I noticed your signature.
        Signature

        I write articles and eBooks - PM me for details!
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3178266].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author tpw
          Originally Posted by Colin Palfrey View Post

          I think I am going to laugh every time I see your signature from now on.
          I hope you realize I just poured a cup of tea over myself, right after I noticed your signature.

          You're welcome...
          Signature
          Bill Platt, Oklahoma USA, PlattPublishing.com
          Publish Coloring Books for Profit (WSOTD 7-30-2015)
          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3178279].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author Sylvia Meier
        Originally Posted by tpw View Post

        It really makes it hard to stay motivated to write great content when you realize how few people actually read what is written, doesn't it?

        I think I am going to change my signature from "read by millions" to "skimmed by millions".
        Bill,
        I was just talking to my husband about this. (Your threads and the skimmers) After the threads you've posted recently that prove no one reads a bloody word, why in the world even write for an intellegent audience?

        I love the sig file too. And it only seems to get worse and worse.

        I'll take a big black crayon to write my articles from now on, since no one really needs to be able to read the article, all they need is a few words so they can jump in and rant and rave LOL.

        Best wishes,
        Sylvia

        P.S You've got a few emails
        Signature
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3178824].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author tpw
          Originally Posted by Sylvia Rolfe View Post

          Bill,
          I was just talking to my husband about this. (You're threads and the skimmers) After the threads you've posted recently that prove no one reads a bloody word, why in the world even write for an intelligent audience?

          Are you trying to convince me again that there is actually an intelligent audience out there that actually reads words on a page?
          Signature
          Bill Platt, Oklahoma USA, PlattPublishing.com
          Publish Coloring Books for Profit (WSOTD 7-30-2015)
          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3179427].message }}
          • Profile picture of the author Sam England
            Originally Posted by tpw View Post

            Are you trying to convince me again that there is actually an intelligent audience out there that actually reads words on a page?
            Define Intelligent...Oh well that leaves me out in the "sandbox"...
            {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3179442].message }}
            • Profile picture of the author JohnMcCabe
              Originally Posted by Dennis Gaskill View Post

              Does that mean I know you too well ... or you know me too well?

              I'm not sure which lost cause is more lost, the Duplicate Content penalty or the I Just Like to Post, I Don't Like to Read penalty. Double


              @ Barry - The warnings do little good. People skim the OP and skip the rest.
              Dennis, you're giving some of them WAY too much credit. From some of the responses, they never made it past the headline before hitting the reply button.

              There's an idea...

              I wonder what would happen if the removed that reply button on the top, and forced people to at least scroll past the actual posts before responding to the headline.

              Originally Posted by tpw View Post

              Are you trying to convince me again that there is actually an intelligent audience out there that actually reads words on a page?
              Like the truth, we're out there, Bill...
              {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3181559].message }}
              • Profile picture of the author tpw
                Originally Posted by JohnMcCabe View Post

                I wonder what would happen if the removed that reply button on the top, and forced people to at least scroll past the actual posts before responding to the headline.

                This strikes me as an easy solution that might help reduce the problem.



                Originally Posted by JohnMcCabe View Post

                Originally Posted by tpw View Post

                Are you trying to convince me again that there is actually an intelligent audience out there that actually reads words on a page?
                Like the truth, we're out there, Bill...

                I know. If I did not believe that, I would not hang around this place.
                Signature
                Bill Platt, Oklahoma USA, PlattPublishing.com
                Publish Coloring Books for Profit (WSOTD 7-30-2015)
                {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3183888].message }}
                • Profile picture of the author Steven Wagenheim
                  What it comes down to is what kind of authority (and how much of it)
                  your site has when you put the content on it.

                  How do you get to be a site of authority?

                  Ah...that's a topic for a whole nother thread.
                  {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3184051].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author paulie888
        Originally Posted by tpw View Post

        It really makes it hard to stay motivated to write great content when you realize how few people actually read what is written, doesn't it?

        I think I am going to change my signature from "read by millions" to "skimmed by millions".
        I wonder about that too, Bill. How do you find the motivation to keep publishing such great posts on here when you're inevitably going to be misunderstood and chastised by these lazy skimmers?
        Signature
        >>> Features Jason Fladlien, John S. Rhodes, Justin Brooke, Sean I. Mitchell, Reed Floren and Brad Gosse! <<<
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3186102].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author kindsvater
    I don't follow the example.

    Reuters creates copyrighted news content that it licenses to other websites to use.

    Typically, that means major news websites with big budgets.

    Typically, that does not mean Bill's website or Brian's website.

    So, if I search for a sentence appearing in the Reuters article the reason I get back major news websites is because those are the sites with the article on them.

    You won't find my website because I'm not paying a fee to license the article.

    But if Bill or Brian creates an article that is syndicated on other sites, and you do a search in quotes for a sentence in that article, you will see a listing of the sites with the article on it - and not major news sites that do not have the article.

    While I am not necessarily disagreeing with the claim of favoritism, and I recall Google admitting to favoritism for some common terms, perhaps there is a better example.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3178306].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author tpw
      Originally Posted by kindsvater View Post

      I don't follow the example.

      Reuters creates copyrighted news content that it licenses to other websites to use.

      Typically, that means major news websites with big budgets.

      Typically, that does not mean Bill's website or Brian's website.

      So, if I search for a sentence appearing in the Reuters article the reason I get back major news websites is because those are the sites with the article on them.

      You won't find my website because I'm not paying a fee to license the article.

      While I am not necessarily disagreeing with the claim of favoritism, and I recall Google admitting to favoritism for some common terms, perhaps there is a better example.

      Brian: If you take any of the articles I have syndicated online, using the same technique outlined here to do your query, you will find my articles on dozens of websites that have syndicated my content.

      The point is that there is no such thing as a Duplicate Content Penalty, and what better way to demonstrate it to some people than to give them the tools to figure it out on their own.

      Then they might figure out that the people saying there is one are toting the latest and greatest bag or horse **** from forum to forum.
      Signature
      Bill Platt, Oklahoma USA, PlattPublishing.com
      Publish Coloring Books for Profit (WSOTD 7-30-2015)
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3178325].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Colin Palfrey
    Or to put it another way.....

    Signature

    I write articles and eBooks - PM me for details!
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3178342].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author packerfan
    So you're telling me major news corporations used syndicated stories from the AP instead of have 10,000 journalists on staff? Surely this can't be true.

    In all seriousness, it seems like these kinds of threads are posted about once a week, someone will come in here and there's no penalty, yada, yada, yada. I'll be back in a day or two to see if anything new comes up.
    Signature

    Nothing to see here

    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3178357].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author tpw
      Originally Posted by packerfan View Post

      So you're telling me major news corporations used syndicated stories from the AP instead of have 10,000 journalists on staff? Surely this can't be true.

      In all seriousness, it seems like these kinds of threads are posted about once a week, someone will come in here and there's no penalty, yada, yada, yada. I'll be back in a day or two to see if anything new comes up.

      Both sides are always posting their own side of the story.

      Duplicate Content Penalty Is Real threads tend to outnumber Duplicate Content Penalty Myth threads by a rate of about 6-to-1.

      For most, the Duplicate Content Penalty is a religion, so it will never be possible to move most people out of their belief system -- whether they are pro or con.

      I try to give people the tools they need to see a different side to the story. Will evidence to the pro or con change their minds? I am not holding my breath.
      Signature
      Bill Platt, Oklahoma USA, PlattPublishing.com
      Publish Coloring Books for Profit (WSOTD 7-30-2015)
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3178399].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author paulie888
      Originally Posted by packerfan View Post

      So you're telling me major news corporations used syndicated stories from the AP instead of have 10,000 journalists on staff? Surely this can't be true.

      In all seriousness, it seems like these kinds of threads are posted about once a week, someone will come in here and there's no penalty, yada, yada, yada. I'll be back in a day or two to see if anything new comes up.
      It happens far more than you'd think. One of the biggest news sites on the internet, the Huffington Post, is nothing more than a huge site which syndicates content from many different news sources!

      Paul
      Signature
      >>> Features Jason Fladlien, John S. Rhodes, Justin Brooke, Sean I. Mitchell, Reed Floren and Brad Gosse! <<<
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3186108].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Latsyrc
    When it comes to news, you have to sign up to show up in Google News. For example, I write sometimes for Suite101. Suite101 released an email last year stating that they are now a part of "Google News" so if you want to be a news writer you have to submit aritcles per their news standards.

    Edited because I went back and read the responses.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3178552].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author tpw
      Originally Posted by counselormom View Post

      I have not read all the responses, but when it comes to news, you have to sign up to show up in Google News. For example, I write sometimes for Suite101. Suite101 released an email last year stating that they are now a part of "Google News" so if you want to be a news writer you have to submit aritcles per their news standards.

      Just for the record, the forum mods have a standard policy to delete threads of this type when people pile on with comments that are preceded by, "I did not take the time to read the responses."
      Signature
      Bill Platt, Oklahoma USA, PlattPublishing.com
      Publish Coloring Books for Profit (WSOTD 7-30-2015)
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3178570].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author Latsyrc
        Oh, I apologize. I've been multitasking and have loud kids in the background so I thought I could add quick help without the ability to completely concentrate on everyone's particular posts. Better not to respond in this case next time.
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3178598].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author tpw
          Originally Posted by counselormom View Post

          Oh, I apologize. I've been multitasking and have loud kids in the background so I thought I could add quick help without the ability to completely concentrate on everyone's particular posts. Better not to respond in this case next time.

          I know about kids screaming in the background.

          When I am talking to my mom on the phone, and she hears the kids in the background, she will say, "You know duct tape will fix that."
          Signature
          Bill Platt, Oklahoma USA, PlattPublishing.com
          Publish Coloring Books for Profit (WSOTD 7-30-2015)
          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3178608].message }}
          • Profile picture of the author Latsyrc
            LOL! I forgot to add with the dog in the mix my ears are ringing at the end of the day, lol.

            Originally Posted by tpw View Post

            I know about kids screaming in the background.

            When I am talking to my mom on the phone, and she hears the kids in the background, she will say, "You know duct tape works well."
            {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3178636].message }}
          • Profile picture of the author CMCarlin
            Originally Posted by tpw View Post

            I know about kids screaming in the background.

            When I am talking to my mom on the phone, and she hears the kids in the background, she will say, "You know duct tape will fix that."
            Tried it. They just take it right off....

            For the record, I started reading your post and got pretty angry (as in, not this type of post again). Then I remembered that YOU were writing it and so I made sure to read every single line
            Signature
            I can help your business grow. Spend less time backlinking and more time focusing on your clients. Skype me anytime for more details. Custom packages available.
            {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3179426].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author astnpwrz
    Oh how I love the Goog. Google means well. They want relevant and specific content to appear first. But, they take it too far sometimes with the whole crawling, algorithm, and bot things. None of that crap can replace a human. I guess thats the beauty of automation though lol.
    Signature

    Multi-tasking is just half-assing a bunch of stuff at the same time!!

    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3178708].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author BrianTerr
    Oh boo hoo, cry me a river. Google rates Yahoo more important than my website too.

    So what if Google favors the big boys? I favor my customers that spend $100,000 per annum over those that spend $250 per annum.

    If it does worry you that much then all you have to do is figure out a way to get syndicated content indexed first.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3178761].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author tpw
      Originally Posted by BrianTerr View Post

      Oh boo hoo, cry me a river. Google rates Yahoo more important than my website too.

      So what if Google favors the big boys? I favor my customers that spend $100,000 per annum over those that spend $250 per annum.

      If it does worry you that much then all you have to do is figure out a way to get syndicated content indexed first.

      Hahahaha... I can see how much of my original post you actually read....
      Signature
      Bill Platt, Oklahoma USA, PlattPublishing.com
      Publish Coloring Books for Profit (WSOTD 7-30-2015)
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3178779].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author BrianTerr
        Originally Posted by tpw View Post

        Hahahaha... I can see how much of my original post you actually read....
        I get it Bill, there is no duplicate content penalty. You just took your sweet time in telling everyone in a long winded, very confusing post.

        ****

        tl;dr: Google doesn't penalize duplicate content on different websites.
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3178939].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author asmithseo
    Stop whining and find a new way to make money. Wasted words instead of making money.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3178794].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Barry Unruh
    Bill,

    You are a DANGEROUS writer. People actually have to READ your entire post to get your point, and sometimes the sarcasm contained within....

    WARNING - BILL PLATT POSTS CANNOT BE SKIMMED - You will miss the point - Don't be like Millions of Other Bill Platt skimmers....

    Barry
    Signature
    Brain Drained...Signature Coming Soon!
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3179023].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author Dennis Gaskill
      Originally Posted by tpw View Post


      Yes Dennis Gaskill, I am in one of those moods.
      Does that mean I know you too well ... or you know me too well?

      I'm not sure which lost cause is more lost, the Duplicate Content penalty or the I Just Like to Post, I Don't Like to Read penalty. Double


      @ Barry - The warnings do little good. People skim the OP and skip the rest.
      Signature

      Just when you think you've got it all figured out, someone changes the rules.

      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3179228].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Fraggler
    This is what Google says about duplicate content:

    Duplicate content - Webmaster Tools Help

    i.e. duplicate content may confuse the Google Bot and it will show one page on your site instead of another more appropriate page on your site for searches that are applicable to more than one page. They also talk about ways to manage the duplicate content to avoid this confusion.

    It has and never had anything to do with syndicated content (which has been used for traffic generation for quite some time). Those comments are from people who skimmed the Google statements and assumed what they meant from the title alone.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3179172].message }}
  • Yeah, I read one time they let bp buy out all the front (maybe it was only the first page...idr exactly) 5 pages for the bp oil spill google just so they can fill people full of garbage and lies. Few people go past the first 5 pages.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3179189].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author KenThompson
    Re skimming/scanning/guessing...

    Bill, if you would please... continue writing your articles. But could you
    bold the most salient points for us? (Not too many words, though.)

    Thanks, babe.

    Ken
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3179249].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author tpw
      Originally Posted by KenThompson View Post

      Re skimming/scanning/guessing...

      Bill, if you would please... continue writing your articles. But could you
      bold the most salient points for us? (Not too many words, though.)

      Thanks, babe.

      Ken

      I do sometimes, but I will warn you, I typically only bold the negative story, not the real one.

      I let those who want to expect the worst, see only what they want to see.
      Signature
      Bill Platt, Oklahoma USA, PlattPublishing.com
      Publish Coloring Books for Profit (WSOTD 7-30-2015)
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3179377].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author KenThompson
        Originally Posted by tpw View Post

        I do sometimes, but I will warn you, I typically only bold the negative story, not the real one.
        So you're gonna insist on making us think? That's rude, man.


        Ken
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3179386].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author terrapurus
    With that level of taking the piss, you could write for theonion.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3184495].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author alcymart
    Originally Posted by tpw View Post

    I hate bashing Google, but they are such an easy target!!!

    Their website is famously quoted for saying, "Do no evil", yet it seems that they don't always practice what they preach...

    So here is the deal. Google has this thing that is called the Duplicate Content Penalty. Google apparently uses it to diminish some websites in their search results...

    You know they do, because people talk about here all the time.

    Yes Dennis Gaskill, I am in one of those moods.

    In essence, Google says that if you have two URLs on the same site with basically the same content, then they will filter out the second URL from their search results, so that they will not show the duplicate pages on your site.

    Of course, others say that the Duplicate Content Filter is more diabolical than even that.

    These folks are quick to explain that the Duplicate Content Penalty is used against those of us who syndicate content online.

    Those of us who write articles for syndication and send them to other websites in an effort to find a larger audience for our articles are the ones that seem to be hurt most by the Duplicate Content Penalty.

    I am really straight forward about why I syndicate my articles. I do it to get my finely-crafted content in front of larger audiences of people -- people who are more likely to buy what I am selling.

    If I can get published on a website with a lot of traffic, then I can potentially get a lot of people to read my article then look at my signature or author's resource box. When done well, people will click the link in my signature, visit the sites I am promoting, and buy what I am selling.

    But here comes Google with their silly Duplicate Content Penalty... OMG!!!

    According to those "people in the know", Google is penalizing my articles and my website for finding those larger audiences.

    Yet, while it appears to be wrong for you and I to engage in that behavior, it seems perfectly suitable for the major media companies to do that without penalty.

    Example:

    The following news story (Economy facing headwinds, but Bernanke hopeful | Reuters) was syndicated by Reuters this week.

    A search for a specific phrase within the article yields 134 search results in Google: "headwinds for an economy that Federal Reserve Chairman" - Google

    A short list of news sites that have carried this particular news story includes:

    * NPR
    * Yahoo
    * Comcast
    * News Daily
    * Business Spectator - Australia
    * Google News
    * and many others

    What do these companies have in common that we do not? A huge marketing budget, a corporate parent, and the ability to get Google's respect.

    You can play this game with Google any time you want by checking a phrase within a news story as found at Business & Financial News, Breaking US & International News | Reuters.com that Reuters is syndicating to other news agencies.

    It comes down to this:

    Either Google is playing favorites and letting the major media companies do what they will not let the little guys do, OR more likely, the Duplicate Content Penalty by Google is one of the biggest loads of horse manure to every get traction in the psyche of online publishers.

    As most of my regular followers know, I tend to be in the second group.

    If you have an opinion on this subject, join the fun and please speak up...

    Let me add for those that aren't aware. The same exact domain starting with .www and no .www for google means 2 different pages with duplicate content. You must go into your .htaccess file on your host and add 3 lines to fix this else Google crawler sees duplicate content and rank you very far away.

    The 3 lines for a 301 redirect are as follow... of course put your domain instead of the one there. In the case below you want Google to see only your .www domain

    RewriteEngine on
    RewriteCond %{HTTP_HOST} !^www.yourdomain.com$
    RewriteRule ^(.*)$ http://www.yourdomain.com/$1 [R=301]


    Take care,

    Bernard St-Pierre
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3184528].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Jon Patrick
    I think there may be some truth to the duplicate content theory, to the extent that if a hundred million sites all posted the exact same piece of content, it seems like most of the pages where that content resided would go supplemental, with only some number of big authority sites being able to rank that content. While, on the other end of the spectrum, you could have just two or three sites posting the same piece of content, and perhaps the duplicity would have no effect.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3184548].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author tpw
      Originally Posted by burningdrive View Post

      I think there may be some truth to the duplicate content theory, to the extent that if a hundred million sites all posted the exact same piece of content, it seems like most of the pages where that content resided would go supplemental, with only some number of big authority sites being able to rank that content. While, on the other end of the spectrum, you could have just two or three sites posting the same piece of content, and perhaps the duplicity would have no effect.

      More honestly, there are only ten pages on page one of the search results.

      Every copy of a syndicated article will be on a page that is not truly unique. Think header, sidebars, footers, comments, etc., and duplicate pages seldom exist.

      I have in times past seen six copies of my article on page one, from six websites, on a three word phrase.

      The last time I checked that search phrase, I still saw the article on the page three times. That was towards the end of last year.

      I did not check it currently, because I would have to take a few minutes to find what my test keyword phrase was.

      I see it all the time, where I can find multiple copies of one article in the first ten results.

      Duplicate Content Filter is supposed to eliminate that possibility, but even Google fails to deliver 100%.
      Signature
      Bill Platt, Oklahoma USA, PlattPublishing.com
      Publish Coloring Books for Profit (WSOTD 7-30-2015)
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3186076].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author Devid Farah
        One thing you need to understand is that Google treats news a lot different than regular articles.

        For news reports, Google is 99% more lenient when it comes to syndication. So unless what you are writing are news reports that are being syndicated on news sites, then you are comparing apples to oranges.

        Google is not out there to get anyone.

        But you need to realize that they are a business and if they have to choose between making money or you making money, I’d pretty sure they won’t pick you.

        That being said, i am a little guy and I’ve found that Google has been very fair.

        But no one is perfect, especially not huge businesses.
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3187617].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author jasonmorgan
    You had me at "the Duplicate Content Penalty by Google is one of the biggest loads of horse manure to every get traction"

    nice chat tonight btw

    remember: big brother is always watching
    Signature

    I'm all about that bass.

    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3186106].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author tpw
      Originally Posted by jasonmorgan View Post

      You had me at "the Duplicate Content Penalty by Google is one of the biggest loads of horse manure to every get traction"

      nice chat tonight btw

      remember: big brother is always watching

      Thank you btw.

      Remember: I have never been someone who worries too much about big brother.

      I occasionally stand in my front yard and wave at the spy satellites passing overhead, but that is because I am absolutely not at all concerned about being watched.
      Signature
      Bill Platt, Oklahoma USA, PlattPublishing.com
      Publish Coloring Books for Profit (WSOTD 7-30-2015)
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3186197].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Fraggler
    Originally Posted by tpw View Post

    Every copy of a syndicated article will be on a page that is not truly unique. Think header, sidebars, footers, comments, etc., and duplicate pages seldom exist.


    One of the few times you will see the Supplemental Index working as one would expect is when you are searching for a web server or script based error. These errors often render the output on the page to be identical to every other page on the web suffering from the same problem.What you see is often 3 or 4 results in Google followed by the option to click to find all similar pages.

    These pages don't have the header, footer, and navigation that would otherwise make the content different on each site. These pages usuallly also don't have backlinks saying that the page is actually important and related to the 'anchor text's' subject matter.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3186252].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author bcturner
    Funny how things are turning for them - like it did for Microsoft in the 90's
    Signature
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3188128].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author bcturner
    But the trouble is that there are only 10 places. Really for an internet entrepreneur it's very very difficult, especially in some industry segments - which is partially what they want - so you can buy ad spots
    Signature
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3188140].message }}

Trending Topics