Is Article Marketing On It's Way Out?

by Tony S
106 replies
Hi,
I hope everyone is having a great day. I am new to the forum. I figure this is the best place to find a truthful answer to a question that has been on my mind for a minute now. That is can any one tell me the truth about article marketing, submitting articles to the directories? Is this still a good way to get traffic an back links to my web sites or simply a waste of time? I have been hearing from different sources that Article marketing is on it's way out. Is this true? if so, what are the alternatives for the online marketer?:confused:
#article #marketing
  • Profile picture of the author anghook
    Banned
    I think it is still effective. Similar to video marketing ..
    But, I think SEM and Viral Marketing is more effective.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3506613].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Mike Hlatky
    Ya, it's been dead a couple of times.

    People still submit their articles, though. I can't seem to figure it out..........
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3506620].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author Richard Van
      Originally Posted by Mike Hlatky View Post

      Ya, it's been dead a couple of times.

      People still submit their articles, though. I can't seem to figure it out..........
      Actually Mike, I believe it's died several times a day, everyday, since the algo change. I reckon if you used the search function and typed in "is article marketing dead", you're computer would implode.

      OP, it's not dead, it's just going full circle back to what it was originally intended for - syndication. Henceforth, the name of the biggest article directory is "Ezine Articles". Loosely translated - A directory of articles, ezines would come to, in order to select articles, for there ezines.

      Mass submitting crappy articles to directories for the PR0 contextually irrelevant back links, may be on it's way out but I don't use it for that anyway, nor do a lot of successful article marketers.
      Signature

      Wibble, bark, my old man's a mushroom etc...

      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3506674].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author The Bad Blogger
        Well article marketing can never be dead... first u need to know people won't get bored in reading and everything such as audio video are created from words which means as long as the content is quality ... article marketing can never be dead... some top marketer like to make things up such as is facebook gonna eat google or is email marketing is dead... look this is just a marketing methods of making a buzz... just remember nothing is dead unless it's gone... now tell me is article marketing dead?
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3506747].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author mmoreal
    I think it's still effective but much more difficult to get.I create a len on squidoo about my keyword and it's on page 1 after submit
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3506650].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author SeanSupplee
    Crappy articles are out. If your writing good quality articles that lead into the clicking of your link then no its not dead what so ever
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3506651].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author scrofford
    There are so many threads started on this...you should do a search before starting a thread like this...anyhow, article marketing will NEVER die because it is CONTENT. Content is what makes the internet go round. Google likes good, original content. People like good, original content. So no, article marketing isn't dead and never will be.

    If I were you though I would post my articles to my website before I posted it to an article directory such as EZA. I think it works out better that way for traffic and what not.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3506669].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author talfighel
    I personally think that it is STILL effective but what I learned is that when you write a few articles in your niche and expect a rush of traffic to your link, you got it all wrong. I am not going to name names here but I heard one guru say that you need a LOT of article which I personally think IS true.

    If you can get 500-1000+ articles for a niche, you can get a good amount of free traffic to your site each and everyday on complete auto-pilot.
    Signature
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3506710].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Chri5123
    Writing content that provides REAL value to people's queries has ALWAYS and STILL does work.

    Writing purely promotional articles and submitting hundreds of junk articles to the top directories with the sole purpose of trying to "game" the search engines is on it's way out.

    I would say Article Marketing the proper way is about to be reborn...
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3506772].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author Daniel Harper
      Originally Posted by Chri5123 View Post

      Writing content that provides REAL value to people's queries has ALWAYS and STILL does work.

      Writing purely promotional articles and submitting hundreds of junk articles to the top directories with the sole purpose of trying to "game" the search engines is on it's way out.

      I would say Article Marketing the proper way is about to be reborn...
      This can't be emphasized enough. IMers,as a group, need to be more value minded.

      Yes, the marketing matters. Of course everyone wants to make a lot of money. But it all starts with delivering value.
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3507066].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author anthony2
    I believe article marketing is still effective but your approach should be
    different from other article marketers. Instead of just posting articles
    to the directories like everyone else. You should

    1)Turn your articles into videos then submit them to video directories.
    2)Turn your articles into podcast then submit them to podcast directories.
    3)Submit your article to blog owners
    4)Offer your articles to ezine publishers.

    Now thats article marketing on STERIODS!!!!
    Signature
    "I Leveled The Playing Field And Removed Every Roadblock
    To Helping You Make Maximum Profits In Minimum Time"
    Click Here Now To Find Out How!
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3506774].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Alexa Smith
    Banned
    Originally Posted by Tony S View Post

    can any one tell me the truth about article marketing, submitting articles to the directories?
    Hi Tony, article marketing is a whole lot more than submitting articles to directories. Article marketing is flourishing and will continue to do so (as it always has done).

    Originally Posted by Tony S View Post

    Is this still a good way to get traffic an back links to my web sites or simply a waste of time?
    Using articles to get traffic and backlinks to your websites is exactly how many of us here are making a living. But for the most part (for the successful article marketers here, anyway) the traffic and backlinks that help so much aren't article directory ones. They're "subsequent" ones, often found (for many of us - not all) by having submitted to article directories, but they're not the article directory copies themselves.

    Article directory backlinks in themselves have never been a very viable form of off-page SEO, because they're all non-context-relevant, PR-0 backlinks. (There's very widespread misunderstanding about this).

    Article directory traffic can be good, but that part's getting harder all the time. And anyway, look at it this way: if someone types your keyword into a search engine as their search-term, do you want them finding a copy of an article on your site (I do) or one in an article directory (I want the copy to be in the article directory for other reasons, but I don't want them finding that copy!)?

    An article directory is a depository of online content, freely available to webmasters and ezine/newsletter compilers to use as a source. The idea of a "directory" is that people go there in search of content, and re-publish that content in front of their already-existing, already-targeted audience (you haven't had to do the targeting yourself), and in the process they also give you backlinks which are far more valuable than the directory backlinks are in themselves. (That arises because of the terms of service of the article directories: they have to publish your resource-box with the article).

    There are also many other, non-article-directory ways you can arrange for this to happen.

    So, to answer your question, article marketing is flourishing and still will, and article directories have their role to play in this. But be clear about what "directories" are, and why you're using them to promote your own sites, and don't imagine that article directory traffic and article directory backlinks are going to get you too far in themselves: that hasn't been so for a long time, and it's less and less so all the time, too.

    There are many very good threads here about article marketing. In the "incidental chat" in some of them, a lot of very successful article marketers give a lot of outstandingly good tips and explanations. (Unfortunately, there's also quite a bit of misinformation about, posted by people who don't understand the differences between "article marketing" and "article directory marketing", and between "duplicate content" and "syndicated content". Differentiating between them takes a bit of judgment and care!).

    This thread is a really good starting-point and repays careful study.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3506898].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author Diane S
      Originally Posted by Alexa Smith View Post

      people go there in search of content, and re-publish that content in front of their already-existing, already-targeted audience (you haven't had to do the targeting yourself), and in the process they also give you backlinks which are far more valuable than the directory backlinks are in themselves. (That arises because of the terms of service of the article directories: they have to publish your resource-box with the article).
      Only once has someone left my author links intact. Everyone else has stripped them out. I don't have time to fight it. So I actually have the experience of the article directory links being the only ones of value.
      Signature
      KimW still needs our help DONATE DIRECTLY
      My First Kindle Book: Ten Days in the Land of Smile
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3508169].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author Richard Van
        Originally Posted by Diane S View Post

        Only once has someone left my author links intact. Everyone else has stripped them out. I don't have time to fight it. So I actually have the experience of the article directory links being the only ones of value.
        I hear what you're saying but with respect the point has gone a miss.

        I form relationships with people that syndicate my content. I don't wait for them to find it on EZA, I find them first, I propose to them why they need my work. This isn't a case of popping articles on EZA and waiting for syndication. The key to it, is proactively finding, creating relationships and feeding high authority sites with my content.

        It's business, we need to find clients. We need to find them, we have the valuable item.

        I don't have time to wait for them to find me.
        Signature

        Wibble, bark, my old man's a mushroom etc...

        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3508199].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author Diane S
          Originally Posted by Richard Van View Post

          I hear what you're saying but with respect the point has gone a miss.

          I form relationships with people that syndicate my content. I don't wait for them to find it on EZA, I find them first, I propose to them why they need my work. This isn't a case of popping articles on EZA and waiting for syndication. The key to it, is proactively finding, creating relationships and feeding high authority sites with my content.

          It's business, we need to find clients. We need to find them, we have the valuable item.

          I don't have time to wait for them to find me.
          That sounds like guest posting to me. I never thought of guest posting as article syndication, but I guess one could look at it that way.

          I don't believe my point has not gone amiss. My point is that webmasters break the TOS of article directories by stripping out our links, and repeatedly, and that many times a Warrior who recommends submitting articles to directories conveniently leaves out this grim reality. Newbies most likely do not know this and I think they should be made aware of it.

          Once you realize this is happening to you, then you have to make decisions. If the links from the article directories alone do not give you either a)increased traffic to your site through click-throughs from your resource box links or b)increased traffic to your site due to gaining higher position in SERPs, then it is fair to conclude that you are not getting benefit from this approach.

          If you have the data that shows submitting articles to directories is not giving you enough value to make it worth your time, then it is definitely time time to try out other kinds of syndication.

          Of course, anyone can do both simultaneously, look at the results, and make a judgment call on which method is more effective. In my case, since all of my articles are in the IM niche, nearly all links are stripped out because the IM webmasters know how to do it, and also know they will not get called out for doing it. In other niches I hope the link-stripping rate is lower, but I don't know for sure if that is the case.

          As soon as all my goals for my IM niche money streams are met, I will be expanding into other niches, and I will test that.
          Signature
          KimW still needs our help DONATE DIRECTLY
          My First Kindle Book: Ten Days in the Land of Smile
          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3513127].message }}
          • Profile picture of the author JordanFrancis
            Hi Diane,

            Originally Posted by Diane S View Post

            In my case, since all of my articles are in the IM niche, nearly all links are stripped out because the IM webmasters know how to do it, and also know they will not get called out for doing it. In other niches I hope the link-stripping rate is lower, but I don't know for sure if that is the case.
            Recently I found my article, minus the links, on a web 2.0 site. There was no contact information for the user, so I reported the problem directly with the site. A few hours later, that person lost their account and blog.

            That said, I can think of better ways of spending my time...
            {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3520303].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author derekwong28
    Here is an interesting post by Chris Tew on DP. If it is true, then things are very bleak for article marketing

    Article Marketing Has Crashed! Ezine Articles Sees 71% of Rankings Drop

    Article Marketing Has Crashed! Ezine Articles Sees 71% of Rankings Drop
    Article Marketing has taken the biggest hit in years. The last time Article Marketing was hit so hard was 3-4 years ago when Google tackled the dupe content produced across article directories.

    ezinearticles.com - 90% loss
    hubpages.com - 87% loss
    buzzle.com - 85% loss
    associatedcontent.com - 93% loss
    articlesbase.com - 94% loss

    Data is from Sistrix. It is based on a “visibility” index value that Sistrix created, which takes into account the number of keyword positions lost, specific ranking position and estimated clickthrough rate from those results.

    Essentially Google is targeting content farms and put out an update on Feb 24th. Factors they *may* be using is:
    - length of content (number of words)
    - backlinks to individual articles
    - usage metrics (such as bounce rate and clickstream data)

    It looks like all article directories have been hit very hard. Here's an overview of the domains that saw most of their rankings go down (data from Sistrix):

    Domain ------ Positions Lost ------ % Loss
    associatedcontent.com ------ 162917 ------ 75.00%
    suite101.com ------ 141469 ------ 79.00%
    ezinearticles.com ------ 130231 ------ 71.00%
    hubpages.com ------ 102820 ------ 67.00%
    buzzle.com ------ 62049 ------ 72.00%
    merchantcircle.com ------ 58666 ------ 63.00%
    wisegeek.com ------ 52084 ------ 70.00%
    articlesbase.com ------ 50909 ------ 62.00%
    findarticles.com ------ 44621 ------ 69.00%
    answerbag.com ------ 41260 ------ 61.00%
    examiner.com ------ 39509 ------ 56.00%
    manta.com ------ 36945 ------ 48.00%
    freedownloadscenter.com ------ 34494 ------ 81.00%
    yourdictionary.com ------ 32981 ------ 67.00%
    lovetoknow.com ------ 31711 ------ 64.00%
    trails.com ------ 29835 ------ 78.00%
    thefind.com ------ 29011 ------ 39.00%
    travelpod.com ------ 28513 ------ 68.00%
    brothersoft.com ------ 27594 ------ 40.00%
    docstoc.com ------ 26650 ------ 56.00%
    fixya.com ------ 25867 ------ 42.00%
    howtodothings.com ------ 25621 ------ 77.00%
    mahalo.com ------ 24135 ------ 71.00%
    insiderpages.com ------ 23346 ------ 70.00%
    faqs.org ------ 22506 ------ 67.00%
    prlog.org ------ 22254 ------ 57.00%
    kaboodle.com ------ 21949 ------ 39.00%
    citytowninfo.com ------ 21615 ------ 86.00%
    shopwiki.com ------ 21528 ------ 43.00%
    roadsideamerica.com ------ 21510 ------ 73.00%
    buzzillions.com ------ 21421 ------ 48.00%
    tradekey.com ------ 21096 ------ 56.00%
    essortment.com ------ 20042 ------ 73.00%
    uptake.com ------ 19655 ------ 58.00%
    encyclopedia.com ------ 19625 ------ 51.00%
    helium.com ------ 18931 ------ 66.00%
    wordiq.com ------ 18877 ------ 77.00%
    springerlink.com ------ 18625 ------ 49.00%
    livestrong.com ------ 18175 ------ 38.00%
    business.com ------ 16743 ------ 78.00%
    doityourself.com ------ 16386 ------ 70.00%
    americantowns.com ------ 16201 ------ 62.00%
    prnewswire.com ------ 15162 ------ 70.00%
    cinemablend.com ------ 14259 ------ 72.00%
    epodunk.com ------ 14190 ------ 78.00%
    vodpod.com ------ 13766 ------ 38.00%
    labnol.org ------ 13541 ------ 85.00%
    medicalnewstoday.com ------ 13426 ------ 75.00%
    mytravelguide.com ------ 13340 ------ 69.00%
    highbeam.com ------ 13324 ------ 34.00%
    blogcritics.org ------ 13312 ------ 57.00%
    chacha.com ------ 12900 ------ 48.00%
    retrevo.com ------ 12601 ------ 35.00%
    sharewareconnection.com ------ 12600 ------ 54.00%
    planetware.com ------ 12387 ------ 75.00%
    ptf.com ------ 12380 ------ 41.00%
    digitaltrends.com ------ 12154 ------ 67.00%
    testfreaks.com ------ 11938 ------ 63.00%
    galttech.com ------ 11804 ------ 76.00%
    aceshowbiz.com ------ 11639 ------ 67.00%
    userinstinct.com ------ 11410 ------ 47.00%
    viewpoints.com ------ 11191 ------ 55.00%
    destination360.com ------ 11167 ------ 76.00%
    topshareware.com ------ 11000 ------ 48.00%
    consumeraffairs.com ------ 10832 ------ 80.00%
    onsugar.com ------ 10699 ------ 40.00%
    stateuniversity.com ------ 10560 ------ 70.00%
    allbusiness.com ------ 10423 ------ 63.00%
    blurtit.com ------ 10331 ------ 47.00%
    everything2.com ------ 10298 ------ 76.00%
    kioskea.net ------ 9781 ------ 32.00%
    travelpost.com ------ 9412 ------ 75.00%
    wrongdiagnosis.com ------ 9293 ------ 52.00%
    technorati.com ------ 9135 ------ 67.00%
    whosdatedwho.com ------ 8986 ------ 58.00%
    entrepreneur.com ------ 8974 ------ 75.00%
    slideshare.net ------ 8909 ------ 27.00%
    geek.com ------ 8632 ------ 65.00%
    gizmag.com ------ 8594 ------ 46.00%
    mp3.com ------ 8577 ------ 64.00%
    trendhunter.com ------ 8539 ------ 66.00%
    fotosearch.com ------ 8473 ------ 48.00%
    daniweb.com ------ 8316 ------ 61.00%
    iloveindia.com ------ 8240 ------ 58.00%
    eventful.com ------ 7948 ------ 55.00%
    globalsources.com ------ 7927 ------ 34.00%
    songkick.com ------ 7908 ------ 50.00%
    eggheadcafe.com ------ 7828 ------ 47.00%
    ubergizmo.com ------ 7807 ------ 73.00%
    ez-tracks.com ------ 7779 ------ 62.00%
    popcrunch.com ------ 7728 ------ 63.00%
    ghacks.net ------ 7695 ------ 78.00%
    healthcentral.com ------ 7660 ------ 59.00%
    5min.com ------ 7652 ------ 62.00%
    famouswhy.com ------ 7619 ------ 63.00%
    fanpix.net ------ 7445 ------ 64.00%
    ilike.com ------ 7401 ------ 62.00%
    torrentreactor.net ------ 7252 ------ 29.00%
    bellaonline.com ------ 7171 ------ 69.00%
    hotel-rates.com ------ 7124 ------ 67.00%




    The Winners:


    youtube.com
    ebay.com
    facebook.com
    instructables.com
    Signature

    Do not get between a wombat and a chocolate biscuit; you will regret it dearly!

    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3507164].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author Alexa Smith
      Banned
      Originally Posted by derekwong28 View Post

      Article Marketing Has Crashed!
      So strange and frustrating, isn't it, that people confuse "article marketing" with "article directory marketing" like that, and imagine that EZA and other directories "crashing" (even if true) means that article marketing itself has somehow "crashed"? :rolleyes:

      Call me naive, but I'd have expected something less hysterical and a little more perceptive from Chris Tew. :p
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3507229].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author Dave Rodman
        Banned
        Article Marketing has definitely crashed. Most people market through directories, directories got killed in this update, so it's safe to say that article marketing is on the decline.

        Some people will still do well under Article Marketing if they deal directly with other webmasters. But as a whole "Article Marketing" got killed. Saying otherwise is like saying that Telemarketing is alive and well after implementation of the DoNotCall List. Sure, some firms managed to stick around, but the industry was pretty much dealt a death blow.
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3507325].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author NicoleBeckett
          Originally Posted by Dave Rodman View Post

          Article Marketing has definitely crashed. Most people market through directories, directories got killed in this update, so it's safe to say that article marketing is on the decline.
          Not all directories "got killed". Some may have seen a decrease in traffic; others are doing better than they were a few weeks ago.

          While they may need to re-organize things a bit (which seems to be what's going on, especially in the case of EZA), article directories aren't going anywhere. So far, all that's really happened is that submission guidelines have gotten stricter, which is a good thing - and long overdue - IMO.

          Just like anything else, article marketing is evolving. While the days of garbage content and super-short articles seem to be gone, there is still very much a place for a solid article marketing strategy.
          Signature
          Sick of blending in with the crowd? Ready to stand ahead of the pack? The right content writing services can get you there...
          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3507357].message }}
          • Profile picture of the author cody123
            Contrary to belief, article marketing is very much alive. Just yesterday I viewed articles that were published on EZA in January, 2011 on Page 1 of Google that had well over 20,000 and 30,000 views. It's where I find my best ideas and keywords.

            Article marketing is not dead by a long shot. In fact, it's one of the best places to find great content that ranks on page 1 of Google.

            Here's a screen shot of yesterday's EZA article results. Proof that article marketing is still alive!

            {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3507372].message }}
          • Profile picture of the author Dave Rodman
            Banned
            Originally Posted by NicoleBeckett View Post

            Not all directories "got killed". Some may have seen a decrease in traffic; others are doing better than they were a few weeks ago.

            While they may need to re-organize things a bit (which seems to be what's going on, especially in the case of EZA), article directories aren't going anywhere. So far, all that's really happened is that submission guidelines have gotten stricter, which is a good thing - and long overdue - IMO.

            Just like anything else, article marketing is evolving. While the days of garbage content and super-short articles seem to be gone, there is still very much a place for a solid article marketing strategy.
            Sure, they all didn't get killed. But most of the big ones did.

            Article marketing will go on and people will continue to make money. But make no mistake, this was a huge hit to article marketing as a whole. People still make money with 900 numbers, but not like they did in the 80's. People still make money through telemarketing, but not like they did in the 90's.

            Sure, syndicating articles to websites is great. But I wonder how much traffic those articles are getting. There's a warrior that's featured on Shoemoney.com and THAT likely produces insane traffic, but I'm sure most don't have arrangements anywhere near that sweet.
            {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3507896].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author Richard Van
          Article Marketing has definitely crashed. Most people market through directories, directories got killed in this update, so it's safe to say that article marketing is on the decline.
          Agreed, that form of article marketing, which has been touted as the way forward, will suffer now. I don't like it anyway.

          I've said for sometime and it's easy reading the threads here to see, that the small minority that continue as they have, with sucessful relationships with authority sites, that want their content, will continue to thrive.

          Whether it's been killed depends entirely upon what you're doing with article marketing.

          If this aspect of my business is doing just as well and I've experienced no change at all, then this business model is alive and well and working very well, for me at least and several others I know.

          It all depends what path you've been following, when saying it's dead, you're just talking about one part of it. For those still successful at it, this is a good thing.
          Signature

          Wibble, bark, my old man's a mushroom etc...

          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3507475].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author DireStraits
          Originally Posted by Dave Rodman View Post

          Article Marketing has definitely crashed. Most people market through directories, directories got killed in this update, so it's safe to say that article marketing is on the decline.

          Some people will still do well under Article Marketing if they deal directly with other webmasters. But as a whole "Article Marketing" got killed. Saying otherwise is like saying that Telemarketing is alive and well after implementation of the DoNotCall List. Sure, some firms managed to stick around, but the industry was pretty much dealt a death blow.
          I don't think your telemarketing analogy quite works here, Dave, because nothing remotely like a "do not call" list has been implemented here.

          Show me where it is now illegal, or even strongly discouraged, to take and republish other people's content from article directories such as EzineArticles?

          EzineArticles themselves - and other directories like them - may have been "penalised" to an extent, from an SEO perspective, but that won't suddenly erase them from consciousness of those individuals who know of them, and routinely go there for the purpose of picking up content to republish on their own sites or in their newsletters. They'll still go there, and they'll still take whatever articles tickle their fancy. So in that respect, article marketing is alive and well, and directories like EzineArticles will continue to facilitate this just as they always did.

          I do see, however, that some people may now be slightly more wary of republishing syndicated content, due to Google stating that their recent algorithm change targeted - among other things - "sites with low levels of unique, original content", or at least something to that effect.

          However, those with "any clue" who are looking to republish syndicated content - be it obtained from article directories or received directly from the author - will be doing so, I expect, in addition to writing and publishing their own unique, original content; so their site isn't likely to comprise mostly of non-unique content. Authors of high-quality articles want them republished on high-quality websites that have the potential of offering them good backlinks and maybe even some referral traffic. I don't believe that websites comprising 90%+ of non-unique content would really be deserving of the "high-quality" label, and as a result it's highly unlikely that they'd have been able to offer either good backlinks or referral traffic in the first place - even before this change.

          The type of sites with most to lose from this change are those which seldom publish anything unique to begin with; but they're also the ones from which an article marketer would gain the least by having their articles republished there, since they'd typically have little to no SEO authority, and no traffic of their own to send you through your articles' links.

          Having your articles republished on high-quality sites will continue to convey the same two major benefits that it always has: good backlinks, and the potential of highly-targeted referral traffic. And site owners who are republishing your content still stand to benefit themselves, too, by presenting valuable information to their visitors, building their reputation as a source of high-quality information and/or entertainment, and ultimately expanding their readership and building their business asset.

          Anyway, I'm getting mildly off-topic, here, so I'll get back to the original point and say this: just because EzineArticles and other directories are right now suffering somewhat from an SEO perspective, it doesn't necessarily mean people will stop utilising them for their primary, traditionally-intended purpose, which just happens to be as a place from which to acquire free content for republication.

          Even if EzineArticles and all the other directories went completely t*ts-up tomorrow, it still wouldn't in any way signify the "crash/death/end of article marketing", because article directories aren't article marketing - they're really just tools that can help facilitate it.
          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3508112].message }}
          • Profile picture of the author Dave Rodman
            Banned
            Originally Posted by DireStraits View Post

            I don't think your telemarketing analogy quite works here, Dave, because nothing remotely like a "do not call" list has been implemented here.

            Show me where it is now illegal, or even strongly discouraged, to take and republish other people's content from article directories such as EzineArticles?

            EzineArticles themselves - and other directories like them - may have been "penalised" to an extent, from an SEO perspective, but that won't suddenly erase them from consciousness of those individuals who know of them, and routinely go there for the purpose of picking up content to republish on their own sites or in their newsletters. They'll still go there, and they'll still take whatever articles tickle their fancy. So in that respect, article marketing is alive and well, and directories like EzineArticles will continue to facilitate this just as they always did.

            I do see, however, that some people may now be slightly more wary of republishing syndicated content, due to Google stating that their recent algorithm change targeted - among other things - "sites with low levels of unique, original content", or at least something to that effect.

            However, those with "any clue" who are looking to republish syndicated content - be it obtained from article directories or received directly from the author - will be doing so, I expect, in addition to writing and publishing their own unique, original content; so their site isn't likely to comprise mostly of non-unique content. Authors of high-quality articles want them republished on high-quality websites that have the potential of offering them good backlinks and maybe even some referral traffic. I don't believe that websites comprising 90%+ of non-unique content would really be deserving of the "high-quality" label, and as a result it's highly unlikely that they'd have been able to offer either good backlinks or referral traffic in the first place - even before this change.

            The type of sites with most to lose from this change are those which seldom publish anything unique to begin with; but they're also the ones from which an article marketer would gain the least by having their articles republished there, since they'd typically have little to no SEO authority, and no traffic of their own to send you through your articles' links.

            Having your articles republished on high-quality sites will continue to convey the same two major benefits that it always has: good backlinks, and the potential of highly-targeted referral traffic. And site owners who are republishing your content still stand to benefit themselves, too, by presenting valuable information to their visitors, building their reputation as a source of high-quality information and/or entertainment, and ultimately expanding their readership and building their business asset.

            Anyway, I'm getting mildly off-topic, here, so I'll get back to the original point and say this: just because EzineArticles and other directories are right now suffering somewhat from an SEO perspective, it doesn't necessarily mean people will stop utilising them for their primary, traditionally-intended purpose, which just happens to be as a place from which to acquire free content for republication.

            Even if EzineArticles and all the other directories went completely t*ts-up tomorrow, it still wouldn't in any way signify the "crash/death/end of article marketing", because article directories aren't article marketing - they're really just tools that can help facilitate it.
            Let me put this another way. It's like me saying "The stock market was down in 2008" and you coming back saying "No it wasn't. It was down for poor performing stocks. But I invested in XYZ and it's doing great".

            Your stock portfolio might be doing fine, but it doesn't mean the stock market wasn't down.

            I'm not talking about the right or wrong way of doing article marketing. I'm talking about the practice, as defined by most people, of article marketing.
            {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3508237].message }}
            • Profile picture of the author DireStraits
              Originally Posted by Dave Rodman View Post

              Let me put this another way. It's like me saying "The stock market was down in 2008" and you coming back saying "No it wasn't. It was down for poor performing stocks. But I invested in XYZ and it's doing great".

              Your stock portfolio might be doing fine, but it doesn't mean the stock market wasn't down.

              I'm not talking about the right or wrong way of doing article marketing. I'm talking about the practice, as defined by most people, of article marketing.
              I know what you're saying, Dave, but you're actually rather contradicting yourself.

              You're acknowledging that if I were silly enough to subscribe to a defintion of "stock market" which encompassed only those stocks in which I have invested, whilst failing to acknowledge that there's a world/market beyond that, it wouldn't in any way change the true, traditional and correct definition of "stock market". And you're absolutely right about that - it wouldn't.

              That's exactly why "most people" labelling their practice as "article marketing" (when it isn't!) doesn't actually make it so.

              You're talking as though I'd be (or am, in the case of article marketing) changing that definition to suit my own purposes, when in actual fact it is you who is doing exactly that, here in this very discussion.

              To put it rather bluntly, I don't give a rat's backside how many people leverage other sites' SEO authority (be they article directories or otherwise) to rank their content and harness traffic, whilst calling it "article marketing". They're still wrong.

              By all means express your view that the effectiveness of this method is in decline. I wouldn't disagree with you there at all! But, unfortunately, as long as you keep placing words/phrases synonymous with "end", "death" or "decline" in the same sentence as "article marketing", when you very clearly mean something quite different, I'm probably going to have to keep disagreeing. And apparently, so are a whole bunch of other people here who know better.
              {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3508677].message }}
              • Profile picture of the author Dave Rodman
                Banned
                Originally Posted by DireStraits View Post

                I know what you're saying, Dave, but you're actually rather contradicting yourself.

                You're acknowledging that if I were silly enough to subscribe to a defintion of "stock market" which encompassed only those stocks in which I have invested, whilst failing to acknowledge that there's a world/market beyond that, it wouldn't in any way change the true, traditional and correct definition of "stock market". And you're absolutely right about that - it wouldn't.

                That's exactly why "most people" labelling their practice as "article marketing" (when it isn't!) doesn't actually make it so.

                You're talking as though I'd be (or am, in the case of article marketing) changing that definition to suit my own purposes, when in actual fact it is you who is doing exactly that, here in this very discussion.

                To put it rather bluntly, I don't give a rat's backside how many people leverage other sites' SEO authority (be they article directories or otherwise) to rank their content and harness traffic, whilst calling it "article marketing". They're still wrong.

                By all means express your view that the effectiveness of this method is in decline. I wouldn't disagree with you there at all! But, unfortunately, as long as you keep placing words/phrases synonymous with "end", "death" or "decline" in the same sentence as "article marketing", when you very clearly mean something quite different, I'm probably going to have to keep disagreeing. And apparently, so are a whole bunch of other people here who know better.
                Since there isn't an official definition of "Article Marketing", I don't know if there really is a right/wrong answer.

                What I do know is that if you surveyed 100 people in the WF, the majority definition of article marketing would be submitting to article directories.
                {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3508719].message }}
                • Profile picture of the author Richard Van
                  Originally Posted by Dave Rodman View Post

                  Since there isn't an official definition of "Article Marketing", I don't know if there really is a right/wrong answer.

                  What I do know is that if you surveyed 100 people in the WF, the majority definition of article marketing would be submitting to article directories.
                  Dave, I'm sure you're a nice guy so forgive me for saying another point against you.

                  The reason, if you asked a random 100 people here, what they thought "article marketing" was and they responded "submitting to article directories" just goes to prove they missed the point. The people that say article marketing was submitting to directories, are all losing out now. Why do you let them define something?

                  Am I one of a select few, that when there's a crash I focus on those winning and it's innate human nature for the others, to look at those it didn't work out for?

                  Why are you focusing on what didn't work when there's a whole bunch of people that it did work for and still does?

                  I find it interesting Dave, the way we see things very differently. No offense.
                  Signature

                  Wibble, bark, my old man's a mushroom etc...

                  {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3508802].message }}
                  • Profile picture of the author Dave Rodman
                    Banned
                    Originally Posted by Richard Van View Post

                    Dave, I'm sure you're a nice guy so forgive me for saying another point against you.

                    The reason, if you asked a random 100 people here, what they thought "article marketing" was and they responded "submitting to article directories" just goes to prove they missed the point. The people that say article marketing was submitting to directories, are all losing out now? Why do you let them define something?

                    Am I one of a select few, that when there's a crash I focus on those winning and it's innate human nature for the others, to look at those it didn't work out for?

                    Why are you focusing on what didn't work when there's a whole bunch of people that it did work for and still does?

                    I find it interesting Dave, the way we see things very differently. No offense.
                    Why would I take offense to you not understanding a simple point?

                    I think I've made it pretty clear that I never endorsed submitting to article directories. I haven't submitted to a directory in YEARS. I'm answering the question in a very black and white manner.

                    1) There is no universal definition of "article marketing", so I define it the way the majority of people would recognize it i.e. Submitting to directories.

                    2) Given that, article marketing was dealt a significant blow when article directories experienced a drop in the rankings. Therefore, it's in decline.

                    Real Estate investing is at a low-point in the US right now. It doesn't mean that it's not a great time to invest in real estate and it doesn't mean people aren't making money.

                    It's a statement of fact.
                    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3508912].message }}
                    • Profile picture of the author Richard Van
                      Dave Rodman - Why would I take offense to you not understanding a simple point?
                      I'm sure you wouldn't David.

                      I think I've made it pretty clear that I never endorsed submitting to article directories. I haven't submitted to a directory in YEARS. I'm answering the question in a very black and white manner.
                      Is "black and white" a realistic way of viewing things, all the time?

                      1) There is no universal definition of "article marketing", so I define it the way the majority of people would recognize it i.e. Submitting to directories.
                      So you went with the masses? You didn't look further? You didn't look at the original reason why article directories existed?

                      2) Given that, article marketing was dealt a significant blow when article directories experienced a drop in the rankings. Therefore, it's in decline.
                      My definition is exempt from directories. :confused: Article marketing can only be in decline for the people who "bought" the idea submitting to directories, by iteslf, was a viable business plan.

                      Real Estate investing is at a low-point in the US right now. It doesn't mean that it's not a great time to invest in real estate and it doesn't mean people aren't making money.
                      Will Real Estate always remain in this low point, despite those in the know cashing in?....Funny isn't it. The hard core investors, who've been in it for years, are irrelevant. It's the 99% of people doing it wrong, that in your world, defines things?

                      Therefore, as the thread question asks, is it: "On it's way out?". :rolleyes:
                      Signature

                      Wibble, bark, my old man's a mushroom etc...

                      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3518080].message }}
                      • Profile picture of the author myob
                        I would recommend reading "The Associated Press Stylebook", the standard for writing articles among journalists. If you are serious about wanting to get your articles syndicated (online and offline), that is the level of writing that will open many doors of opportunity.

                        And when you combine the best of article writing with proven marketing practices such as syndication, you have defined "article maketing" at its finest. Why is this such a hard concept to grasp?
                        Signature
                        “If I have seen further than others, it is by standing upon the shoulders of giants.” – Isaac Newton
                        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3519146].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author inter123
        Everthing discussed here falls into the remit of "Internet Article Marketing". According to Wikipedia:

        Article marketing - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

        Article Marketing is "Internet technique to subtly advertise products and services via online article directories".

        On that basis Article Marketing has crashed. And where people are using other websites other then Article Directories, it falls into the category of some other form of Article Marketing. If I was to create a site for a Clickbank product with article that revolves around the product, I guess that is Article Marketing too.


        Originally Posted by Alexa Smith View Post

        So strange and frustrating, isn't it, that people confuse "article marketing" with "article directory marketing" like that, and imagine that EZA and other directories "crashing" (even if true) means that article marketing itself has somehow "crashed"? :rolleyes:

        Call me naive, but I'd have expected something less hysterical and a little more perceptive from Chris Tew. :p
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3507856].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author Alexa Smith
          Banned
          Originally Posted by inter123 View Post

          On that basis
          On that basis? I'd certainly like to think the Warrior Forum can do a little better than Wiki when it comes to defining an everyday term of internet marketing.

          I'm sure you would, too, really?

          However you look at it, there are plenty of people here making a full-time living from article marketing without depending on article directories for traffic or backlinks, and that's just factual.
          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3507865].message }}
          • Profile picture of the author inter123
            Absolutely.

            Originally Posted by Dave Rodman View Post

            Both fall under the umbrella of article marketing. And if 99% of the people do article directory marketing and it crashes, then "article marketing" has crashed.

            It's like the stock market. The stock market crashes, people on the whole lose money. It doesn't mean there aren't people that are making money doing it.
            I'd rather trust what is on Wikipedia then what is on many of the websites out there. While the Warrior Forum is a fantastic place, I am sure most people agree there is a lot of misinformation here. And given there is a lot of people are obviously into Marketing, there is a lot of "spin doctoring" too.

            As stated in the quote above, if 99% of the people do article marketing through Article directories and that crashes then Article Marketing is in rude health.

            Originally Posted by Alexa Smith View Post

            On that basis? I'd certainly like to think the Warrior Forum can do a little better than Wiki when it comes to defining an everyday term of internet marketing.

            I'm sure you would, too, really?

            However you look at it, there are plenty of people here making a full-time living from article marketing without depending on article directories for traffic or backlinks, and that's just factual.
            {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3508074].message }}
            • Profile picture of the author Richard Van
              Originally Posted by inter123 View Post

              As stated in the quote above, if 99% of the people do article marketing through Article directories and that crashes then Article Marketing is in rude health.
              I already answered that above, you chose not to read it.

              Just because 99% were doing it wrong and were consistently told so, doesn't mean article marketing crashed. It crashed for the majority doing it wrong.
              Signature

              Wibble, bark, my old man's a mushroom etc...

              {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3508108].message }}
              • Profile picture of the author inter123
                You replied as I posted.

                Originally Posted by Richard Van View Post

                I already answered that above, you chose not to read it.
                Where was it documented that Google was going to knock out Ezine Articles? People chose to work with Ezine Article because it was working and had been working for a number of years. And what is there to say Google are not going to take action against other methods of "Article Marketing". I suppose one can say don't rely on Google. So what is next? A person gets a list of subscribers and does Article Marketing through Email?

                Originally Posted by Richard Van View Post

                Just because 99% were doing it wrong and were consistently told so, doesn't mean article marketing crashed. It crashed for the majority doing it wrong.
                {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3508249].message }}
                • Profile picture of the author Richard Van
                  Originally Posted by inter123 View Post

                  Where was it documented that Google was going to knock out Ezine Articles? People chose to work with Ezine Article because it was working and had been working for a number of years. And what is there to say Google are not going to take action against other methods of "Article Marketing". I suppose one can say don't rely on Google. So what is next? A person gets a list of subscribers and does Article Marketing through Email?
                  You have'nt seen the stats to see how much traffic EZA has lost yet?

                  They may well take further action, unlikely just yet though.

                  It's for that reason article marketing is just a small part of my business, though still a very profitable one, despite the changes.

                  People chose to work with Ezine Article because it was working and had been working for a number of years.
                  What years are you talking about? There's a distinct difference in tactics throughout there lifetime.
                  Signature

                  Wibble, bark, my old man's a mushroom etc...

                  {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3508387].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author Richard Van
          Originally Posted by inter123 View Post

          Everthing discussed here falls into the remit of "Internet Article Marketing". According to Wikipedia:

          Article marketing - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

          Article Marketing is "Internet technique to subtly advertise products and services via online article directories".

          On that basis Article Marketing has crashed. And where people are using other websites other then Article Directories, it falls into the category of some other forms of Article Marketing. If I was to create a site for a Clickbank product with article on the site that revolves around the product, I guess that is Article Marketing.
          So one form of article marketing is dead and another form isn't?

          So in other words a small bit/flawed part of article marketing is dead but the true form of it, the original way it operated, lives on.

          Therefore hasn't crashed, even slightly.

          Wikipedia isn't flawless either.
          Signature

          Wibble, bark, my old man's a mushroom etc...

          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3507881].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author Warrior Dude
        Originally Posted by Alexa Smith View Post

        So strange and frustrating, isn't it, that people confuse "article marketing" with "article directory marketing" like that, and imagine that EZA and other directories "crashing" (even if true) means that article marketing itself has somehow "crashed"? :rolleyes:

        Call me naive, but I'd have expected something less hysterical and a little more perceptive from Chris Tew. :p
        Hi Alexa,

        Just wondering, since your focus is on distribution of articles instead of backlinks and traffic have you had a hit to your income from articles.

        From the posts you put up lately it sounds like your income hasn't went down any.

        Thanks,

        Curious
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3507891].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author Alexa Smith
          Banned
          Originally Posted by Warrior Dude View Post

          Hi Alexa,

          Just wondering, since your focus is on distribution of articles instead of backlinks and traffic have you had a hit to your income from articles.

          From the posts you put up lately it sounds like your income hasn't went down any.
          I've actually seen a slight improvement, but it's very early to tell and clearly I can't legitimately attribute it to "this business" yet. I suppose.

          But logically, there's no reason at all why my income ought to drop over this. On the contrary, if anything, it might increase a fraction because article directory articles dropping in the SERP's (which clearly some have, for some keywords) ought to benefit me, if anything. But I haven't actually done any real work for about the last ten days, to be honest, so I shouldn't really comment yet anyway.
          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3507924].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author Dave Rodman
        Banned
        Originally Posted by Alexa Smith View Post

        So strange and frustrating, isn't it, that people confuse "article marketing" with "article directory marketing" like that, and imagine that EZA and other directories "crashing" (even if true) means that article marketing itself has somehow "crashed"? :rolleyes:

        Call me naive, but I'd have expected something less hysterical and a little more perceptive from Chris Tew. :p
        Both fall under the umbrella of article marketing. And if 99% of the people do article directory marketing and it crashes, then "article marketing" has crashed.

        It's like the stock market. The stock market crashes, people on the whole lose money. It doesn't mean there aren't people that are making money doing it.
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3507914].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author Richard Van
          Originally Posted by Dave Rodman View Post

          Both fall under the umbrella of article marketing. And if 99% of the people do article directory marketing and it crashes, then "article marketing" has crashed.

          It's like the stock market. The stock market crashes, people on the whole lose money. It doesn't mean there aren't people that are making money doing it.

          But what if those 99% were constantly told by the 1% why it was wrong?

          What if they wanted to believe the spinner makers, mass article distribution software creators and all the other ways to mass submit articles for crap backlinks shortcuts there are, instead of trying to create a business?

          What if the 99% were not chasing dreams and making others rich in the process?

          Just because 99% were consistently doing it wrong, despite evidence to the contrary, doesn't mean it's dead. It means those doing it wrong just found out...and with proof this time.

          It's like the stock market. The stock market crashes, people on the whole lose money. It doesn't mean there aren't people that are making money doing it.
          ...and the stock market continues, right? It just sheds some weight.
          Signature

          Wibble, bark, my old man's a mushroom etc...

          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3507945].message }}
          • Profile picture of the author Dave Rodman
            Banned
            Originally Posted by Richard Van View Post

            But what if those 99% were constantly told by the 1% why it was wrong?

            What if they wanted to believe the spinner makers, mass article distribution software creators and all the other ways to mass submit articles for crap backlinks shortcuts there are, instead of trying to create a business?

            What if the 99% were not chasing dreams and making others rich in the process?

            Just because 99% were consistently doing it wrong, despite evidence to the contrary, doesn't mean it's dead. It means those doing it wrong just found out...and with proof this time.
            I think you're missing the point. It's irrelevant what the 1% told the 99%. We're talking about article marketing as a whole, not dividing it up between "right" and "wrong" article marketing.

            The vast majority of people consider "Article Marketing" to be submitting to directories right? And if the biggest directories (and some of the biggest sites in the world) take huge traffic hits, then it directly effects traffic generated from "Article Marketing".

            Originally Posted by Richard Van View Post

            ...and the stock market continues, right? It just sheds some weight.
            That analogy isn't valid, it doesn't really even make sense. The reference to the stock market was that, even if some people make money on individual stocks, it doesn't mean that the market didn't go down.

            So sure, some people will make money doing article marketing the "right" way, but it doesn't take away from the fact that article marketing is in decline (at the moment)
            {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3508213].message }}
            • Profile picture of the author Alexa Smith
              Banned
              Originally Posted by Dave Rodman View Post

              The vast majority of people consider "Article Marketing" to be submitting to directories right?
              Wrong.

              "A majority", perhaps. Not "the vast majority". There are certainly 8 or 10 full-time, professional article marketers who fill the article marketing threads here (when we can) with enough posts pointing out that it actually isn't at all.

              The vast majority of ill-informed people consider it to be that, though, certainly.

              Originally Posted by Dave Rodman View Post

              And if the biggest directories (and some of the biggest sites in the world) take huge traffic hits, then it directly effects traffic generated from "Article Marketing".
              It actually affects the traffic generated from article directory marketing. Obviously.

              Many of us here who are article marketers have not had a reduction in our traffic, according to what I've read here over the last 10 days or so. Which matches my own experience.

              I appreciate the extent to which you seem to enjoy taking up a position contrary to whatever I happen to have posted, Dave; I hope you'll excuse the observation that this time you seem to be falling rather far short even of your own standards of logic and debate.

              Originally Posted by Dave Rodman View Post

              sure, some people will make money doing article marketing the "right" way, but it doesn't take away from the fact that article marketing is in decline (at the moment)
              Dear me ... and you think Richard Van "missed the point"? What's in decline (and has been for a long time, even without any reference at all to any recent Google/EZA events) is being dependent on article directories for traffic. That, however, is history, not news. Some of us have been saying for years that that isn't really a viable business model for most people. Fortunately, however, it also isn't "article marketing".

              Essentially, however, it's a sterile argument. So be my guest: have the last word. Knock yourself out.
              {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3508287].message }}
            • Profile picture of the author Richard Van
              I think you're missing the point. It's irrelevant what the 1% told the 99%. We're talking about article marketing as a whole, not dividing it up between "right" and "wrong" article marketing.
              You always like to say the "you're missing the point" arguement. I often feel the same about you Dave. I'm not talking about the whole because there isn't one. There are lots of people doing it different ways.

              Do you follow the masses Dave? If the masses do something, does it mean that's the way it is? I'm not the masses Dave. I'm in the 1% and for that group, there's been no crash, just a welcome sigh of relief that this has finally arrived. Article marketing for me, is now a much better place.

              The vast majority of people consider "Article Marketing" to be submitting to directories right?
              Are the "vast majority" the people you watch and follow Dave?

              Are they right?

              That analogy isn't valid, it doesn't really even make sense. The reference to the stock market was that, even if some people make money on individual stocks, it doesn't mean that the market didn't go down.
              True but that was your analogy, it was flawed from the start.

              So sure, some people will make money doing article marketing the "right" way, but it doesn't take away from the fact that article marketing is in decline (at the moment)
              In decline for those doing it the wrong way.

              Article marketing is declining because it's shedding all the people who did it, following other peoples instructions and not testing for themselves. I see this as a good thing.

              On a plus point, this leaves the market wide open for a new link building software.
              Signature

              Wibble, bark, my old man's a mushroom etc...

              {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3508339].message }}
              • Profile picture of the author Dave Rodman
                Banned
                Originally Posted by Richard Van View Post


                Article marketing is declining because it's shedding all the people who did it, following other peoples instructions and not testing for themselves. I see this as a good thing.
                I think I'll rest my point with you finally agreeing with me. You're talking about right and wrong article marketing, the way people are doing article marketing, and taking a simple analogy and turning it upside down.

                --In 2008, were the majority of people positively or negatively effected by the stock market?

                --Post Feb 24th, did the majority of people experience better or worse results from article marketing?

                --In 2010, did real estate prices in the US go up or down?

                You might have...

                1) Made money in th stock market in 2008
                2) Got more views on your articles
                3) Made a ton of money flipping houses in 2010.

                It doesn't change the overall results.
                {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3508447].message }}
                • Profile picture of the author Richard Van
                  Originally Posted by Dave Rodman View Post

                  I think I'll rest my point with you finally agreeing with me. You're talking about right and wrong article marketing, the way people are doing article marketing, and taking a simple analogy and turning it upside down.

                  --In 2008, were the majority of people positively or negatively effected by the stock market?

                  --Post Feb 24th, did the majority of people experience better or worse results from article marketing?

                  --In 2010, did real estate prices in the US go up or down?

                  You might have...

                  1) Made money in th stock market in 2008
                  2) Got more views on your articles
                  3) Made a ton of money flipping houses in 2010.

                  It doesn't change the overall results.
                  Fair point Dave. I guess when you do it right, changes are made and it makes it even better. You don't necessarily focus on those crashing around you.

                  I guess when the property market crashed, you went around telling everyone it'd crashed, I was still enjoying it. When the stock market crashed, you ran around saying it crashed, I was still cashing in and when the Algo hit EZA, you were saying it crashed, I was still minting it.

                  Might I also add that the stock market and the property market is ripe for making money, now the "99%" has gone. So yes it crashed but not for everyone or for long.

                  I agree with you but in a very different way.

                  Like I said, there's been no crash for me, so I don't focus on it.
                  Signature

                  Wibble, bark, my old man's a mushroom etc...

                  {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3508504].message }}
                  • Profile picture of the author Tony S
                    First I would just like to thank everyone that posted to this thread. All of the information here is very interesting as well as helpful in a big way.

                    I intend to sort through it all and find a resolution for me.

                    You all have been great thanks again.

                    Tony s.
                    Signature

                    "Give a person a fish they can eat for that day: teach them how to fish they can eat for their lifetime".

                    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3509676].message }}
                  • Profile picture of the author paulie888
                    Originally Posted by Richard Van View Post

                    Fair point Dave. I guess when you do it right, changes are made and it makes it even better. You don't necessarily focus on those crashing around you.

                    I guess when the property market crashed, you went around telling everyone it'd crashed, I was still enjoying it. When the stock market crashed, you ran around saying it crashed, I was still cashing in and when the Algo hit EZA, you were saying it crashed, I was still minting it.

                    Might I also add that the stock market and the property market is ripe for making money, now the "99%" has gone. So yes it crashed but not for everyone or for long.

                    I agree with you but in a very different way.

                    Like I said, there's been no crash for me, so I don't focus on it.
                    Excellent illustration, Richard. While the masses run around crying "woe is me" and throw up their hands in despair over this article marketing "slap", the present situation lets savvy marketers swoop in and absolutely dominate with their articles. Just by doing it the proper way and ignoring the incessant rants of the majority of marketers, they are presented with an enormous and incredible opportunity to capitalize on this temporary fallout in the market.

                    The same thing is happening in the real estate market here as well. While the average consumer is moaning about falling prices and how real estate is a lost cause, savvy speculators are capitalizing on the situation and raking in the big money by finding underpriced property and passing them on to wealthy investors, who realize that this is probably the best time in decades to invest in incredible real estate bargains.

                    Adopting the contrarian view in times of confusion and panic can be very profitable, if you know what you're doing. This applies equally to internet marketing as it does to other types of business transactions.

                    Paul
                    Signature
                    >>> Features Jason Fladlien, John S. Rhodes, Justin Brooke, Sean I. Mitchell, Reed Floren and Brad Gosse! <<<
                    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3511815].message }}
                • Profile picture of the author PatriciaJ
                  As some have stated, not all directories have taken hits. My sites are still getting traffic from directories that I've submitted articles to and syndication seems to be on the increase.

                  I don't think that article marketing is on the way out at all, it's just evolving and hopefully into something better than it evolved into during the last few years.

                  Before I closed my directory to allcomers I was declining a minimum of 80% of the articles. Some days checking them seemed futile. Imagine hour after hour and not one acceptable article, really disheartening. Hopefully the days of submitting crap to directories are coming to an end. Quality beats quantity any day and if such as EZA get rid of the dross then it will make it easier for publishers to find decent articles to syndicate.

                  So for all of you gloom and doomers who think article marketing is dying or declining carry on thinking that if you want, some of us know differently.
                  {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3509364].message }}
                • Profile picture of the author The Niche Man
                  Because of people's need to express themselves in writing, see their name in print and ... vent. Article marketing will always be with us, whether it remains as a valuable source of traffic, backlinks or even money.

                  A true writer has to write, pay or no pay.

                  A true writer's motto is ... "Write or Die!"
                  Signature
                  Download "Free 80 Page E-Book"
                  "201 Ways To Live Better On Less Money".
                  "Because The Easiest Way To Make Money is ... ... By Saving Some First!"
                  {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3519919].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author anthony2
      Very interesting....That why you always have more than
      one source of traffic.
      Signature
      "I Leveled The Playing Field And Removed Every Roadblock
      To Helping You Make Maximum Profits In Minimum Time"
      Click Here Now To Find Out How!
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3513152].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author NicoleBeckett
    It depends on what your idea of article marketing is.

    If you think that article marketing = paying a writer $2 to give you 250 words of barely-legible content that you publish, then shove it through a spinner to make it even less legible and publish it again, then, yes, article marketing is dead. But, then, that way of thinking didn't work even BEFORE the Panda update.

    However, if you think that article marketing = giving your target audience solid answers and solutions (based on research and facts, instead of just rambling off the top of your head), then, no, article marketing isn't going anywhere now or ever.

    The world wide web will always need good, informative content. If you can be someone that provides it, your strategy will never be "dead".
    Signature
    Sick of blending in with the crowd? Ready to stand ahead of the pack? The right content writing services can get you there...
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3507311].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Alfred Shelver
    Just a thought, thirty years ago how much content was needed? I figure you needed content for news papers magazines and book, Did I miss anything?

    The dawn and explosion of the internet has caused the need for content to grow exponentially just think about it. I see no significant change in the number of books, newspapers and magazines on shelves, and then there is the internet which needs content to to grow, and lots of it.

    So if there is always going to be a demand for content, people will always have needs and wants to fulfill. I cannot see how article marketing will ever be dead.

    As others have said, 'no value spewed out content flood marketing' may be dying , but offering real solutions and value, people will never tire of.
    Signature

    Help me give my children a better future gofund.me/xge53k8

    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3507384].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author entrepreneurjay
    It still works but it is dying in my opinion. If you have a new website, or blog than submitting articles is a necessity for backlinks, traffic in my opinion. But if your blog is established and you already have 100s of articles out there than there are better options. Press releases, posting on your own blog ( blog posts ), video marketing, etc...

    I personally do not submit very many articles nowadays because their are better options in my opinion. But my blogs are established and rank well in the serps. They are very time consuming, and do not produce the results they once did. Do they work? Yeah. Are there better options? Yeah!
    Signature

    Free Quick Start Guide To Creating A Profitable High Converting Sales Funnel That Makes Money. http://jaysonlinereviews.com/go/free...-sales-funnel/
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3507490].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author microunique
    Banned
    Yes I dont think that article marketing is dead yet
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3507612].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author mojojuju
    I think that the success of article marketing depends mainly on the literacy rate of the country in which your audience resides.

    For example, I was spending thousands of dollars a week to drive visitors from Mali to my article squeeze page with no success whatsoever.That's when my friend brought to my attention the fact that the literacy rate in Mali is 26%.

    FACE PALM!

    I realized that when your marketing to the illiterate, article marketing is effectively dead!

    my solution to the "article marketing is dead" problem in this case was to simply replace article marketing - with video marketing!

    If you're struggling with article marketing like I was, be smart and find out if your audience can read.
    Signature

    :)

    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3507989].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Vic Smith
    I am sure these Article sites will find a way to reclaim their rankings over time. There really is useful content in the sites and people will realize it.
    I think it will lead to a ranking system regulated by real people that will determine if the content is good and the good content will rise and win.

    Computers don't know crap!!!
    Signature

    Hi, check out my testimonials about my programming and software engineering management skills:
    http://you.want.to.know.warrior-vic.clikon.me/ Open to JVs. Please PM me on the Warrior Forum. http://www.linkedin.com/in/victorsmith Connection Email: Victors.LinkedIN.Connection@optechmarketing.com

    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3508147].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Vini289
    To me it was never really very effective...

    Anyway, years after the explosion, I believe (or at least I choose to believe) people already know Article websites are filled with people trying to sell you stuff...
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3508195].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author sarahberra
    No way!! Article marketing is here to stay. It's just changed. Focus on submitting articles to one site rather than submitting the same article to multiple sites. Focus on quality and select sites like Hub Pages, so that you can earn extra adsense revenue. Ezine was hit hard from all the google changes. Article marketing is not dead- It's just different now.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3508251].message }}
  • I like facebook and connecting with people on their. I do some article marketing (i get freelancers to do the work for me) very cheap. Just search easy outsource on google and the first result is the best.
    Signature
    Next time you're at a McDonald's Playplace and someone asks you, "Aww which one is yours?" Say, "I haven't picked one out yet..."

    Im selling 2 adwords accounts with $100 in each account for $30! $200 value! PM me only!
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3508295].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author ELK
      This is kind of a technical question about article marketing.

      Isn't it possible (though maybe not the most thorough way) to do article marketing without submitting to article directories? Perhaps to only solicit directly to people who would syndicate your work?

      Aren't directories simply a way to make this easier, not the base model altogether?

      One thing is for sure, there seem to be two very distinct interpretations of the term "article marketing". There seems to be an even bigger difference in "business health" of people doing either type.
      Signature

      Quality handcrafted PLR articles made by me, a mental health professional and freelance writer
      http://healthhomeplrsite.com/

      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3508391].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Natlex
    I still see articles ranking, they probably just need better content to be accepted and a few more backlinks than before.

    Personally, I still use articles as a source of backlinks (90%+ for my websites) and my rankings do not seem to have been affected.
    Signature

    ---> My blog on making niche sites & ranking them with SEO for a full time income since 2010 !<----

    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3508891].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author O0o0O
    I don't see what all the complaining is about. Just think if the giant sites aren't raking in the top spots anymore, then someone is. There is more opportunity for the everyday internet marketer to grab those top spots now that content farms have been devalued.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3508969].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author JohnMcCabe
      Originally Posted by inter123 View Post

      Everthing discussed here falls into the remit of "Internet Article Marketing". According to Wikipedia:

      Article marketing - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

      Article Marketing is "Internet technique to subtly advertise products and services via online article directories".

      On that basis Article Marketing has crashed. And where people are using other websites other then Article Directories, it falls into the category of some other form of Article Marketing. If I was to create a site for a Clickbank product with article that revolves around the product, I guess that is Article Marketing too.
      Originally Posted by inter123 View Post

      Absolutely.

      I'd rather trust what is on Wikipedia then what is on many of the websites out there. While the Warrior Forum is a fantastic place, I am sure most people agree there is a lot of misinformation here. And given there is a lot of people are obviously into Marketing, there is a lot of "spin doctoring" too.

      As stated in the quote above, if 99% of the people do article marketing through Article directories and that crashes then Article Marketing is in rude health.
      Both of you do realize, I hope, that Wikipedia is open for any jackwad with an agenda to edit any page to suit that agenda, right?

      Just because "it's in Wikipedia" does not make it factually accurate.

      It's like someone waving the Weekly World News, or some other supermarket rag, and proclaiming that Bat Boy must exist because 'they couldn't print it if it wasn't true'.

      Originally Posted by ELK View Post

      This is kind of a technical question about article marketing.

      Isn't it possible (though maybe not the most thorough way) to do article marketing without submitting to article directories? Perhaps to only solicit directly to people who would syndicate your work?

      Aren't directories simply a way to make this easier, not the base model altogether?

      One thing is for sure, there seem to be two very distinct interpretations of the term "article marketing". There seems to be an even bigger difference in "business health" of people doing either type.
      It's quite possible. It's how we did it before there were article directories.

      In their original concept, article directories were simply another channel where your content might be found. If you were a publisher, you went to a directory when you didn't have an article on hand to fill a particular 'hole', whether on a site or in a newsletter. If you found a writer you liked, you made contact, to try to get content directly and cut out the directory altogether.

      With that said, here's my take on the whole subject of this thread...

      Apropos of the "Farmer Update", what's happening to article marketers is similar to what happened to real farmers when the EPA started cracking down on chemical runoff a couple of decades ago.

      Many successful farmers changed tactics, from spraying manure across the landscape and hoping their crops would grow to using much smaller, pinpoint applications of fertilizer to cut down on the runoff. They got a bonus with increased crop yield and lower costs.

      If your idea of "article marketing" was spraying digital manure across article directories and any other site that would take them, this is your sign that it's time to change tactics or find something else to do.
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3509290].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author PatriciaJ
        Originally Posted by JohnMcCabe View Post

        If your idea of "article marketing" was spraying digital manure across article directories and any other site that would take them, this is your sign that it's time to change tactics or find something else to do.
        Best thing I've read all week, brilliant
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3509392].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author wpo1408
      Originally Posted by O0o0O View Post

      I don't see what all the complaining is about. Just think if the giant sites aren't raking in the top spots anymore, then someone is. There is more opportunity for the everyday internet marketer to grab those top spots now that content farms have been devalued.
      I agree, the directories have vacated a lot of top spots in the SE's and my traffic has increased by 30%, although I do not know how much of that is attributable to Panda and how much just because people are recovering financially after Christmas.
      CTR has not changed, which is to be expected.
      So, all in all. I'm happy with Panda.
      Signature
      Behind The Smile ~ the Story of Lek, a Bar Girl in Pattaya, Thailand ~
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3509710].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author pyrotechno
    not sure if it's still viable after the google search update
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3509475].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author inter123
      Sure just because it is in Wikipedia, it does not make it accurate. Likewise, just because something is stated here, it does not make it correct either. Everything simply comes down to what the individual wishes to believe.

      But, I beleieve the fact is, many people went about getting traffic through the use of article directories. Hence, for me, the definition of "Article Marketing" is the use of directories to receive traffic. But now the mode operation of "Article Marketing" needs to change and become something else if someone is to stay competetive in the market place.

      In many ways the (possible) death of the directories has raised the bar and made things more difficult. Perhaps, someone can point out how this is not the case. But I am assuming getting websites to accept your articles, having to make relationships with different sites and everything else is more difficult and time consuming then signing up to Ezine Article and submitting articles.

      Originally Posted by JohnMcCabe View Post

      Both of you do realize, I hope, that Wikipedia is open for any jackwad with an agenda to edit any page to suit that agenda, right?

      Just because "it's in Wikipedia" does not make it factually accurate.

      It's like someone waving the Weekly World News, or some other supermarket rag, and proclaiming that Bat Boy must exist because 'they couldn't print it if it wasn't true'.
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3509586].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author Richard Van
        Originally Posted by inter123 View Post

        Everything simply comes down to what the individual wishes to believe.

        But, I beleieve the fact is, many people went about getting traffic through the use of article directories. Hence, for me, the definition of "Article Marketing" is the use of directories to receive traffic. But now the mode operation of "Article Marketing" needs to change and become something else if someone is to stay competetive in the market place.

        In many ways the (possible) death of the directories has raised the bar and made things more difficult. Perhaps, someone can point out how this is not the case. But I am assuming getting websites to accept your articles, having to make relationships with different sites and everything else is more difficult and time consuming then signing up to Ezine Article and submitting articles.
        Oh where to start? Your definition is very one dimensional.

        Hence, for me, the definition of "Article Marketing" is the use of directories to receive traffic
        That's your definition of it. Like you say...

        Everything simply comes down to what the individual wishes to believe.
        It's also wrong. This was a model of article marketing that mainly popped it's head up in around 2005, long after the real purpose of article marketing and how many have been doing it successfully for some time, syndication existed. So the syndication model has been around much longer. So your definition and Wiki's definition is flawed. Heck, you could have even written Wiki's version for all I know.

        The reason so many people jumped on the bandwagon was because it was touted as a get rich quick thing, with lots of shiny toys to make it even quicker, products, bum marketing, spinners, mass submission tools etc etc. Because most people like shiny things, they ignored syndication, bought the duplicate content myth and made other people lots of money.

        How many books do you see on syndication? How many shiny toys to make it quicker? None, why? Because it's a successful business model, not get rich quick rubbish.

        But now the mode operation of "Article Marketing" needs to change and become something else if someone is to stay competetive in the market place.
        Why does article marketing need to be competitive? It's a model of business not a product. It is changing now, for the better too. So many people say "don't rely on Google", yet looking around it astounds me so many people have relied on directories and very mistakenly think the only use for them is to get (irrelevant) backlinks.

        In many ways the (possible) death of the directories has raised the bar and made things more difficult. Perhaps, someone can point out how this is not the case.
        Yes. By not relying on them in the first place.

        But I am assuming getting websites to accept your articles, having to make relationships with different sites and everything else is more difficult and time consuming then signing up to Ezine Article and submitting articles.
        It is more difficult and precisely the reason, as I stated earlier, everyone flocked to the shiny products. Everyone wants to make a "quick buck" and fails to realise that this is a business. At least with syndication, it's in your control, as opposed to relying on EZA to screw your career when Google move the goal posts.
        Signature

        Wibble, bark, my old man's a mushroom etc...

        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3511482].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author inter123
          I won't comment because all this is a little repetetive and rather monotonous (just see the comments in this thread).

          Originally Posted by Richard Van View Post

          Oh where to start? Your definition is very one dimensional.

          It's also wrong. This was a model of article marketing that mainly popped it's head up in around 2005, long after the real purpose of article marketing and how many have been doing it successfully for some time, syndication existed. So the syndication model has been around much longer. So your definition and Wiki's definition is flawed. Heck, you could have even written Wiki's version for all I know.

          It is all a question of being at the right place at the right time. If someone had started doing this sort of marketing (that is submitting to Ezine Articles) when it first started and pumped out a lot of articles, they could have made money.

          And with syndication, in what way are you in control? You are providing articles to other sites for them to publish. What is there to say they might not take it off, the site becomes redundant or even hit with a penalty from Google (it was not just article directories that took a hit from Google).

          Or by syndication, do you mean you own the websites themselves? Only then will one be in remotely close to being in control.

          I think what you need to realise is that, there is no such thing as being in control if you are relying on other people whether it is syndication, submitting to Article Directories or your own sites where traffic comes from third parties.

          It might be a little safer if you can get a list and do Article Marketing through email. I guess this is acceptable way to define Article Marketing since there is no universal definition of Article Marketing.


          Originally Posted by Richard Van View Post

          The reason so many people jumped on the bandwagon was because it was touted as a get rich quick thing, with lots of shiny toys to make it even quicker, products, bum marketing, spinners, mass submission tools etc etc. Because most people like shiny things, they ignored syndication, bought the duplicate content myth and made other people lots of money.

          How many books do you see on syndication? How many shiny toys to make it quicker? None, why? Because it's a successful business model, not get rich quick rubbish.

          Why does article marketing need to be competitive? It's a model of business not a product. It is changing now, for the better too. So many people say "don't rely on Google", yet looking around it astounds me so many people have relied on directories and very mistakenly think the only use for them is to get (irrelevant) backlinks.

          Yes. By not relying on them in the first place.

          It is more difficult and precisely the reason, as I stated earlier, everyone flocked to the shiny products. Everyone wants to make a "quick buck" and fails to realise that this is a business. At least with syndication, it's in your control, as opposed to relying on EZA to screw your career when Google move the goal posts.
          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3512417].message }}
          • Profile picture of the author Richard Van
            It is all a question of being at the right place at the right time. If someone had started doing this sort of marketing (that is submitting to Ezine Articles) when it first started and pumped out a lot of articles, they could have made money.
            Of course they could, back in the bum marketing day when this all started, they made quite a bit too.

            And with syndication, in what way are you in control? You are providing articles to other sites for them to publish. What is there to say they might not take it off, the site becomes redundant or even hit with a penalty from Google (it was not just article directories that took a hit from Google).
            I'm in control by forming relationships with sites Google likes, awards high PR and encourages. I don't wait for articles to be syndicated, I find the site owners and become friends with them. We have a good relationship. How much more in control can you get online? None of the authority sites I syndicate to have experienced any hits, on the contrary, they are doing better for it. These are not spammy content farms and crap sites Google has hit, they are the opposite. Highly relevant sites which Google likes. If they hit these sites, what would replace them? They already are the authority sites. Why would Google remove a site and replace it with a worse, less relevant one?

            Or by syndication, do you mean you own the websites themselves? Only then will one be in remotely close to being in control.
            No I don't own these sites. However as a result of the highly relevant authority backlinks I receive and my constantly updating my sites, they increase in the rankings and will eventually become authority sites too. It's a long term plan.

            I think what you need to realise is that, there is no such thing as being in control if you are relying on other people whether it is syndication, submitting to Article Directories or your own sites where traffic comes from third parties.
            I realise more than you think. There is a level of control I can get, far higher than those who rely on directories for "backlinks". I'd also add that this article syndication is just one small part of my online business. If it all stopped tomorrow, that's fine, I have many other parts to this business that will continue, including offline ventures. I also have several very large lists.

            I guess this is acceptable since there is no universal definition of Article Marketing.
            There's no universal definition because there are several ways you can do it.

            I agree you can't be in total control but you sure as heck can minimise your lack of control.
            Signature

            Wibble, bark, my old man's a mushroom etc...

            {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3512482].message }}
          • Profile picture of the author DireStraits
            Originally Posted by inter123 View Post

            And with syndication, in what way are you in control? You are providing articles to other sites for them to publish. What is there to say they might not take it off, the site becomes redundant or even hit with a penalty from Google (it was not just article directories that took a hit from Google).
            That is why the usually-intended goal of article syndication is to have each article republished across multiple sites - not just on a single one. If one or more sites that were previously home to your article go down, you will at least still have your backlinks and/or traffic from other instances of that same article published elsewhere.

            It's a beautiful thing.

            (Also note that most of the article marketers who talk about syndication don't ever refer to their search-engine rankings on other people's sites; the syndication-model article marketers won't be trying to rank their articles on someone else's site to begin with. Not only is that not part of their goal, it's actually something they often hope to avoid.)
            {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3512506].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author bahama
    New here so take my .02 for what its worth.

    I just started writing my own. Trying to make them useful and full of content. I put thought and some time into them. New to seo but treating seo and articles as I do investing;diversification. Cliche but I think its a good way to look at seo and writing articles etc. Articles are just one of many tools to use.
    Signature
    Steel Drum Music by my band Steel Tropics
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3509600].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author rjweng
    The Web is all about content so if you can produce high quality content either in the form of articles or video and taking SEO into account you will do just fine.

    As they all say, Content is King!
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3510956].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author jennywalton
    content = articles will always be relevant for search engines...
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3511409].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author dailysnatch
    I've been doing article marketing for quite some time now and it's only this past few months that my EZA articles highly lost their ranking and even some were permanently de-indexed. We are trying to find other options. We might make use of other high-tier article sites aside from Ezine. Google surely changed their algos.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3511434].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Charles Harper
    Article marketing is not on its way out, but you need to think outside of the box. If you are talking about using somebody else's article directory...I don't know how long that will be effective. However, relevant content can be used anyplace to rank sites and to be found on search engines.

    CT
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3511462].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author indiatext
    In my personal opinion it is an omnipotent tactice for an IM business. It can effectively generate good amount of leads.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3511503].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author sam12six
      There are 3 business models that people consider article marketing:

      1) The classic model that submits and promotes articles to sites that Google loves because they are easier to rank than your own brand new site.

      2) Submitting masses of articles for easy backlinks and traffic to your site.

      3) Submitting very well written content in hopes that syndication will build backlinks for you.


      The first is definitely hurting because a lot of the sites that Google loved have become victims of the most recent slap (but Google only slapped them because it loved them and they made it mad). Unless they can regain the trust Google once had for them, then this model is pretty dead (or at the very least, no longer an advantage over promoting your own site).

      The second is dead if those hurting sites succeed in cracking down and get their ex back (Google). I suspect they're busy reading all the articles they're deleting.

      The third will never die as long as the article directory concept exists on the internet.
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3511561].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author Richard Van
        Originally Posted by sam12six View Post

        3) Submitting very well written content in hopes that syndication will build backlinks for you.
        Hello Sam,

        I just wanted to add, that syndication is not just about backlinks. If I have an article on a trainspotting website that gets visited by tens of thousands of obsessed train spotters, I will also get a high level of extremely relevant and targetted customers all visiting my pre-sell page.

        Compare this to how many train spotters visit EZA each day looking for articles. Where does the trainspotter hang about? The authority site in the niche he's obsessed with, where all his friends are, or on an article directory?

        Backlinks is one part, traffic is another.
        The third will never die as long as the article directory concept exists on the internet.
        I agree with this but in actual fact, the syndication model will still exist, even if all the directories disappear today. I don't wait for people to find my articles, I find them.
        Signature

        Wibble, bark, my old man's a mushroom etc...

        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3511599].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author sam12six
    Yeah Richard, that was my bad. I had listed backlinks for both the second and third method then went back to add traffic because I forgot and put it in the wrong place.

    I think most people will agree that throwing low quality crap in as many directions as possible won't net you much direct traffic...
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3511685].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author Richard Van
      Yeah Richard, that was my bad. I had listed backlinks for both the second and third method then went back to add traffic because I forgot and put it in the wrong place.
      My apologies, I wasn't being rude, just adding to your otherwise very good comment.

      I think most people will agree that throwing low quality crap in as many directions as possible won't net you much direct traffic...
      I fully agree, a lot however, would probably, albeit wrongly, try and argue the point though!
      Signature

      Wibble, bark, my old man's a mushroom etc...

      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3511729].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Diver Doug
    I still don't know what to think about the whole algo change and how it affected EZA. I know that content is king, but it's suddenly so bloody hard to get an article of mine even published!! The main excuse is "Not enough original content", which is a load of crap when I look at other articles that are less than half the size of mine and barely legible


    Does anyone here have any recommendations on where to post articles if I'm trying to generate traffic more so than backlinks? I'm thinking of boycotting EZA just on principle, as they are really pissing me off lately (almost three weeks later, an article of mine STILL hasn't been published...so much for Platinum Membership!!)
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3511754].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author spectrecom
    Originally Posted by Tony S View Post

    Hi,
    I hope everyone is having a great day. I am new to the forum. I figure this is the best place to find a truthful answer to a question that has been on my mind for a minute now. That is can any one tell me the truth about article marketing, submitting articles to the directories? Is this still a good way to get traffic an back links to my web sites or simply a waste of time? I have been hearing from different sources that Article marketing is on it's way out. Is this true? if so, what are the alternatives for the online marketer?:confused:
    It's definitely be impacted by the latest update, but writing good quality content and submitting to article sites, will still work.

    Spinning articles and using submitters will not. And good. Who wants the Internet clogged up with unreadable rubbish?
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3511764].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author sam12six
    Yeah, it's a matter of perspective. For years it's been annoying to me that something on ezinearticles or associated content could get a good position simply because it was posted on those sites. Now that's changed and it's an opportunity to jump in and fill the void these guys are leaving as their content drops.

    It's like having building codes change. They're busy scrambling to get their 300 room hotel up to code and get their income back while a "little guy" has the chance to build a rental house quickly with the current codes and pick up the income they lost.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3511932].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author derekwong28
    Having been through a number of Google slaps, I just know how Google works too well

    You Ain't Seen Nothing Yet. This is just the beginning of a series of slaps in that direction.
    Signature

    Do not get between a wombat and a chocolate biscuit; you will regret it dearly!

    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3512042].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author arttse
    Why would a reputable/authority website want to publish syndicated content on their site?

    What is the benefit?

    If they want to give their uses a better experience why aren't they just linking to the original source?

    It makes no sense whatsoever why anyone would want to post syndicated content on their site? I have yet to read any valid reason.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3512413].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author Richard Van
      Arttse - Why would a reputable/authority website want to publish syndicated content on their site?
      Because they don't have the time or the money to make it them themselves? Maybe they're not good writers, maybe they don't want to pay out for articles? Did you read my trainspotting analogy above? Some people over the years have created nerdy sites that are highly relevant. They are hobby and enthusiast sites. Also as sales people/marketers, it shouldn't be too hard to convince these people why they need your content.

      If they want to give their uses a better experience why aren't they just linking to the original source?
      They can if they want, much better though when the site owner tells all his avid readers that Richard Van has another excellent piece of information they need to read. It sounds like you don't believe this happens. You do realise don't you, why article directories were originally made? I'll give you a clue - "Ezine Articles" - A place where Ezines could come and get articles for their site (syndication) that's why they are all called "directories", a directory of articles. This has been going on for over 10 years. I'm surprised you're still struggling to grasp the concept.

      It makes no sense whatsoever why anyone would want to post syndicated content on their site? I have yet to read any valid reason.
      It makes no sense to me, reading this forum, why this is so difficult to fathom. I think that's the reason you've never read a valid reason, you simply don't want to.
      Signature

      Wibble, bark, my old man's a mushroom etc...

      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3512520].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author arttse
        I was referring to an authority website - not any type of website.

        FYI an authority website is not lazy, and does not republish non original content 'verbatim'.

        You failed to properly answer my questions but good effort anyway.

        Originally Posted by Richard Van View Post

        Because they don't have the time or the money to make it them themselves? Maybe they're not good writers, maybe they don't want to pay out for articles? Did you read my trainspotting analogy above? Some people over the years have created nerdy sites that are highly relevant. They are hobby and enthusiast sites. Also as sales people/marketers, it shouldn't be too hard to convince these people why they need your content.

        They can if they want, much better though when the site owner tells all his avid readers that Richard Van has another excellent piece of information they need to read. It sounds like you don't believe this happens. You do realise don't you, why article directories were originally made? I'll give you a clue - "Ezine Articles" - A place where Ezines could come and get articles for their site (syndication) that's why they are all called "directories", a directory of articles. This has been going on for over 10 years. I'm surprised you're still struggling to grasp the concept.

        It makes no sense to me, reading this forum, why this is so difficult to fathom. I think that's the reason you've never read a valid reason, you simply don't want to.
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3512894].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author DireStraits
          Originally Posted by arttse View Post

          I was referring to an authority website - not any type of website.

          FYI a website becomes an authority because they are not lazy, do not republish non original content 'verbatim'.
          Some do, some don't. Are you seriously suggesting that not a single website with any reasonable degree of authority - from an SEO and/or human perspective - will ever republish syndicated content? They only use content to which they have the exclusive rights and/or which has been written in-house?

          Really?

          Have you looked up every article you've ever seen published, on any website, to ensure that it isn't also present and indexed on one or more others?

          Or are you just speculating, here, because you can't see yourself wanting to publish someone else's content (unless you had exclusive rights to it, perhaps?) if you ran an authority site? Or because you genuinely don't believe that human beings and fish - errr, I mean non-unique and unique content - can co-exist peacefully?
          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3512966].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author Richard Van
          Originally Posted by arttse View Post

          I was referring to an authority website - not any type of website.

          FYI an authority website is not lazy, and does not republish non original content 'verbatim'.

          You failed to properly answer my questions but good effort anyway.
          and does not republish non original content 'verbatim'.
          Sorry, it took me a while to pick myself up off the floor and stop laughing about that comment.

          I was talking about authority websites, so perhaps you didn't read my answer properly?

          All the sites I syndicate to, are authority sites in the niches I target, I know that because I specifically target them for that purpose. I want only authority sites.

          FYI I didn't say authority sites were lazy, that's you putting words in my mouth. They do publish non original content though, because I give it to them after publishing it to my site first, as do most successful article syndicators. Have a look for them here, don't take my word, ask them yourself. It'll help you better understand why they do it and what the benfits are.

          I answered your question fine, you failed to read the answer properly.
          Signature

          Wibble, bark, my old man's a mushroom etc...

          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3513133].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author celente
    cool here come the threads about the death of article marketing.

    Yes it is dead....stop doing it please. I do not need the competition....LOL
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3512683].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author Richard Van
      Originally Posted by celente View Post

      cool here come the threads about the death of article marketing.

      Yes it is dead....stop doing it please. I do not need the competition....LOL
      Oh no, this is about it being "on the way out", not dead, totally different

      I do agree though, being the 1462nd post on article marketing since the algo change, is starting to grate a bit.
      Signature

      Wibble, bark, my old man's a mushroom etc...

      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3512704].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author DavidTT
    now I aint sure about all this crap but there's a good ol' saying that goes:

    "When everyone is scared, its time to be greedy. When everyone's greedy, its time to be scared."

    Im sure while a lot people are freaking out over all this, some people are looking for the new way of doing things.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3513758].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author ankur sharma
    After all the drama, lets go back to basics, which is "Good content is king". If you got good content, google will love you.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3514138].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author JohnMcCabe
      Originally Posted by arttse View Post

      Why would a reputable/authority website want to publish syndicated content on their site?
      I can only answer for myself. I publish other peoples' content because it adds to the user experience on those sites. The content fits the subject of the site and provides value. It also demonstrates authority by recognizing the authority of others and validating it.

      Besides, in a way, it's like free outsourcing, although barter might be a closer concept. Both the writer and the publisher receive non-cash benefits in exchange for their own non-cash benefits.

      Originally Posted by arttse View Post

      What is the benefit?
      1. Satisfied users return for more.

      2. Happy users spend more time on site, view more of my offers, and sign up for my lists - and buy more of what I'm selling.

      3. If I make my choices of what to publish shrewdly, I get more trust and love from the search engines when they see good content on my site. Even if it isn't the original.

      Originally Posted by arttse View Post

      If they want to give their uses a better experience why aren't they just linking to the original source?
      For the same reason article directory marketers posted articles on directories. Having the complete text provides more spider food and better rankings.

      Originally Posted by arttse View Post

      It makes no sense whatsoever why anyone would want to post syndicated content on their site? I have yet to read any valid reason.
      I count 7 in this post...
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3518025].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author arttse
        Guest posting would add value to an authority site. Syndicated content would devalue an authority site.

        Its your choice what value you put on your site.

        Originally Posted by JohnMcCabe View Post

        I can only answer for myself. I publish other peoples' content because it adds to the user experience on those sites. The content fits the subject of the site and provides value. It also demonstrates authority by recognizing the authority of others and validating it.

        Besides, in a way, it's like free outsourcing, although barter might be a closer concept. Both the writer and the publisher receive non-cash benefits in exchange for their own non-cash benefits.



        1. Satisfied users return for more.

        2. Happy users spend more time on site, view more of my offers, and sign up for my lists - and buy more of what I'm selling.

        3. If I make my choices of what to publish shrewdly, I get more trust and love from the search engines when they see good content on my site. Even if it isn't the original.



        For the same reason article directory marketers posted articles on directories. Having the complete text provides more spider food and better rankings.



        I count 7 in this post...
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3519820].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author Alexa Smith
          Banned
          Originally Posted by arttse View Post

          Syndicated content would devalue an authority site.
          Are you going to adduce some evidence for this most remarkable and baffling assertion, or is it simply your own personal opinion?

          (But if you do manage to find any evidence for it, please don't pass it on to the Webmasters of any of the authority sites who are consistently so keen to syndicate my work, otherwise I'll be out of a living! ).
          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3519887].message }}
          • Profile picture of the author DireStraits
            Originally Posted by arttse View Post

            Guest posting would add value to an authority site. Syndicated content would devalue an authority site.

            Its your choice what value you put on your site.
            LOL. Okay, then ...

            Originally Posted by Alexa Smith View Post

            Are you going to adduce some evidence for this most remarkable and baffling assertion, or is it simply your own personal opinion?

            (But if you do manage to find any evidence for it, please don't pass it on to the Webmasters of any of the authority sites who are consistently so keen to syndicate my work, otherwise I'll be out of a living! ).
            Yeap.

            The more of arttse's posts I read on this subject, the more I believe he's just trying to provoke an argumentative response and perhaps doesn't even believe half of the stuff he's spouting, himself. Because, I mean, no-one - not even a "clueless/confused newbie" - could be innocently guilty of subscribing to and perpetuating such truly ridiculous, baseless assumptions as a result of their own ignorance ... right?

            Especially when the reality, which just happens to be in stark contrast to what he's claiming, requires little more than the application of a smidgen of common sense to be realised.
            {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3519984].message }}
            • Profile picture of the author arttse
              You are right. I made some comments which I now regret. Never intended to offend any members.

              Article syndication has many benefits including SEO benefits.
              Originally Posted by DireStraits View Post

              LOL. Okay, then ...



              Yeap.

              The more of arttse's posts I read on this subject, the more I believe he's just trying to provoke an argumentative response and perhaps doesn't even believe half of the stuff he's spouting, himself. Because, I mean, no-one - not even a "clueless/confused newbie" - could be innocently guilty of subscribing to and perpetuating such truly ridiculous, baseless assumptions as a result of their own ignorance ... right?

              Especially when the reality, which just happens to be in stark contrast to what he's claiming, requires little more than the application of a smidgen of common sense to be realised.
              {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3531900].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author JohnMcCabe
          Originally Posted by arttse View Post

          Guest posting would add value to an authority site. Syndicated content would devalue an authority site.

          Its your choice what value you put on your site.
          I made my pitch, and it bounced off a locked door. You've already made up your mind, so I'm not going to waste my time arguing with you.

          Paraphrasing the UNCF, "a closed mind is a terrible thing to waste..."
          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3520071].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author abbesnwk
    Banned
    just to answer the subject question...Yes
    I have a site that sells plr articles -- over 100k for 20$ and lately...the sales decreased like hell - it might be a sign...it worked well for 2 years
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3519996].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author GooglesMostWanted
    I find these types of threads funny because of the fact that I personally rank 6-7 websites per week through article marketing.

    Article marketing is not going away.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3520372].message }}

Trending Topics