Article Marketing: is the spin really necessary?

236 replies
Hi, guys!

I was just looking at Brad Callen's Article Submitter. (It looks like a great piece of software. There's a free and a paid version. You can find it via Google.) I think it would be useful in speeding up the process of article submission, but it has no spin option. So basically you have 600+ article directories, but he suggests that you send the same exact article to each one.

Wouldn't this cause a problem? I've heard a lot about duplicate content and the importance of making sure your spin is x% unique. How true is that?
#article #marketing #spin
  • Profile picture of the author Alexa Smith
    Banned
    Originally Posted by chrishonda View Post

    Wouldn't this cause a problem?
    No.

    Originally Posted by chrishonda View Post

    I've heard a lot about duplicate content
    If anyone has talked to you about duplicate content in this context, for myself, not only would I ignore whatever they said, but I'd also ignore any other "information" that same person gave you on any related topics, just in case all their "information" turns out to be based on urban myths.

    This isn't duplicate content. It's syndicated content.

    This issue's been discussed in detail in at least 100 threads here this year. (I've posted in at least 99 of them myself.)

    Originally Posted by chrishonda View Post

    and the importance of making sure your spin is x% unique. How true is that?
    It's utter nonsense - one of the very pervasive urban myths of internet marketing, lovingly promulgated and perpetuated by those with an interest in selling spinning software.

    Bear in mind, that whether you "spin" your content or not, all you'll get from an article directory in SEO terms is a non-context-relevant, PR-0 backlinks. Even before Google's recent algorithm change devalued the article directories still further, the authors of many leading SEO textbooks were saying that typically one would need something between 50,000 and 100,000 of those backlinks to confer the same link-juice as one relevant backlink from an authority site.

    The SEO value, in other words, is negligible.

    And "spinning" the content won't improve it at all. A given backlink on a given page of a given site (such as in an article directory) doesn't somehow magically improve in value by being attached to content which has been spun rather than simply submitted unchanged. Why on Earth should it?

    So if the instructions of this software are advising you submit "unspun" rather than "spun" they're totally correct: at least that way it will be only the "submission-time" that will be largely wasted rather than both the "submission-time" and the "spinning-time". :p

    This isn't article marketing. It's just article directory marketing; and that hasn't been a viable business model for most people for at least a year or two. If, instead, you get your articles syndicated to some relevant authority sites, now that's a whole different matter. That gives you targeted traffic and powerful backlinks and the ability to earn a living.

    I strongly recommend to you this excellent, closely related article from Annie Pottinger's blog.

    And don't forget always to publish your articles on your own site first and have them indexed there before submitting them anywhere else: article directories don't require unpublished content and there's no point in giving away the initial indexation-rights whose long-term, cumulative effect is so beneficial to your own site's SEO.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4292575].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author Robert Boduch
      Hi chrishonda...

      You can't go wrong by listening to Alexa. As she has already done many, many times, Alexa generously shares her substantial knowledge about writing and article marketing.


      "And "spinning" the content won't improve it at all. A given backlink on a given page of a given site (such as in an article directory) doesn't somehow magically improve in value by being attached to content which has been spun rather than simply submitted unchanged. Why on Earth should it? "


      Love it! This paragraph from Alexa speaks volumes.

      Robert
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4292752].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author Kurt
      Originally Posted by Alexa Smith View Post

      No.



      If anyone has talked to you about duplicate content in this context, for myself, not only would I ignore whatever they said, but I'd also ignore any other "information" that same person gave you on any related topics, just in case all their "information" turns out to be based on urban myths.

      This isn't duplicate content. It's syndicated content.

      This issue's been discussed in detail in at least 100 threads here this year. (I've posted in at least 99 of them myself.)



      It's utter nonsense - one of the very pervasive urban myths of internet marketing, lovingly promulgated and perpetuated by those with an interest in selling spinning software.

      Bear in mind, that whether you "spin" your content or not, all you'll get from an article directory in SEO terms is a non-context-relevant, PR-0 backlinks. Even before Google's recent algorithm change devalued the article directories still further, the authors of many leading SEO textbooks were saying that typically one would need something between 50,000 and 100,000 of those backlinks to confer the same link-juice as one relevant backlink from an authority site.

      The SEO value, in other words, is negligible.

      And "spinning" the content won't improve it at all. A given backlink on a given page of a given site (such as in an article directory) doesn't somehow magically improve in value by being attached to content which has been spun rather than simply submitted unchanged. Why on Earth should it?

      So if the instructions of this software are advising you submit "unspun" rather than "spun" they're totally correct: at least that way it will be only the "submission-time" that will be largely wasted rather than both the "submission-time" and the "spinning-time". :p

      This isn't article marketing. It's just article directory marketing; and that hasn't been a viable business model for most people for at least a year or two. If, instead, you get your articles syndicated to some relevant authority sites, now that's a whole different matter. That gives you targeted traffic and powerful backlinks and the ability to earn a living.

      I strongly recommend to you this excellent, closely related article from Annie Pottinger's blog.

      And don't forget always to publish your articles on your own site first and have them indexed there before submitting them anywhere else: article directories don't require unpublished content and there's no point in giving away the initial indexation-rights whose long-term, cumulative effect is so beneficial to your own site's SEO.
      Here's Google's definition:

      Duplicate content - Webmaster Tools Help

      Duplicate content generally refers to substantive blocks of content within or across domains that either completely match other content or are appreciably similar. Mostly, this is not deceptive in origin. Examples of non-malicious duplicate content could include:

      <snip>

      Syndicate carefully: If you syndicate your content on other sites, Google will always show the version we think is most appropriate for users in each given search, which may or may not be the version you'd prefer. However, it is helpful to ensure that each site on which your content is syndicated includes a link back to your original article. You can also ask those who use your syndicated material to use the noindex meta tag to prevent search engines from indexing their version of the content.
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4292810].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author mattlaclear
      Originally Posted by Alexa Smith View Post

      The SEO value, in other words, is negligible.
      Not true at all. If what you say were true my entire operation would be ineffective. As it is it grows exponentially from one quarter to the next. We're generating huge amounts of juice using pr0 links.

      I admire some of the posts you make here on WF. But this one is straight misinformation.
      Signature

      Free Webinar - 5 Steps to Getting Targeted Traffic
      Unlocking Your Website's Profit Potential: Quick and Easy Steps to Generating More Traffic and Sales - Learn More By Clicking Here

      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4293381].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author Alexa Smith
        Banned
        Originally Posted by mattlaclear View Post

        If what you say were true my entire operation would be ineffective.
        I don't agree with that at all, Matt - certainly not your entire operation.

        I've read (and with great interest) many of your posts here about how consistently you submit content to blog networks/site networks which you yourself own, and admired your technique of getting context-relevant backlinks by doing that.

        I'd far rather have relevant PR-0 backlinks than non-context-relevant PR-4 backlinks. To me, based on my own observation, what others have told/showed me, and what I've read in so many SEO textbooks, the issue of relevance far outweighs page-ranks. (And to be honest, I'm not exactly hurting from the fact that Google's Matt Cutts now pretty openly says the same thing, too).

        Originally Posted by mattlaclear View Post

        We're generating huge amounts of juice using pr0 links.
        I don't doubt that for a moment. But we both know (in my case, from other helpful threads to which you've kindly contributed) that some of them aren't "article-directory backlinks" as the meaning of that expression is being discussed in this thread.

        Originally Posted by mattward View Post

        Google is certainly more likely to index what it perceives as unique articles rather than identical ones in my experience.
        I suspect you may mean "to index in the main index, rather than in the supplemental index", rather than just "to index"?

        You're surely not suggesting, Matt, that - in your experience - syndicated articles are simply going un-indexed because they're syndicated rather than spun?!

        And equally, presumably you're not contending that a backlink in the supplemental index is worth any less than the same backlink in the main index? (I haven't even seen people actively promoting spinning software advancing that proposition ...) :confused:

        Originally Posted by Irham Dhani View Post

        if spinning doesn't necessary then what tools like the best spinner are used for?
        To make money from their promoters.

        Many of the urban myths of internet marketing are sustained by financial and/or emotional interests in their promotion and propagation.

        It's easier, for many, to make money in a gold rush by selling shovels than it is by digging. Of course there's nothing wrong with that, in itself, but it's wise, too, to be very aware that some of the most popular models of shovel on the market actually have no great history of successful usage, some are full of holes which are widening month-by-month, and some can even produce income only for the people selling them.

        The basis of article marketing's pretty simple to understand, really: it's about getting high-quality articles in front of well targeted traffic.

        Opinions can come and go - and they do, but on a factual level one thing's for certain, and it's seen and reinforced in this forum on an almost daily basis: people who are making the switch - as I did myself - from spinning and mass submission to syndication of quality articles are certainly not switching back.
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4293520].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author Matt Ward
          Originally Posted by Alexa Smith View Post

          I suspect you may mean "to index in the main index, rather than in the supplemental index", rather than just "to index"?

          You're surely not suggesting, Matt, that - in your experience - syndicated articles are simply going un-indexed because they're syndicated rather than spun?!

          And equally, presumably you're not contending that a backlink in the supplemental index is worth any less than the same backlink in the main index? (I haven't even seen people actively promoting spinning software advancing that proposition ...) :confused:
          I'm talking about mass article submission with software like AMR, etc. In my experience, blasting out one single article to all of the sites supported by something like AMR will result in a very poor indexation rate overall. I don't claim to be an SEO wizard, but I use Scrapebox to check the number of articles found indexed at all in Google, which is a figure that ultimately ends up being pretty poor. I'm not talking about supplemental; I'm talking about it not being indexed at all. If I submit a nice, hand-spun (NOT software-spun) I get a considerably higher indexation rate.

          I do totally agree with you that people who push their spinning software (and a lot of other SEO software, services, etc) do it knowing full well that it's almost completely useless. There's also a lot of customers of this software that will swear by it, but not talk about actual results. It's not hard to create something that spins and whirs and lights up and does nothing else, but gets a ton of praise from people because it appears to do something, but no one is sure exactly what.

          I don't think spinning is useless, depending on why you're doing it, but I wouldn't recommend specialty spinning software in any case. Most of the time you end up with gibberish-reading articles if you use software, and if you put in the effort to make sure that doesn't happen then you may as well have just spun it by hand. I'm just saying, in my experience Google is much more willing to index stuff that seems to be unique. Maybe that doesn't mean it WON'T index it, but it sure seems harder to accomplish it. Or I could be completely wrong, I don't know.
          Signature
          "Keep moving forward."
          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4298225].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author Kurt
          Originally Posted by Alexa Smith View Post

          And equally, presumably you're not contending that a backlink in the supplemental index is worth any less than the same backlink in the main index? (I haven't even seen people actively promoting spinning software advancing that proposition ...) :confused:
          Actually, the burdon of proof should be on you to prove that links on pages count as much as links on pages in the main index, as this is your contention.

          I'm not saying you are right or wrong, only that I want to know how you qualify this statement.


          Opinions can come and go - and they do, but on a factual level one thing's for certain, and it's seen and reinforced in this forum on an almost daily basis: people who are making the switch - as I did myself - from spinning and mass submission to syndication of quality articles are certainly not switching back.
          And I've never figured out why it's either/or and not BOTH???
          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4301587].message }}
          • Profile picture of the author Alexa Smith
            Banned
            Originally Posted by Kurt View Post

            Actually, the burdon of proof should be on you to prove that links on pages count as much as links on pages in the main index, as this is your contention.
            Wrong.

            I made no contention.

            I asked someone else for clarification of what he had said.

            Originally Posted by Kurt View Post

            I'm not saying you are right or wrong, only that I want to know how you qualify this statement.
            I didn't make a statement: I asked a question.

            One day, under other circumstances, if/when it's convenient for both of us (and of course I acknowledge that it would necessarily be very time-consuming indeed), I'd enjoy discussing the entire issue with you in detail, Kurt, either in public or perhaps even better in private, because Paul Myers, whose views I respect greatly, has indicated to me his opinion that we may actually be able to learn a great deal from one another. And that does appeal to me, in principle. But I'm willing to do that only if and when (a) you declare openly your own financial interests in this subject, and (b) you undertake to respond constructively, methodically and point-by-point rather than ignoring 97% of the content of such threads in the interest of seizing upon the other 3% which possibly enables you to produce a response that the less experienced readers here might regard as in some sense salvaging the reputation of "spinning". Nice try, though ...
            {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4301705].message }}
            • Profile picture of the author Kurt
              Originally Posted by Alexa Smith View Post

              Wrong.

              I made no contention.

              I asked someone else for clarification of what he had said.



              I didn't make a statement: I asked a question.
              On this thread you didn't make the contention...However, on other threads you have contended that links on doop pages and pages in the sup index count as much as other links.

              Personally if I were Mr. Google, if I determined a page was a doop, including the links, I wouldn't count the links as much. I have zero proof of this, it's only what I consider basic common sense. Why count dupicate links the same as "unique" links?

              One day, under other circumstances, if/when it's convenient for both of us (and of course I acknowledge that it would necessarily be very time-consuming indeed), I'd enjoy discussing the entire issue with you in detail, Kurt, either in public or perhaps even better in private, because Paul Myers, whose views I respect greatly, has indicated to me his opinion that we may actually be able to learn a great deal from one another. And that does appeal to me, in principle. But I'm willing to do that only if and when (a) you declare openly your own financial interests in this subject, and (b) you respond constructively, methodically and point-by-point rather than ignoring 97% of the content of such threads in the interest of seizing upon the other 3% which possibly enables you to produce a response that the less experienced readers here might regard as in some sense salvaging the reputation of "spinning". Nice try, though ...
              First, I don't need to do anything to meet your approval, especially considering the lack of any "payoff" for me. And it's a bit egotistical that I have to prove anything to meet your "standards", when I have zero interest in the offer.

              But, I'll play along to a degree. I have no financial interest in spinning in the context you are using. I do sell some software that can be used for my own method of spinning. I sell it as part of a package that right now is $17. It makes up about 1% of the total content of that package. So let's call it less than 17 cents per sale.

              However, even if I sold spinning software a my #1 source of income, your "argument" is nothing more than an ad hominem fallacy. Whether or not someone makes money from spinners doesn't make their points invalid, although you've used this "reasoning" on more than one occasion. And let's not discount EGO as a motivating force, either. Not all motives are financial...Some make posts just to feed their ego.

              And the 3% which you claim I comment on, is what I believe to be poor SEO advice by someone that's admitted they aren't an SEO expert. I don't second guess your opinion or any one elses' on article syndication. I do often have very sincere questions about your SEO "advice".

              Something else you often ignore is, there's plenty of users of spinners that are still having success from spinning and article submitting. Your entire "sample" is only from those on this forum that share your views, and discounts experiences and advice shared on the Warrior SEO forum as well as virtually every other SEO forum. In other words, you link to threads that agree with your own opinions and totally discount opinions of others with far more SEO experience that you have.

              BTW, anyone is welcome to join my Bombsquad and get my advice there. I don't do "private" for free, especially for non-members.

              I answered your questions...Now have the same respect you demand and answer mine: Why can't a person write and syndicate "quality" articles, and also use article directory submission for SEO purposes?
              {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4301889].message }}
              • Profile picture of the author Kurt
                Originally Posted by Kurt View Post

                But, I'll play along to a degree. I have no financial interest in spinning in the context you are using. I do sell some software that can be used for my own method of spinning. I sell it as part of a package that right now is $17. It makes up about 1% of the total content of that package. So let's call it less than 17 cents per sale.
                For the sake of accuracy, I should update this, as my last 2 WSOs did each contain a little about spinning. However, I didn't use spinning as a sales point for on, but for a Twitter related WSO, I do offer spun text for some Tweets.

                One thing that's important to note is that I almost always spin NOUNS, not adjectives, which is what most people that spin do. One reason for this is, most search queries are for nouns. The other main reason is, I want to work in as many secondary keywords as possible.

                So, for example if I have content about camping, I want to work in as many nouns concerning camping equipment, brand names and camp grounds as possible.

                I also use spinning (in this context) to break up n-grams and text vectors, which I believe Google uses to determine doop content, as well as to add some diversity in things like anchor text, URLs, article titles, etc.

                I'll post some of my other report here, so people can judge on their own my concepts of spinning. The info below is part of a report War Room members can get there.


                The Power of And & Or.
                When keyword weaving, your first inclination may be to take a sentence like:


                When training a big dog, you always want to have it under control.


                And add a keyword like:


                When training a big dog, such as a great dane, you always want to have it under control.



                Let's take it a step further and add "or" plus another keyword:


                When training a big dog, such as a great dane or german shepard, you always want to have it under control.


                At first this may not seem like a big deal, but it is. Let's say you have a list of 20 different breed of big dogs...AND you plan on writing and submitting relevant articles to various directories.

                If you rotate through each big dog breed keyword and use it once, your sentence has 20 different possibilities.

                But if you divide them into two groups, one group has 9 breeds and the other 11 breeds, then you have 99 possible keyword combinations using the same number of keywords. (9 x 11 = 99)

                And keyword combos are the secret sauce for getting traffic. Instead of having the 20 different versions of a sentence, one for each big dog breed, we know have 99 combos. And this is still only using the same 20 keywords.

                Also, as the numbers increase, the results become more dramatic. Let's say you have a list of the 50 US states. If you use just one at a time in a sentence you will have 50 possibilities. However, if you split them into two different lists of 25 each, you now have 625 possible combos (25 x 25 = 625) using the same total of 50 keywords:


                I'm looking for a job in either Oregon or Utah, because I have friends there I can live with.


                This is an important factor because we want to get as many of our secondary keywords onto our pages as possible. Not only does using the "and/or" strategy double the use of individual keyword phrases, it also can dramatically increase the different combinations of keywords used, a very valuable tactic when getting traffic from the SEs.

                The "and/or" method is an excellent strategy for getting brand names (buyer words) into your content, posts and articles.

                Let's say you will be writing an article concerning "How to Save Money on a New Car" and want to submit it to various article directories. Using the "and/or" method, you can work in tons of keyword combos:


                No matter if you're looking for an 2011 Chevrolet Equinox or a new Ford F 150 pickup, our tips will help you save a ton of cash.




                No matter if you're looking for an 2011 Hyundai Equus or a new 2012 Dodge Durango , our tips will help you save a ton of cash.


                You should be able to see the power of using "and/or", as it not only doubles the keywords you use in a single document, but it greatly increases the number of keyword COMBOS, which increase chances for traffic, as well as create more "uniqueness".

                The Power of Prime Numbers - Prime numbers are numbers that can only be divided by 1 and itself and the result be a whole number. This gives them some special properties when considering the number of potential combinations. This means if we put just a little thought into how many keywords we use together with other keywords we can greatly explode the number of keyword combinations.

                It depends on how your particular software handles spinning whether or not using Prime Numbers will be effective...If it's truly random, then it's OK to have both lists of equal size and prime numbers won't matter. However, if your software uses a sequential process, using prime numbers becomes very potent.

                Instead of trying to explain more about the math, I can show you better than I can tell you. Let's say I have two lists of keywords that I want to spin using the most potential combinations of phrases.

                Below is a list of prime numbers from 3 - 200:
                3 5 7 11 13 17 19 23 29 31 37 41 43 47 53 59 61 67 71 73 79 83 89 97 101 103 107 109 113 127 131 137 139 149 151 157 163 167 173 179 181 191 193 197 199

                Basically, when you're getting ready to spin you'll want to create your list of alternatives so they contain a number of keywords equal to a prime number.

                In our 50 US states example, since 25 isn't a prime number, and using the and/or strategy, we will want to have a list of:
                23 States and/or 29 States

                Yep...That equals 52 states. In this example, you'll want to take two of your "better" keywords (states) and make another version of them. For example:

                CaliforniaSouthern CaliforniaNew YorkUpstate New YorkUsing this method, we have made it so "California" and "New York" will be used twice as much as the other keywords. This is called "weighting" and we want to try to use our better keywords more often when possible.

                And since we're using two lists of states using prime numbers, instead of just 50 keyword variations, we now have 667 versions. (23 x 29 = 667). Not only does this give us many more keyword combos, it also helps make pages more "unique".

                I understand this may not make sense to many readers. However, it's an important concept that utilizes more combinations and adds uniqueness, and it's pretty easy to do even if you don't fully understand why.
                {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4302220].message }}
              • Profile picture of the author Alexa Smith
                Banned
                Originally Posted by Kurt View Post

                I have zero proof of this, it's only what I consider basic common sense. Why count dupicate links the same as "unique" links?
                First, they're not "duplicate links" or "unique links". They're "links attached to unique content" or "links attached to syndicated content". A subtle but very relevant distinction.

                Secondly, why and how should a search engine distinguish between the two? Or even want to?

                Thirdly, members here who have worked on search engine algorithms say that they don't, shouldn't, wouldn't, couldn't, and so on.

                Fourthly, all the standard SEO textbooks I've read (and that's quite now a lot, because I've been trying, over the last year, to educate myself rather better on this subject, now that I've worked out that the "quality-controlled", "peer-reviewed", orthodox publications on the subject are so much more reliable than 99% of the stuff one reads about it online), say the same.

                Fifthly, all my own experience, as well as that of others with whom I've discussed it, point in the same direction.

                Since you ask.

                Originally Posted by Kurt View Post

                First, I don't need to do anything to meet your approval, especially considering the lack of any "payoff" for me.
                Oh well ... I tried.

                Having nothing to promote/sell, myself, on this subject, I'd have appreciated and (as I explained) been willing to learn something from an honest discussion based on integrity.

                Originally Posted by Kurt View Post

                I have zero interest in the offer.
                A shame - but fair enough - I was just offering, really following Paul Myers' observations to me. But understood and accepted, of course.

                Some people are instinctively interested in the potential for learning something they didn't know; others, apparently, have "zero interest in the offer".

                Don't worry - I won't keep asking: you made your point clearly and I heard it, and will remember it.

                Originally Posted by Kurt View Post

                I answered your questions
                I didn't ask you any.

                You still seem - dare I say "increasingly"? - to have a little difficulty distinguishing between statements and questions, here ...

                Originally Posted by Kurt View Post

                Now have the same respect you demand and answer mine: Why can't a person write and syndicate "quality" articles, and also use article directory submission for SEO purposes?
                No reason that I know of, other than the fact that one of them has no significant SEO value for most people, for all the explanations so many article marketers here offer on a daily basis for article directory marketing to have been declining over the last couple of years, for directory backlinks to be non-context-relevant, PR-0 backlinks, for it being a bit silly and wasteful to put any effort at all into promoting other people's sites rather than your own, and for the other reasons which you know as well as I do that I could illustrate with links to a dozen other threads none of which you'd actually click on because you've just clarified so expressly that you have "zero interest" in trying to learn anything. :rolleyes:

                Sorry if I sound unympathetic to that stance: I do actually appreciate, given your financial interest in spinning, how very fed up you must be of seeing so many people successfully making their livings from article marketing decrying spinning over and over and over again.

                It's very apparent indeed that most people who fail at "article marketing" tend to fail in more or less the same way, and it's a way broadly characterised by (a) depending on article directories for traffic and backlinks and (b) using "spinning" and/or "mass-submission" software.

                You can be sure, too, whenever you see one of the ever-increasing plethora of threads we regularly have appearing here with titles like "Article Marketing Doesn't Work Any More" or "I'm Not Sure About Article Marketing Any More" (we've all noticed those, right?), that the person starting it off has been doing those things.

                We see that evidenced here unambiguously, typically several times every week. This is simply factual.
                There are reasons for that.

                Others - having found something far more beneficial - have largely turned their backs on that. Especially after Google's recent update - even though many of us regarded it as "too little, too late" - has finally knocked the SEO value of the article directories for six - as even their owners have so openly and repeatedly commented.

                Too little, too late, for some of us, perhaps - but on a brighter note, Google does say pretty openly that "there's more coming along soon, from where that one came from".
                {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4302285].message }}
                • Profile picture of the author Matt281
                  Alright I've looked at enough posts that I'm going to give article syndicating a shot. I'm still going to submit backlink articles to related blogs, but I'm going to try to incorporate syndication was well.

                  I'm still pretty new to this, so if anyone could answer a few of these questions I'd be eternally grateful =)

                  1. Alexa, you mentioned that "relevance" comes from related keywords on the page, which I sort of figured from common sense. However, I'm unclear on exactly what constitutes the "page" which determines relevance. What actually counts? If I do a post on cholesterol, for example, and there's categories on the sidebar about heart health, is that going to count as relevance? What about other articles before and after it on the blog? How to I determine the approximate relevance of the site (I know it's still guesswork for the most part).

                  2. For article syndication, it sounds like I should begin by submitting the articles I already have on my sites to EZA (1-5 a day), then posting them on GoArticles and/or Article Dashboard after they're accepted on ezine. After that I should focus on generating larger articles with very high quality content (the ones I already have are ~400 words and high quality) and doing the same thing. Is that correct? Is there another important part of this process that I'm missing?

                  3. I was under the impression that EZA didn't accept duplicate content, am I wrong about this?

                  4. I gather from the posts I've read that as long as your content is indexed first, you won't have to worry about duplicate competition in the rankings. Is that true? And why is that? ---Also, is there any reason not to also submit the duplicate content to 5-10 other article directories?

                  5. How should the resource box look? Do I simply link to 2 other articles (not the one posted) on the same website? Is there anything else? Should the title be the same as on my website?

                  Sorry, a lot of questions. I can't tell how helpful you guys (alexa and other people who's posts I've read) have been.

                  Thanks!
                  {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4303417].message }}
                  • Profile picture of the author Alexa Smith
                    Banned
                    Originally Posted by Matt281 View Post

                    If I do a post on cholesterol, for example, and there's categories on the sidebar about heart health, is that going to count as relevance?
                    I think, again, nobody can answer with certainty and confidence. My own (pretty firm) opinion is that the answer's "yes". I'll be interested to see others' replies.

                    Originally Posted by Matt281 View Post

                    What about other articles before and after it on the blog? How to I determine the approximate relevance of the site (I know it's still guesswork for the most part).
                    My answers to this are unhelpful to others (experience has taught me) because I'm not a Wordpress user, and there are considerations about pages/posts/stuff which are different in Wordpress from the system I use on all my own money sites. I can't help you there; sorry.

                    Originally Posted by Matt281 View Post

                    2. For article syndication, it sounds like I should begin by submitting the articles I already have on my sites to EZA (1-5 a day), then posting them on GoArticles and/or Article Dashboard after they're accepted on ezine.
                    You can do this in any order you like.

                    Nothing to gain by waiting for EZA acceptance before submitting to other article directories. But equally no reason not to do it that way round, if it suits you.

                    Originally Posted by Matt281 View Post

                    After that I should focus on generating larger articles with very high quality content (the ones I already have are ~400 words and high quality) and doing the same thing. Is that correct? Is there another important part of this process that I'm missing?
                    "Resource Box City".

                    You may need to "fiddle with the end" (as it were), if you want (for example) to finish the article in the resource box (a nice trick, I think) and add something suitable.

                    Originally Posted by Matt281 View Post

                    3. I was under the impression that EZA didn't accept duplicate content, am I wrong about this?
                    Completely.

                    They invite and welcome it.

                    "Syndicated content", it is - not "duplicate content".

                    All 1,350+ of my EZA articles were originally published on my own sites prior to EZA submission.

                    This long and very helpful thread will interest you a lot.

                    And this very much shorter one might, too.

                    Originally Posted by Matt281 View Post

                    4. I gather from the posts I've read that as long as your content is indexed first, you won't have to worry about duplicate competition in the rankings. Is that true? And why is that?
                    In the long term, your site will be the cumulative, net SEO beneficiary of doing it that way round. The long thread mentioned above explains this in some detail.

                    The theory is that the syndicated copies are indexed in Google's supplemental index (the backlinks still count, just the same!). The reality is that that happens about 80% of the time, and the other maybe 20% of the time they're indexed separately in the main index (I'm sure that's not Google's intention but it's the outcome).

                    Again, be clear that this isn't "duplicate content" for SEO purposes. It's "syndicated content".

                    And here's a really good, really helpful, closely related short article from Annie Pottinger's blog, highly recommended indeed, which answers a couple of your questions above. "Best link of the day, there!"

                    Originally Posted by Matt281 View Post

                    Also, is there any reason not to also submit the duplicate content to 5-10 other article directories?
                    Just total "lack of benefit", for me. No point in submitting to any article directories from which my articles can't/won't be syndicated, and the backlinks are almost worthless. But no specific reason not to, if you really want to.

                    I admit that I spent a year submitting all my articles to 7/8 different directories, but never benefitted from doing so, and have cut back to 1 or 2, now. (And I originally started off mass-submitting to many hundreds, I'm embarrassed to admit, until I learned better ).

                    Originally Posted by Matt281 View Post

                    5. How should the resource box look?
                    Big subject.

                    It depends whether you're "writing for clicks" or "writing for syndication".

                    Explained in this post, I think (the entire thread is good).

                    Originally Posted by Matt281 View Post

                    Do I simply link to 2 other articles (not the one posted) on the same website?
                    Eew, well ... you can do that, if that's really where you want to send the traffic. I admit I wouldn't dream of it, myself. I want to send to the traffic to my landing page. I always link to my landing page. If I have two links to play with (as one does at EZA), I might also link to one other inner page of the same site (but it won't often be another article, even so).

                    Originally Posted by Matt281 View Post

                    Should the title be the same as on my website?
                    Doesn't matter, really. I don't bother changing them now, because I've put quite a lot of thought into writing the titles (title-writing is really "copywriting", not "content-writing"!) and don't want to have to repeat it.

                    Originally Posted by Matt281 View Post

                    Sorry, a lot of questions.
                    Not at all. Sorry, it's late at night here and I've short-changed you on your "resource box question" because it's a big subject. Try the search function, looking for threads in this section of the forum with the word "resource" in their titles only, maybe? I know there are some good "resource box threads" knocking about ...
                    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4303584].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author myob
        Originally Posted by mattlaclear View Post

        We're generating huge amounts of juice using pr0 links.
        What Matt has not disclosed is that his "operation" is a service submiting massive amounts of spun articles ensonced with keywords to his own blog/site network. Such a method is certainly far beyond the ability of any article marketer to compete against the many thousands of required submissions.

        I have a syndicated network of 25,000 outlets and most of them have page ranks that any SEO marketer would envy. However, even all of those backlinks are ineffective for ranking in the extremely competitive niches where I market to. But the direct traffic from real live eyeballs beats out the competition within these niches where the heavy hitters are entrenched high in the SERPs.

        Using the model of article writing for syndication has far more advantages than trying to write for the search engines. Backlinks are just the side benefit of quality writing. It does not take many articles at all to level the playing field in any competitive market when the power of syndication, leveraging your efforts over many outlets, is fully understood. The learning curve for syndication is not anywhere near as steep as it is for SEO.
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4293709].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author chrishonda
          Thanks for that, myob! I was actually just coming back to ask Matt about the premise of his system. But this makes sense. I'm just so surprised that everything that I've been reading and learning has focused more on article directory marketing with spun articles and mass submissions. I clearly need to dig a little deeper! That's why I love the forum!
          Signature
          Failure will never overtake me if my determination to succeed is strong enough! --Og Mandino
          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4293736].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author mattlaclear
          Originally Posted by Alexa Smith View Post

          I don't agree with that at all, Matt - certainly not your entire operation.

          I've read (and with great interest) many of your posts here about how consistently you submit content to blog networks/site networks which you yourself own, and admired your technique of getting context-relevant backlinks by doing that.

          I'd far rather have relevant PR-0 backlinks than non-context-relevant PR-4 backlinks. To me, based on my own observation, what others have told/showed me, and what I've read in so many SEO textbooks, the issue of relevance far outweighs page-ranks. (And to be honest, I'm not exactly hurting from the fact that Google's Matt Cutts now pretty openly says the same thing, too).
          Most SEO textbooks are extremely outdated. Even our own backlinking system evolves every three months or so to something that continues to work effectively. I'm sure every one of the authors of those books would agree with me on that point too.

          But the bottom line about seo is this:

          All backlinks count for page rankings. Even no follows. That's why so many people get indignant when someone bashes a system they know is working for them.

          So what experts can we believe regarding SEO? I say all of them. Except Matt Cutts. HE is nothing more than a paid spokesperson meant to deceive would be seo'ers. IMHO that is.

          Originally Posted by myob View Post

          What Matt has not disclosed is that his "operation" is submiting massive amounts of spun articles ensonced with keywords. Such a method is certainly far beyond the ability of any article marketer to compete against the many thousands of required submissions.

          I have a syndicated network of 25,000 outlets and most of them have page ranks that any SEO marketer would envy. However, even all of those backlinks are ineffective for ranking in the extremely competitive niches where I market to. But the direct traffic from real live eyeballs beats out the competition within these niches where the heavy hitters are entrenched high in the SERPs.

          Using the model of article writing for syndication has far more advantages than trying to write for the search engines. Backlinks are just the side benefit of quality writing. It does not take many articles at all to level the playing field in any competitive market when the power of syndication; leveraging your efforts over many outlets, is fully understood. The learning curve for syndication is not anywhere near as steep as it is for SEO.
          In a perfect world you could generate traffic from the se's as well as the directories. But as it is marketers are forced to decide which traffic source they want to go after.

          Our system generates close to 500k of article links a day on our network. We can aim that at any combination of keywords and urls that we desire. Which in my opinion has taken the quality v. quantity crew such as yourself right out of contention on the serps.

          While the quantity v. quality crowd that I belong to will never receive traffic from the directories directly that we submit to.

          So too bad neither side gets to have their cake and eat it too.
          Signature

          Free Webinar - 5 Steps to Getting Targeted Traffic
          Unlocking Your Website's Profit Potential: Quick and Easy Steps to Generating More Traffic and Sales - Learn More By Clicking Here

          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4293796].message }}
          • Profile picture of the author chrishonda
            Okay. So just pick a side and go with it, huh? And always keep learning. I can definitely do this!
            Signature
            Failure will never overtake me if my determination to succeed is strong enough! --Og Mandino
            {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4293910].message }}
            • Profile picture of the author AnniePot
              Originally Posted by chrishonda View Post

              Okay. So just pick a side and go with it, huh? And always keep learning. I can definitely do this!
              Chris

              You may find this WSO useful. It certainly contains some gems of information and it's only $5. I recommend it, as do a number of other Warriors - Brad Gosse, for example.

              http://www.warriorforum.com/warrior-...s-se-nuke.html
              {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4294086].message }}
              • Profile picture of the author chrishonda
                Originally Posted by AnniePot View Post

                Chris

                You may find this WSO useful. It certainly contains some gems of information and it's only $5. I recommend it, as do a number of other Warriors - Brad Gosse, for example.

                http://www.warriorforum.com/warrior-...s-se-nuke.html
                Thanks for the suggestion, Annie! And to everyone else, I'm still learning from the discussion so thanks some more!
                Signature
                Failure will never overtake me if my determination to succeed is strong enough! --Og Mandino
                {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4295161].message }}
              • Profile picture of the author VeronicaD
                Hey Annie, just wanted to pop in here and say thanks. I am glad you found it helpful and that you think it was worth sharing with others.

                As for duplicate content... there's no "penalty". It's just that Google will only show so many results of the same thing. You aren't punished other than if they think that where your version appears is less credible (less authority, less backlinks, newer, etc...) you'll get lost in the 'omitted results'

                As for me, I use original articles for each publishing.



                Originally Posted by AnniePot View Post

                Chris

                You may find this WSO useful. It certainly contains some gems of information and it's only $5. I recommend it, as do a number of other Warriors - Brad Gosse, for example.

                http://www.warriorforum.com/warrior-...s-se-nuke.html
                Signature

                Contact me if you need to!

                {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4297769].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author ryanjm
          Originally Posted by myob View Post


          Using the model of article writing for syndication has far more advantages than trying to write for the search engines. Backlinks are just the side benefit of quality writing. It does not take many articles at all to level the playing field in any competitive market when the power of syndication, leveraging your efforts over many outlets, is fully understood. The learning curve for syndication is not anywhere near as steep as it is for SEO.
          Depending on what kind of business you run, this could go either way. Your idea of writing for syndication requires good writing skills, and a narrow focus on a particular niche that you are knowledgeable about. What if you're doing SEO for a local dentist? Lawyer? Maybe I've got 100 niche sites. Am I going to crank out real-world-reader quality articles for all of those?

          Instead, if I purchase a few hundred domains, and then maybe 60 or so high PR domains, I can spend way less time writing content and much more time setting up the infrastructure that will allow me to link and boost my rankings on auto-pilot. While you toil away as a writer, I press a few buttons and achieve the same effect. That's how you scale up.

          The other benefit is that I can now sell my services to those who also would like to boost their ranking. Since it requires almost no time on my part and costs me nothing, I can now link to other people's sites using my network as well. I also monitor rankings and learn the most effective means to boost sites, and that skill itself has value. Plus my network has value if I ever wanted to liquidate assets.

          So I would say that everyone has their own perspective on this, and we are all limited in some way by our own understanding of what works for us. For me, I would take article writing for SEO any day simply because there's almost no way I can build up the highly diverse network of contacts I would need to syndicate the wide range of article topics I would write about. It's just not even realistically possible. Add in the other things I mentioned, and I'll take the risk of not having syndication in exchange for maximum flexibility, scalability, and developing a valuable skillset.

          p.s. I think Alexa mentioned that the reason Matt's links work is because they're relevant to the content. Actually, the article has nothing to do with the links, so they aren't relevant at all. In-context links are the key. Relevance? Not so much.
          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4304576].message }}
          • Profile picture of the author myob
            Originally Posted by myob View Post

            Using the model of article writing for syndication has far more advantages than trying to write for the search engines. Backlinks are just the side benefit of quality writing. It does not take many articles at all to level the playing field in any competitive market when the power of syndication, leveraging your efforts over many outlets, is fully understood. The learning curve for syndication is not anywhere near as steep as it is for SEO.


            Originally Posted by ryanjm View Post

            Depending on what kind of business you run, this could go either way. Your idea of writing for syndication requires good writing skills, and a narrow focus on a particular niche that you are knowledgeable about. What if you're doing SEO for a local dentist? Lawyer? Maybe I've got 100 niche sites. Am I going to crank out real-world-reader quality articles for all of those?

            Instead, if I purchase a few hundred domains, and then maybe 60 or so high PR domains, I can spend way less time writing content and much more time setting up the infrastructure that will allow me to link and boost my rankings on auto-pilot. While you toil away as a writer, I press a few buttons and achieve the same effect. That's how you scale up...

            All I do is sell affiliate products, and really have no interest at all in doing SEO for the butcher, the baker, or the candlestick maker. My "idea" of writing for syndication is a proven marketing model that wipes out my competitors who depend on only SEO. And, as I have posted in other threads, my marketing is comprised of hundreds of mini-websites in dozens of some of the most hotly competitive niches.

            In such extremely competitive markets, SEO is essentially a massive and expensive undertaking to outrank heavy hitters with deep pockets who have entrenched their sites with targeted keywords and backlinks. Those are the markets I target, and those are the ones that fall most easily to the suave techniques of quality writing and article syndication.

            Since all of my sites are buried in the murky depths beyond recognition in the SERPs, writing articles for backlinks is impractical and needlessly laborious. What does work is submitting articles to those sites that already rank for my targeted keywords, resulting in highly convertable traffic of real live readers.

            If I so choose, I perhaps could target less competitive keywords through my syndicated network of 25,000 or so publisher outlets. Most of them have page ranks in the 4-7 range, so it would not be a problem at all to go to page 1 on Google for keywords in less competitive niches. But, that's not where the big money is.
            {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4308062].message }}
            • Profile picture of the author ryanjm
              Originally Posted by myob View Post

              All I do is sell affiliate products, and really have no interest at all in doing SEO for the butcher, the baker, or the candlestick maker. My "idea" of writing for syndication is a proven marketing model that wipes out my competitors who depend on only SEO. And, as I have posted in other threads, my marketing is comprised of hundreds of mini-websites in dozens of some of the most hotly competitive niches.

              In such extremely competitive markets, SEO is essentially a massive and expensive undertaking to outrank heavy hitters with deep pockets who have entrenched their sites with targeted keywords and backlinks. Those are the markets I target, and those are the ones that fall most easily to the suave techniques of quality writing and article syndication.

              Since all of my sites are buried in the murky depths beyond recognition in the SERPs, writing articles for backlinks is impractical and needlessly laborious. What does work is submitting articles to those sites that already rank for my targeted keywords, resulting in highly convertable traffic of real live readers.

              If I so choose, I perhaps could target less competitive keywords through my syndicated network of 25,000 or so publisher outlets. Most of them have page ranks in the 4-7 range, so it would not be a problem at all to go to page 1 on Google for keywords in less competitive niches. But, that's not where the big money is.
              Interesting. A few questions:
              1) This 25,000 site network-- Is this something you subscribe to, or are you quoting some sort of figure from Ezine that says how many sites they have that actively publish their content? And then you hope these sites pick it up? If so, how long did it take you to establish yourself as an expert so that sites would accept your content?

              2) Are you personally writing each article for each niche site you have?

              3) Once the article is published on another website, I'm assuming you receive a temporary spike in traffic, but then this traffic declines sharply once it's archived, no? How do you get traffic day-in/day-out if you have to write for 50+ sites?

              I agree that SEO is way more competitive for traffic than it would be to create an article and instantly get viewers. I just don't see how you can continuously get that traffic though unless you're writing a ton of content continuously. The beauty of writing for SEO is that I can spin and re-use the same article over and over for quite a while and just spam my own network. Then, once I achieve the ranking, I sit back and collect checks while you continuously toil away writing forever and ever. Also, once a ranking is achieved an a passive income stream is established, I now have an asset that I can sell. Your asset is yourself, so the value is only in what you actively produce.

              Also, you dismissed offline business SEO, but there is a TON of money in offline SEO for the most skilled among us. When you start closing 5 figure monthly recurring payments for corporate clients, syndication is not what they want to hear about and not what they pay you for when they want their real estate site to dominate their local market. That's where I feel the flexibility of what I can do to make money with SEO far outstrips syndication. It's almost like we're talking about the difference between being a professional writer versus a professional marketer.

              But there's room for everybody. Everyone is going to prefer a way that suits their tastes and what they're trying to achieve. I'm still interested in the answers to my questions though because for certain niches it would be fun for me to write, and if that works well for you then I would appreciate knowing some details. Thanks.
              {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4308723].message }}
              • Profile picture of the author myob
                Originally Posted by ryanjm View Post

                Interesting. A few questions:
                1) This 25,000 site network-- Is this something you subscribe to, or are you quoting some sort of figure from Ezine that says how many sites they have that actively publish their content? And then you hope these sites pick it up? If so, how long did it take you to establish yourself as an expert so that sites would accept your content?

                2) Are you personally writing each article for each niche site you have?

                3) Once the article is published on another website, I'm assuming you receive a temporary spike in traffic, but then this traffic declines sharply once it's archived, no? How do you get traffic day-in/day-out if you have to write for 50+ sites?

                I agree that SEO is way more competitive for traffic than it would be to create an article and instantly get viewers. I just don't see how you can continuously get that traffic though unless you're writing a ton of content continuously. The beauty of writing for SEO is that I can spin and re-use the same article over and over for quite a while and just spam my own network...
                I'd be happy to entertain you with my syndication process. First of all, I am a professional writer and marketer with an established network of 25,000 syndicated outlets for my articles. These outlets include authoritative and context-relevant websites, blogs, niche ezines, and offline outlets such as print magazines, trade journals, professional newsletters, newspapers, etc. Nearly all of my offline publishers also have highly ranked online components. It's these assets that dislodge the competition from their lofty perches in the SERPs. The real beauty of syndication is that you can write once and use the exact same article over and over again for tens of thousands of publishers without spamming.

                I'm not really an "expert" in anything except for a rather short professional career in economics. Almost all of my writing is done inhouse with a staff of some part-time and full-time researchers/writers. Articles are distributed through RSS feeds, autoresponders, websites, direct email, fax, and even postal mail for a few publishers. Once these articles are distributed, traffic is fairly consistent for several months or even years from the high ranking sites. I get 3-5 new publishers everyday to add to my ever-growing network. By submitting a few articles every week, new traffic records are reached each month, with Google and SEO being totally irrelevant for marketing in these heavily competitive niches.
                {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4309108].message }}
                • Profile picture of the author ryanjm
                  Originally Posted by myob View Post

                  I'd be happy to entertain you with my syndication process. First of all, I am a professional writer and marketer with an established network of 25,000 syndicated outlets for my articles. These outlets include authoritative and context-relevant websites, blogs, niche ezines, and offline outlets such as print magazines, trade journals, professional newsletters, newspapers, etc.
                  Thanks for sharing. So to setup these relationships, do you just write to them and say, "Hey, I'll provide you with free articles if you link back to my site." And then you just manually go out and find a handful of worthwhile sites each day to contact about publishing your content?

                  I take it the cost then is really just hiring the writers and researchers to come up with good content to provide these sites.

                  Lastly, this 25k number you keep quoting, was that built up each day, adding a handful a day? That would only be like 1,000 sites a year, so there must be some larger networks that you contacted that were willing to accept your content, correct?

                  Thanks again, I like learning new things
                  {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4311867].message }}
                  • Profile picture of the author myob
                    Originally Posted by ryanjm View Post

                    I like learning new things
                    This is not at all new. Article syndication as a powerful marketing method is well over two centuries old. And this thread and hundreds of others have explained it ad naseum. What we mean by article syndication is when you leverage your efforts over many outlets in writing quality and useful information for real people, not primarily for backlinks, robots or search engines. Submitting quality articles to article directories purposed for syndication is only the beginning of a grand destiny for your work. These article directories were in fact originally intended as repositories from which republishers source content for their websites, blogs, ezines, newsletters etc.

                    My articles in EZA, for example, attract publishers who pick these up and distribute within their networks resulting in a targeted audience for my products and services. Just from having my articles showcased in the EZA directory results in several new syndicated outlets every week. Other more proactive approaches bring the total average of new outlets to 3-5 daily. This has been a fairly consistent growth rate over the last 14 years which brings this currently to over 25,000 total syndicated outlets. Article syndication works extremely well for me, perhaps only because every one of my websites are hopelessly buried under thousands of pages in the SERPs.

                    At first glance this may seem impossible for the average article marketer to accomplish, but it really does not take very many syndicated outlets to make a decent income. It is in fact quite feasible using this method to have a steady income well before a website even ranks in the SERPs. Setting a reasonable goal of obtaining just one or two outlets a day will result in a sustainable business within 30-60 days. That is the power of this marketing model, and which so many of us try to help especially the beginners to grasp in understanding. It's not easy, but it's simple. And as I often have mentioned, it does not take many articles at all to see amazing results.

                    Perhaps the easiest way is to begin by guest commenting on context-relevant blogs. I would try to choose blogs that have high ranking, but even that is not essential. What is more important is getting your content in the face of targeted readers. A resource which I have very often recommended is the Directory of Ezines (directoryofezines.com). Ezine publishers are hungry for quality content, and if you can provide that on a consistent basis you will have an abundance of targeted prospects. When an ezine publisher accepts your article, you have a powerful implied endorsement from the publication which carries with it far more weight than what any other form of advertising or promotion can do. Ditto for other online/offline publishers.
                    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4312325].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author missmystery
          Originally Posted by myob View Post

          What Matt has not disclosed is that his "operation" is a service submiting massive amounts of spun articles ensonced with keywords to his own blog/site network. Such a method is certainly far beyond the ability of any article marketer to compete against the many thousands of required submissions.

          I have a syndicated network of 25,000 outlets and most of them have page ranks that any SEO marketer would envy. However, even all of those backlinks are ineffective for ranking in the extremely competitive niches where I market to. But the direct traffic from real live eyeballs beats out the competition within these niches where the heavy hitters are entrenched high in the SERPs.

          Using the model of article writing for syndication has far more advantages than trying to write for the search engines. Backlinks are just the side benefit of quality writing. It does not take many articles at all to level the playing field in any competitive market when the power of syndication, leveraging your efforts over many outlets, is fully understood. The learning curve for syndication is not anywhere near as steep as it is for SEO.
          Holy crap man, Good work on getting 25,000 outlets.
          Signature
          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7270805].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author CaptnJack
      Thanks for that very informative post. Makes some important things much more clear.
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4503712].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author drmani
      Originally Posted by Alexa Smith View Post

      This isn't duplicate content. It's syndicated content.
      To quibble, it IS 'duplicate content' - but a unique form of it.

      From Google Webmaster Tools:

      Duplicate content generally refers to substantive blocks of content within or across domains that either completely match other content or are appreciably similar. Mostly, this is not deceptive in origin.
      What sets 'syndicated content' apart from 'duplicate content with malicious intent' in Google's eyes is that it is NOT "deliberately duplicated across domains in an attempt to manipulate search engine rankings or win more traffic" but happens as a NATURAL consequence of providing quality and value.

      However, don't expect to see all 600 of your syndicated links listed on search engine results pages (SERPs), as doing that would mean lowering the 'user experience' of the search engine's user base - so Google states clearly that it "tries hard to index and show pages with distinct information. This filtering means... we'll choose one of them to list."

      Spinning your submissions is an attempt to *try* and make each version 'unique' to the extent that a search engine will consider it different enough to rank and list on its SERPs pages - giving you the chance to own multiple slots on the results pages for your own content.

      As for the 'risk' or 'danger' here's where that lies:

      In the rare cases in which Google perceives that duplicate content may be shown with intent to manipulate our rankings and deceive our users, we'll also make appropriate adjustments in the indexing and ranking of the sites involved. As a result, the ranking of the site may suffer, or the site might be removed entirely from the Google index, in which case it will no longer appear in search results.
      Finally, a lesson I learned many years ago from a wise SEO specialist who has been active on this discussion, Kurt Melvin.

      Kurt has been one of the VERY few who, for years, have been advocating an SEO strategy that embrace EVERY possible variation of algorithmically determined content uniqueness in your Web content.

      In other words, have web pages with META tags, and some without. Have pages with 100 words of content, some with 300, others with 500 and even some with 800, 1,000 or 5,000. Aim for keyword density of 1% on some, 2.5% in others, 4% in a few more and maybe 15% on some. Target one-word keywords, 2-, 3-, or 4-word phrases for others.

      Or to put it more generally, cover all the bases.

      As search engine algorithms evolve or shift, you'll notice one set of pages falling OUT of favor just as another set comes INTO focus - and you have a sustainable search engine presence that can last literally for YEARS.

      Letting short-term focus like a Panda update govern your entire content development strategy can come back to haunt you a few months or years down the line.

      All success
      Dr.Mani
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4506585].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author Kurt
        Thanks Dr., I appreciate it.

        Originally Posted by drmani View Post

        To quibble, it IS 'duplicate content' - but a unique form of it.

        From Google Webmaster Tools:

        What sets 'syndicated content' apart from 'duplicate content with malicious intent' in Google's eyes is that it is NOT "deliberately duplicated across domains in an attempt to manipulate search engine rankings or win more traffic" but happens as a NATURAL consequence of providing quality and value.
        This is correct, Google and Matt Cutts have said that their definition of duplicate content includes across multiple domains and isn't limited to a single domain.

        Google has invested a lot of time and money into things like text vectors and ngrams to determine unique content.

        Google is also partners with Copyscape and actually use Copyscape for Google Alerts, so we know there's another resource Google has access to for discovering doop content.

        I don't believe Google uses these resources to merely detect doop content on the same domain.

        However, don't expect to see all 600 of your syndicated links listed on search engine results pages (SERPs), as doing that would mean lowering the 'user experience' of the search engine's user base - so Google states clearly that it "tries hard to index and show pages with distinct information. This filtering means... we'll choose one of them to list."

        Spinning your submissions is an attempt to *try* and make each version 'unique' to the extent that a search engine will consider it different enough to rank and list on its SERPs pages - giving you the chance to own multiple slots on the results pages for your own content.
        As for the 'risk' or 'danger' here's where that lies:
        This is 100% correct. There's no doubt "spinning" is an attempt to fool Google. And I'm fine with that. If they catch me and deindex my pages, that's their right. But I never signed anything that says I have to follow their rules, except when I use Adsense.

        The real key to spinning is to do a good job so you also fool people into thinking the article isn't spun. I prefer to spin in a way so that each resulting article also has a high degree of unique info, not just unique word strings. I find this much better so I can easily cross-link these articles and real human readers will benefit from the linking.


        Finally, a lesson I learned many years ago from a wise SEO specialist who has been active on this discussion, Kurt Melvin.

        Kurt has been one of the VERY few who, for years, have been advocating an SEO strategy that embrace EVERY possible variation of algorithmically determined content uniqueness in your Web content.

        In other words, have web pages with META tags, and some without. Have pages with 100 words of content, some with 300, others with 500 and even some with 800, 1,000 or 5,000. Aim for keyword density of 1% on some, 2.5% in others, 4% in a few more and maybe 15% on some. Target one-word keywords, 2-, 3-, or 4-word phrases for others.

        Or to put it more generally, cover all the bases.
        Thanks again Dr., you said what I've said better than me.

        The only thing I'd add to clarify is I suggest all reasonable possibilities. In discussions we'll often have two sides, both which make sense. IMO, it's wrong to choose either/or, when both is the best choice IMO.

        As I posted above, spinning and not spinning both have valid arguments by reasonable people, so the best strategy isn't to choose one or the other, it's to utilize both.


        As search engine algorithms evolve or shift, you'll notice one set of pages falling OUT of favor just as another set comes INTO focus - and you have a sustainable search engine presence that can last literally for YEARS.

        Letting short-term focus like a Panda update govern your entire content development strategy can come back to haunt you a few months or years down the line.

        All success
        Dr.Mani
        Exactly. And in the case of spinning or not spinning, we can't assume what Google will prefer in the future. Just because some say doop content is OK now, doesn't mean it will be OK 6 months from now. I'd go so far as to say Farmer/Panda is an indication that Google is learning to not liking doop content.

        We can be pretty sure Google doesn't like spinning, so the goal here is to do a good enough job so that Google can't detect it and simple synonym replacement probably won't be good enough in the future.
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4512999].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author drmani
          Originally Posted by Kurt View Post

          The real key to spinning is to do a good job so you also fool people into thinking the article isn't spun. I prefer to spin in a way so that each resulting article also has a high degree of unique info, not just unique word strings. I find this much better so I can easily cross-link these articles and real human readers will benefit from the linking.
          For those who want to know more about exactly how this works, I believe one of Kurt's products teaches this step by step, including how to put his versatile toolkit of DomBom scripts to work in the content creation process. I forget exactly which report/ebook it was, but I remember reading it somewhere around 2003, and using it with incredible impact in my web content creation since then.

          The reason I recommend Kurt's teaching so highly is that he is one of the few people I know who is both EXPERT in search and optimization, and ETHICAL in teaching how optimizers can manipulate their rankings without spamming the engines with worthless junk.

          The end-result, when you follow this process, is a series of 'spun' articles that actually make sense, add value to human readers, AND are sufficiently 'unique' in the eyes of a search engine algorithm to deliver SEO value.

          Jay Abraham has a favorite quotation: "What you don't know is what you don't know."

          And if you don't know that content spinning CAN be done in a value-adding way, and believe that the only way to spin is that taught and done by the cheap content spinning tools that tap into thesaurii and dictionaries for synonym/meaning replacements, then you're limiting your vision and possibilities about the diversity of content creating techniques.

          All success
          Dr.Mani
          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4515664].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author DireStraits
        Originally Posted by Terry Gorry View Post

        Therefore in circumstances where it is impossible for Google to discern your intent as to traffic or back link generation it would be fair to conclude by any rational person from the above that syndicated content = duplicate content.

        To try to argue otherwise is an attempt to rewrite the English language and attribute meaning to words that is nonsensical

        Terry
        Long time no talk, Terry.

        I don't remember anyone ever disputing how Google chooses to refer to syndicated content (i.e. as "duplicate content"); we've merely raised the point that, because of the very real difference betwen the potential treatment of each, it'd perhaps make quite a lot of sense for them to distinguish between each with separate labels.

        But Google does as Google does, and that unfortunately isn't the case.

        Either way, more often than not, subsequent instances of syndicated content are just filtered from the search results (unless one specifically "calls them up"). It's causes no problems at all, and so none of what you're saying is a justification for spinnng, if that's what you're getting at. :p
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4514779].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author myob
        Originally Posted by Terry Gorry View Post

        Therefore in circumstances where it is impossible for Google to discern your intent as to traffic or back link generation it would be fair to conclude by any rational person from the above that syndicated content = duplicate content.

        To try to argue otherwise is an attempt to rewrite the English language and attribute meaning to words that is nonsensical

        Terry
        There is no idea so brilliant or original that a sufficiently untalented writer can't screw it up.

        - Raymond Feist
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4515011].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author drmani
        Originally Posted by Terry Gorry View Post

        Therefore in circumstances where it is impossible for Google to discern your intent as to traffic or back link generation...

        Terry
        "Reading is the cure to many evils" - Dr.Mani

        From the same link I referenced earlier:

        There are some steps you can take to proactively address duplicate content issues, and ensure that visitors see the content you want them to.

        . . .

        Syndicate carefully: If you syndicate your content on other sites, Google will always show the version we think is most appropriate for users in each given search, which may or may not be the version you'd prefer. However, it is helpful to ensure that each site on which your content is syndicated includes a link back to your original article. You can also ask those who use your syndicated material to use the noindex meta tag to prevent search engines from indexing their version of the content.
        So there IS a process to follow that ensures your syndicated content benefits
        you from a SEO point of view, also.

        The BIGGER point of my previous comment, though, is to reinforce what Kurt
        has been teaching over years... it's not EITHER/OR but "AND" that should be
        your operative word while strategizing.

        This is applicable not just for SEO and article submission/marketing, but
        ALSO for other elements of business. If I had shunned Adsense content as
        an alternative revenue model to the infoproduct creation and selling route
        that worked so well in my own infopreneur business, my revenues may be
        taking a steep hit today.

        Things fade in and out of fashion in a style and at a speed that's hard to
        predict or prepare for. The best option, imho, is diversification - so that
        you'll be viable regardless of which fad or trend is predominant at the moment.

        My 2 cents

        All success
        Dr.Mani
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4515611].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author wpo1408
      Originally Posted by Alexa Smith View Post

      No.

      And don't forget always to publish your articles on your own site first and have them indexed there before submitting them anywhere else: article directories don't require unpublished content and there's no point in giving away the initial indexation-rights whose long-term, cumulative effect is so beneficial to your own site's SEO.
      Why does Hubpages and Squidoo make such a fuss about 'dupicate' or syndicated content?
      Signature
      Behind The Smile ~ the Story of Lek, a Bar Girl in Pattaya, Thailand ~
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6111520].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author DireStraits
        Originally Posted by wpo1408 View Post

        Why does Hubpages and Squidoo make such a fuss about 'dupicate' or syndicated content?
        Well, because all these kinds of sites - including article directories, ironically, given syndication is their raison d'ĂȘtre - rely heavily on search engines as their primary traffic medium. They rather cunningly tailor their terms of service, "training materials" and submission incentives so that they are the foremost beneficiaries of users' work.

        "Web 2.0" content farms such as Squidoo and Hubpages are the worst for preying on naive individuals, but article directories do it too. Article directories, however, aren't so explicit about only soliciting unique content; it'd be counterproductive of them to do so, given that a republication "licence" forms an integral part of their terms of service, without which they couldn't very well call themselves an article directory at all.

        But you can bet your last dollar that article directories aren't in any hurry to deter authors from submitting to them their brand new, previously unpublished work. They thrive on misguided individuals too, and in all likelihood wouldn't survive without them.
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6111742].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author wpo1408
          Originally Posted by DireStraits View Post

          Well, because all these kinds of sites - including article directories, ironically, given syndication is their raison d'ĂȘtre - rely heavily on search engines as their primary traffic medium. They rather cunningly tailor their terms of service, "training materials" and submission incentives so that they are the foremost beneficiaries of users' work.

          "Web 2.0" content farms such as Squidoo and Hubpages are the worst for preying on naive individuals, but article directories do it, too. The only difference is that article directories aren't so explicit about only soliciting unique content; it'd be counterproductive of them to do so, given that a republication "licence" forms an integral part of their terms of service, without which they couldn't very well call themselves an article directory at all.
          Yes, that makes sense.
          Thanks, very much.
          They are off my mailing list from now on.

          Owen
          Signature
          Behind The Smile ~ the Story of Lek, a Bar Girl in Pattaya, Thailand ~
          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6111785].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author wpo1408
      Originally Posted by Alexa Smith View Post

      No.

      And don't forget always to publish your articles on your own site first and have them indexed there before submitting them anywhere else: article directories don't require unpublished content and there's no point in giving away the initial indexation-rights whose long-term, cumulative effect is so beneficial to your own site's SEO.
      Why does Hubpages and Squidoo make such a fuss about 'duplicate' or syndicated content?
      Signature
      Behind The Smile ~ the Story of Lek, a Bar Girl in Pattaya, Thailand ~
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6111523].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author chrishonda
    I always learn so much from all the old pros here! That was both a great reply and a great article. I'm getting a better understanding. So just to be clear, article directory marketing is just sending articles out to numerous directories while syndication is the same thing, only beginning with a blog post of your own?
    Signature
    Failure will never overtake me if my determination to succeed is strong enough! --Og Mandino
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4292650].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author AnniePot
      Everything Alexa is telling you in this thread is the unmitigated truth, hence there is nothing to be gained in my rehashing and repeating her words.

      One very minor point I will make...

      95% of the time I only ever submit my articles to Ezine Articles (after first posting on my own site(s) of course), but on the very infrequent occasions when I do submit to additional directories, I may edit the resource box to change the anchor-text keyword. But, I will only do this if the alternate keyword has also been included in the article body.
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4292728].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author chrishonda
        Originally Posted by AnniePot View Post

        Everything Alex is telling you in this thread is the unmitigated truth, hence there is nothing to be gained in my rehashing and repeating her words.

        One very minor point I will make...

        95% of the time I only ever submit my articles to Ezine Articles (after first posting on my own site(s) of course), but on the very infrequent occasions when I do submit to additional directories, I may edit the resource box to change the anchor-text keyword. But, I will only do this if the alternate keyword has also been included in the article body.
        Thanks for jumping in, Annie! What you're saying (and I believe Alexa also mentioned this in one of those posts too!) is that syndication is possible and profitable using just one directory, namely EZines? If that's true, it certainly cuts out some of the busywork!
        Signature
        Failure will never overtake me if my determination to succeed is strong enough! --Og Mandino
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4292869].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author Alexa Smith
          Banned
          Originally Posted by chrishonda View Post

          Okay, I'm starting to get a picture. This business model has a blog at the center (or top depending on how you draw flow charts! :p)
          I'm not much of an artist, but I'm with you either way ...

          Originally Posted by chrishonda View Post

          The marketer then writes posts for the blog, transforms them into article for syndication, which eventually drives traffic back to the blog.
          No transformation needed, for me.

          Just the addition of a resource-box and maybe slightly altering the spacing of the last paragraph to put the last sentence or two in the resource-box (because I don't need a resource-box for the copy on my own site, of course: the traffic's already there).

          But all 1,350 of my EZA articles were published first on one of my own sites with the same wording as at EZA (and elsewhere).

          Originally Posted by chrishonda View Post

          So where is the money-making component?
          Ah well ... that's about whatever you're selling/promoting on the site (mostly - not entirely - ClickBank products for me), and getting the traffic to opt in and building your lists, of which I have 8 from my 8 different niche sites.

          My articles, though, are always about the niche - not about the product.

          Originally Posted by chrishonda View Post

          is that syndication is possible and profitable using just one directory, namely EZines? If that's true, it certainly cuts out some of the busywork!
          I actually submit all mine to EZA, and then nearly all of them additionally to either ArticlesBase or GoArticles (occasionally both - depending on the niche). But that's it for directories. Not too time-consuming.

          I change a punctuation-mark (usually a semi-colon) in each version so that I'll know later "where they were syndicated from" when I find them (hopefully) on various authority sites around the web (never know your luck).

          For me, it's almost always the EZA copy that's been re-published.

          But I have seen some other Warriors saying that they get syndicated from GoArticles and/or ArticlesBase, too, so those are probably worth trying, too.

          I don't really know of any others are worth using for this purpose, I must say (and I've tried many over the years).
          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4292927].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author tech007
          Hi I am new here
          Really informative discussion

          I am also a member of Ezinearticles thats true they never approved duplicate content.

          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6319330].message }}
          • Profile picture of the author Nicola Lane
            Originally Posted by tech007 View Post

            I am also a member of Ezinearticles thats true they never approved duplicate content.
            Of course they have never approved duplicate content - if you mean exactly the same article more then once on their website. It is quite beyond belief that anyone would want to see multiple copies of the same article submitted time and time again!

            But if you mean duplicate content as in the same article from your own website submitted to ezine articles - then they definitely allow that.

            If you do mean the second explanation then perhaps you could quote for me the part of their submission guidelines that says that.

            You will find their complete editorial guidelines here:

            EzineArticles.com - All Editorial Guidelines
            Signature

            I like to keep an open mind, but not so open that my brains fall out

            {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6319385].message }}
            • Profile picture of the author Steve Lim
              Hi, I used to do article spining and mass submission before, but with the Google Panda and Penguine update, I no do it anymore as I don't want to loss the reputation in Google ranking.

              This is what I am doing now, I will write a 10 pages ebook/ 10 articles, then I submit these articles to top the 10 article directory. After that I the articles convert into an ebook and submit to top 10 document sharing site, then I convert into video and submit to top 10 video directories, next submit the audio to podcast directories.

              This might sound a lot of work, so I just find some good gig in Fiverr to do these submission.
              {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6319423].message }}
              • Profile picture of the author AnniePot
                Originally Posted by Steve Lim View Post

                Hi, I used to do article spining and mass submission before, but with the Google Panda and Penguine update, I no do it anymore as I don't want to loss the reputation in Google ranking.

                This is what I am doing now, I will write a 10 pages ebook/ 10 articles, then I submit these articles to top the 10 article directory. After that I the articles convert into an ebook and submit to top 10 document sharing site, then I convert into video and submit to top 10 video directories, next submit the audio to podcast directories.

                This might sound a lot of work, so I just find some good gig in Fiverr to do these submission.
                I hope you just omitted to mention that first and foremost, your initial task was to publish all that content to your own websites / blogs.. :rolleyes:
                {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6320183].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author islandbreezes
        Originally Posted by AnniePot View Post

        95% of the time I only ever submit my articles to Ezine Articles (after first posting on my own site(s) of course), but on the very infrequent occasions when I do submit to additional directories, I may edit the resource box to change the anchor-text keyword. But, I will only do this if the alternate keyword has also been included in the article body.
        Thank you for this helpful tip and advice!
        This entire thread has been insightful!
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4306129].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author Alexa Smith
      Banned
      Originally Posted by chrishonda View Post

      So just to be clear, article directory marketing is just sending articles out to numerous directories while syndication is the same thing, only beginning with a blog post of your own?
      It's part of "forum life's rich tapestry" that people commonly use expressions with subtly different meanings ...

      I always take article directory marketing as meaning "trying to use article directories, typically with mass submission, for their own traffic and their own backlinks". All broadly non-viable and for most people a bit of a waste of time because their backlinks are close-to-worthless and always have been (non-context-relevant, PR-0 backlinks), and their traffic's even worse because of (a) the latest Google update, and (b) the fact that nobody in their right mind would want their potential customer-traffic to be going to a directory copy of an article in preference to one on their own site. A "25% click-through-rate" is just another way of saying "I'm only losing 75% of my traffic"! :p

      Syndication is the attraction of targeted traffic (and some high-class backlinks and excellent SEO tend to be involved as well, though that's only an added extra) by the re-publication of your work. And one of the many ways of achieving syndication is writing articles aimed at syndication and putting them where webmasters and ezine/newsletter compilers go looking for content. (For me, that's "EZA", among other places - but not using EZA for its own traffic or its own backlinks).

      In other words, there is a little area of overlap between article marketing and article directory marketing, in that article marketers can use one or two article directories for their original and intended purpose, as depositories of content aimed specifically at re-publication.

      Article marketers will always publish on their own sites first. And so will article directory marketers who know what they're doing and understand the process. (Far be it from me to suggest that that might be only a minority of them ).

      "Writing for syndication" is explained here.

      Knowing no better at the time, I actually started off with just EZA as my "syndication avenue" (), and even now, two and a half years later, a fair proportion of my "syndication network" comprises people whom I originally "met" through following them up when they kindly re-published one or more of my articles from EZA. However, there's a much better answer to "How to get them syndicated" here.
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4292750].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author chrishonda
        Okay, I'm starting to get a picture. This business model has a blog at the center (or top depending on how you draw flow charts! :p) The marketer then writes posts for the blog, transforms them into article for syndication, which eventually drives traffic back to the blog. So where is the money-making component?
        Signature
        Failure will never overtake me if my determination to succeed is strong enough! --Og Mandino
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4292848].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author tayjuno
    Alexa,

    Thanks for clearing it up. I admit that I was confused whether we would be penalized for having "duplicate content". It didn't make sense to me that spun content which was "unique" but read like "garbage" would carry more weight in Google's eye.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4292721].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author chrishonda
    I feel like I should stop asking questions so I can devour all these nuggets of GOLD! Do you mind if I look at one of your niche sites and a corresponding article? I don't know what the rules are for posting links, but I'd love to glean more from your expertise!
    Signature
    Failure will never overtake me if my determination to succeed is strong enough! --Og Mandino
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4293050].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author Alexa Smith
      Banned
      With apologies, I have never disclosed any of my niches/lists/articles to anyone here at all and can't help with this one (I put a lot of time - nearly half an hour per day, and over nearly 3 years that adds up!) into niche/product research and it's not something I can afford to take the chance of sharing; please excuse me ...
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4293133].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author AnniePot
      Originally Posted by chrishonda View Post

      Thanks for jumping in, Annie! What you're saying (and I believe Alexa also mentioned this in one of those posts too!) is that syndication is possible and profitable using just one directory, namely EZines? If that's true, it certainly cuts out some of the busywork!
      Exactly right. You need to remember that even though an article directory may have a PR (page rank) of 2,3,4,5,6, etc., the page you article appears on will have a page rank of 0, zero, zilch. Hence, any 'link juice' derived from your articles will be minimal.

      The principal reason for submitting articles to directories, should be attracting other blog / website owners to syndicate them.

      In addition to publishing articles on EZA (and occasionally other article directories), I'm also a huge believer in Guest Blogging, posting on Web 2.0 sites and transforming my articles to videos. I really believe these reap far more benefit than blasting my articles to thousands of crappy 'here today, gone tomorrow' article directories.
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4293229].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author myob
        Submitting articles to article directories, particularly EZA, is an effective way for getting your quality articles syndicated. In my experience also, publishers often use directories for sourcing articles for content on their websites, blogs, newsletters, and ezines. You can speed up this syndication process considerably by querying niche publishers directly with your relevant articles. The traffic generated directly from these outlets is highly convertable, and the results are much faster than waiting for your websites to rank in the search engines.
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4293346].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author chrishonda
          Originally Posted by myob View Post

          Submitting articles to article directories, particularly EZA, is an effective way for getting your quality articles syndicated. In my experience publishers often use directories for sourcing articles for content on their websites, blogs, newsletters, and ezines. You can speed up this syndication process considerably by querying niche publishers directly with your relevant articles. The traffic generated directly from these outlets is highly convertable, and the results are much faster than waiting for your websites to rank in the search engines.
          I love this! If the traffic generated from syndication can be faster than those crazy SERPs than I am definitely in!
          Signature
          Failure will never overtake me if my determination to succeed is strong enough! --Og Mandino
          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4293361].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author scottmanesis
        Originally Posted by AnniePot View Post

        Exactly right. You need to remember that even though an article directory may have a PR (page rank) of 2,3,4,5,6, etc., the page you article appears on will have a page rank of 0, zero, zilch. Hence, any 'link juice' derived from your articles will be minimal.

        The principal reason for submitting articles to directories, should be attracting other blog / website owners to syndicate them.

        In addition to publishing articles on EZA (and occasionally other article directories), I'm also a huge believer in Guest Blogging, posting on Web 2.0 sites and transforming my articles to videos. I really believe these reap far more benefit than blasting my articles to thousands of crappy 'here today, gone tomorrow' article directories.
        Except that another competitor with similar keyword density, quality of read etc ( in other words all things being equal) who has more of those crappy backlinks will outrank you in the SERPS. Unfortunately that is how it is these days. More backlinks equals more weight on the SERP even if the backlink is on a low pr site with no readership. If you have 3 backlinks and I have 30,000 guess who wins?
        Signature

        Want to make $800 Per Sale By Promoting Master Copywriter Dan Kennedy's Soon To Be Released New Product That Hardly Anybody Knows About Yet?Dan Kennedy's Game Changer DNA.

        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4516832].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author myob
          Originally Posted by scottmanesis View Post

          More backlinks equals more weight on the SERP even if the backlink is on a low pr site with no readership. If you have 3 backlinks and I have 30,000 guess who wins?
          If I have 3 backlinks from context-relevant, targeted authoritative websites and you have 30,000 backlinks on low pr sites with no readership, I win, and I win big time. Here's what really happens: my superb articles are read directly by potentially hundreds of thousands of people on those three websites, driving laser-targeted traffic with very high conversions. This is precisely how I'm consistently kicking butt against the entrenched competition within any niche I may choose to market. Quality trumps quantity every single time, IMHO.
          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4518916].message }}
          • Profile picture of the author Alexa Smith
            Banned
            Originally Posted by DireStraits View Post

            It's causes no problems at all, and so none of what you're saying is a justification for spinnng, if that's what you're getting at. :p
            The key point, it seems to me.

            Originally Posted by Bruce99 View Post

            I just cant believe after panda reignited it all that anyone can seriously consider putting duplicate content out there will achieve anything?
            If you'll excuse the observation, Bruce, that's because you have a fundamentally different concept of what "duplicate content" is from all of those of us who are making good livings, and building solid, asset-based businesses by doing exactly that with what you consider "duplicate content".

            One thing's simply incontrovertible, from about 100 threads here over the last year or so, and that is that those who (like the great majority) have failed with article directory marketing and are in the minority switching to article syndication are achieving great success with it, and nobody's switching back.

            Originally Posted by JimmyRose View Post

            I'm not going to go into it here though cause this thread is already the size of an essay!
            Like so many other threads on this subject, the first page or two are very instructive and greatly appreciated by many here, but eventually such threads tend to deteriorate when vested interests in clouding the issues take over.

            Please don't be offended by people noting with interest the highly relevant fact that you're advertising spinning software in your sig-file!

            Originally Posted by JimmyRose View Post

            the higher your spin percentage, the higher the chance your article will be accepted by blog publishers. So it only makes sense to spin.
            Like that of so many others here, my experience - having been a "spinner" when I first started off doing what I mistakenly thought was "article marketing", is exactly the opposite of this. My acceptance rate shot up dramatically (enough to make the difference between not making a living and making an increasing living based on residual income, in my case) when I stopped "spinning". And as you may have noticed, countless other threads here on related subjects are full of countless other Warriors making exactly the same observation. Funny, that ...

            Originally Posted by myob View Post

            If I have 3 backlinks from context-relevant, targeted authoritative websites and you have 30,000 backlinks on low pr sites with no readership, I win, and I win big time. Here's what really happens: my superb articles are read directly by potentially hundreds of thousands of people on those three websites, driving laser-targeted traffic with very high conversions. This is precisely how I'm consistently kicking butt against the entrenched competition within any niche I may choose to market. Quality trumps quantity every single time, IMHO.
            Exactly - of course it does.

            But people with financial interests in promoting "bots", "spinners" and the like, people with their own emotional investment in believing what they've always believed about "duplicate content", people who choose to spin their articles and then mistakenly attribute anything good that happens to the fact that they've done so, and people drawn to quantitative approaches about "page ranks" and "numbers of backlinks" are not always open to persuasion. Which is fine - I'm happy for as many of my competitors as possible to believe they're gaining something from "spinning".

            Meanwhile, the truth sits in places like this, which some choose to read and others to ignore.

            And for me, too, the thread's gone on long enough, I must admit.
            {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4519069].message }}
          • Profile picture of the author scottmanesis
            Originally Posted by myob View Post

            If I have 3 backlinks from context-relevant, targeted authoritative websites and you have 30,000 backlinks on low pr sites with no readership, I win, and I win big time. Here's what really happens: my superb articles are read directly by potentially hundreds of thousands of people on those three websites, driving laser-targeted traffic with very high conversions. This is precisely how I'm consistently kicking butt against the entrenched competition within any niche I may choose to market. Quality trumps quantity every single time, IMHO.
            I guess you missed the part that says "Except that another competitor with similar keyword density, quality of read etc ( in other words all things being equal) " in my post, so if this were a me versus you contest....I would have the same superb articles on those same 3 websites, plus 30 thousand more...so in fact I still win. Don't worry, many people are selective readers.
            Signature

            Want to make $800 Per Sale By Promoting Master Copywriter Dan Kennedy's Soon To Be Released New Product That Hardly Anybody Knows About Yet?Dan Kennedy's Game Changer DNA.

            {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4522236].message }}
            • Profile picture of the author myob
              Originally Posted by scottmanesis View Post

              I guess you missed the part that says "Except that another competitor with similar keyword density, quality of read etc ( in other words all things being equal) " in my post, so if this were a me versus you contest....I would have the same superb articles on those same 3 websites, plus 30 thousand more...so in fact I still win. Don't worry, many people are selective readers.
              I must have indeed missed the part where you previously said that you would have the same superb articles on those same 3 websites, plus 30 thousand more. Don't worry, many other people seem to have similar fantasies as well as selective recall. :rolleyes:
              {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4522468].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author chrishonda
    Oh no! It's okay! I'm just trying to learn as much as I can and you've been so helpful already! I completely understand. It must be working for you, or you wouldn't care. :rolleyes: So that definitely speaks in and of itself! Thanks for all your help. I'm going to get to it!
    Signature
    Failure will never overtake me if my determination to succeed is strong enough! --Og Mandino
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4293165].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author chrishonda
    I see, Annie! I really like your ideas about guest blogging, Web 2.0 and video articles. I've been hearing/researching some about video articles, but I really don't know anything about guest blogging or Web 2.0. Looks like I have a couple other subjects to start learning!
    Signature
    Failure will never overtake me if my determination to succeed is strong enough! --Og Mandino
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4293353].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Matt Ward
    I can't with authority say that spinning is beneficial to SEO, but Google is certainly more likely to index what it perceives as unique articles rather than identical ones in my experience. The general concensus is that backlinks don't count unless Google indexes/caches the page they're on, so when you consider all that, I say it matters for SEO.
    Signature
    "Keep moving forward."
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4293442].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Evanna Zainal
    if spinning doesn't necessary then what tools like the best spinner are used for?
    Signature

    nothing to put here..

    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4293504].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author rowanman28
    I used to write articles on some of these article directories like HubPages, Factoidz, etc for money, and I have to tell you, you can compete for first on the first page of a fairly popular specific search, and get a page rank of one or more, and tons of traffic. Nobody's talked about titles. If you write unique articles with unique titles, and make heaps of back links to them, you can make them into good back links, and that's got to be better than using software to "syndicate" your articles on hundreds of crappy sites. That has practically no value, save a few hits.
    Signature
    Social Media Marketing Services
    Custom Facebook page design, Facebook Ads management, Facebook likes, Twitter followers, Google Plus, Instagram, social sharing, SEO, content production, video production, whatever you want.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4293914].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author mattlaclear
      Originally Posted by rowanman28 View Post

      ...and that's got to be better than using software to "syndicate" your articles on hundreds of crappy sites. That has practically no value, save a few hits.
      Crappy sites generate link juice. Google doesn't consider them a crappy site either. They consider it as a real life human being who is recommending your site.
      Signature

      Free Webinar - 5 Steps to Getting Targeted Traffic
      Unlocking Your Website's Profit Potential: Quick and Easy Steps to Generating More Traffic and Sales - Learn More By Clicking Here

      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4293932].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author rowanman28
    I've heard that Google deindexes duplicated content, but I guess I didn't know about the definition of syndication as being it having a link back to the original. Still, I think Google's latest algorithm change on content farms was exactly meant to counter this exact thing. Quality is surely important, and for me, driving traffic from different Google searches is just as important as small amounts of link juice. A back link from a syndicated article on the hundredth page of Google on a crappy site is surely worth a hundred times less than an article on the first page, with a good bounce rate, steady traffic, and a good page rank. Page rank is not just measured in single numbers. There's 0.01, or 0.9, before you get to one, and so many overlapping algorithms on authority and relevance, that even the engineers at Google don't fully understand how it works. I just stick to what they tell me, which is quality is the way to go.
    Signature
    Social Media Marketing Services
    Custom Facebook page design, Facebook Ads management, Facebook likes, Twitter followers, Google Plus, Instagram, social sharing, SEO, content production, video production, whatever you want.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4294078].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author mattlaclear
      Originally Posted by rowanman28 View Post

      I've heard that Google deindexes duplicated content, but I guess I didn't know about the definition of syndication as being it having a link back to the original. Still, I think Google's latest algorithm change on content farms was exactly meant to counter this exact thing. Quality is surely important, and for me, driving traffic from different Google searches is just as important as small amounts of link juice. A back link from a syndicated article on the hundredth page of Google on a crappy site is surely worth a hundred times less than an article on the first page, with a good bounce rate, steady traffic, and a good page rank. Page rank is not just measured in single numbers. There's 0.01, or 0.9, before you get to one, and so many overlapping algorithms on authority and relevance, that even the engineers at Google don't fully understand how it works. I just stick to what they tell me, which is quality is the way to go.
      I'll leave you to it then.
      Signature

      Free Webinar - 5 Steps to Getting Targeted Traffic
      Unlocking Your Website's Profit Potential: Quick and Easy Steps to Generating More Traffic and Sales - Learn More By Clicking Here

      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4294149].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author Alexa Smith
      Banned
      Originally Posted by rowanman28 View Post

      I've heard that Google deindexes duplicated content
      If you'll excuse the observation, I think you're adding two and two and getting an answer of seventy-three and a half, here.

      Google say (actually pretty clearly) that they reserve the right to de-index sites which contain duplicate content (that means multiple copies of the same text-file within one domain-name) if they determine that the intra-site duplication has been done deliberately to "game" their algorithm (their word).

      You may notice that even with the upheavals of the Panda update, Google has not de-indexed any article directories - nay verily: not even the ones that are packed out with syndicated articles originally published elsewhere.

      Originally Posted by rowanman28 View Post

      I guess I didn't know about the definition of syndication as being it having a link back to the original.
      That's a line that people selling spinning software like to pluck out of obscurity in such conversations. For what it's worth (to me it's worth a lot but you can make up your own mind about that), among all the successful article marketers I know, using the syndication model, I have never heard of anyone linking back from a copy of an article to its original, and it's something I'd never do myself, and nor will anyone else syndicating any of my articles from article directories to their own sites, nor does EZA require them to do that! So it's all a bit of nonsense, anyway. But it enables people promoting "spinning" to try to score a point in a discussion, which is going to be a bit hard for them otherwise. :rolleyes:

      Originally Posted by rowanman28 View Post

      Still, I think Google's latest algorithm change on content farms was exactly meant to counter this exact thing.
      The "Panda update" had nothing to do with duplicate content at all.

      As long as you publish all your articles on your own site first and have them indexed there, and only then submit them elsewhere, you have absolutely nothing to worry about regarding your own site. It's true that people syndicating the articles will get less SEO value out of them than you do, but that's their problem, not yours.

      Originally Posted by rowanman28 View Post

      A back link from a syndicated article on the hundredth page of Google on a crappy site is surely worth a hundred times less than an article on the first page, with a good bounce rate, steady traffic, and a good page rank.
      The article itself, however, is worthless if nobody actually reads it.

      Originally Posted by rowanman28 View Post

      Page rank is not just measured in single numbers. There's 0.01, or 0.9, before you get to one, and so many overlapping algorithms on authority and relevance, that even the engineers at Google don't fully understand how it works. I just stick to what they tell me, which is quality is the way to go.
      To put it bluntly, I don't give a toss about page-rank. My concerns are relevance and quality, but I certainly won't argue with you about your conclusion there.
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4294979].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author JustSomeWarrior
    This article was so useful. I am glad I stopped by and read it. I am not even sure when I clicked it, I just found it in an open tab in the background.

    Awesome :-)
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4295458].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author celente
    first and last you need to hear this...

    why the hell are you spinning articles.

    Think about why you are doing articles in the first place, to put fresh high quality content out there and to make sales.

    How are you going to get sale from putting jibberish out there and spread it like a virus to all the article directories. I mean seriously.... do I need to go on....??
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4296485].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author AnniePot
      Originally Posted by celente View Post

      first and last you need to hear this...

      why the hell are you spinning articles.

      Think about why you are doing articles in the first place, to put fresh high quality content out there and to make sales.

      How are you going to get sale from putting jibberish out there and spread it like a virus to all the article directories. I mean seriously.... do I need to go on....??
      As Alexa so succinctly puts it - the only people making money from crappy article spinners are those selling the spinning software.
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4296863].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author 4Frankie
    Great Post and great debate. Thanks Alexa. I agree quality is still very important.
    Signature


    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4298184].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Matt281
    Can someone explain how relevance is calculated?

    I've been submitting re-written versions of my own articles (with relevant content surrounding my keywords) to other websites within a similar niche. Most are blogs that receive articles from guest posters.

    How is relevance calculated?
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4298544].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author Alexa Smith
      Banned
      Originally Posted by Matt281 View Post

      How is relevance calculated?
      It has to do with being called Matt when two other people already in the thread are called Matt - that makes your username relevant to the thread.

      Alternatively, of course, you can instead believe the "spinners" who will tell you that that's duplicate content and means that nobody will even read your post, let alone reply to it. But we already disproved that, didn't we, because I seem to be commenting?

      The answer to your question is probably that (i) it varies a little from search engine to search engine anyway, and (ii) Google doesn't really disclose it other than in typically somewhat oblique comments on their blog, their webmaster site, Matt Cutts' blog, and so on, with the effect that nobody can answer with certainty and confidence anyway, and (iii) it has to do with "related keywords" (which some people, who try - in an attempt to lend verisimilitude to an otherwise bald and unconvincing narrative - to sound as if they know more about the subject than anyone else, like to call "latent semantic indexing", a pompous term which really signifies little more than "related keywords"), the effect being that "keyword X is related to keyword Y if a certain proportion of people searching for one also search for the other and/or if a certain proportion of pages with one also contain the other", and measuring that sort of stuff enables Google to work out that people who are searching for information on how to grow potatoes may also be interested in information on how to grow tubers (potatoes being in the tuber classification of vegetables) but not particularly interested in information about tubas (those references neither being sought by the same people nor often appearing on the same pages but seeming to be more associated with trombones and trumpets), so it gradually "learns" that tubers, but not tubas, are relevant to potatoes. Or something like that.
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4299168].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author DireStraits
        Originally Posted by Alexa Smith View Post

        The answer to your question is probably that (i) it varies a little from search engine to search engine anyway, and (ii) Google doesn't really disclose it other than in typically somewhat oblique comments on their blog, their webmaster site, Matt Cutts' blog, and so on, with the effect that nobody can answer with certainty and confidence anyway, and (iii) it has to do with "related keywords" (which some people, who try - in an attempt to lend verisimilitude to an otherwise bald and unconvincing narrative - to sound as if they know more about the subject than anyone else, like to call "latent semantic indexing", a pompous term which really signifies little more than "related keywords"), the effect being that "keyword X is related to keyword Y if a certain proportion of people searching for one also search for the other and/or if a certain proportion of pages with one also contain the other", and measuring that sort of stuff enables Google to work out that people who are searching for information on how to grow potatoes may also be interested in information on how to grow tubers (potatoes being in the tuber classification of vegetables) but not particularly interested in information about tubas (those references neither being sought by the same people nor often appearing on the same pages but seeming to be more associated with trombones and trumpets), so it gradually "learns" that tubers, but not tubas, are relevant to potatoes. Or something like that.
        Such is the raw power of Latent Semantic Indexing (or is it Laughably Slow Imbecile??) that I've just been able to deduce my own stupidity from a forum post that endeavoured only to explain very roughly how Google determines relevance.

        Not since having Shakespeare's "greatness thrust upon" me in high school have I had to make so many passes over a single extract of text.

        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4299708].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author Alexa Smith
          Banned
          Originally Posted by DireStraits View Post

          Not since having Shakespeare's "greatness thrust upon" me in high school have I had to make so many passes over a single extract of text.
          I'll make people understand this poxy, revolting subject if it kills me ... no, wait a minute: that's not quite right.

          I'll make people understand this poxy, revolting subject if it kills them.

          Yes; that's better.
          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4300091].message }}
          • Profile picture of the author DireStraits
            Originally Posted by Alexa Smith View Post

            I'll make people understand this poxy, revolting subject if it kills me ... no, wait a minute: that's not quite right.

            I'll make people understand this poxy, revolting subject if it kills them.

            Yes; that's better.
            Damn ... I love the sound of facepalm in the afternoon. :p
            {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4300116].message }}
            • Profile picture of the author chrishonda
              Originally Posted by DireStraits View Post

              Damn ... I love the sound of facepalm in the afternoon. :p
              I'm so agreeing with that! Thanks for the extended explanation, Alexa. I know those of us who are actually reading are grateful for your expertise!
              Signature
              Failure will never overtake me if my determination to succeed is strong enough! --Og Mandino
              {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4300355].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author rowanman28
    Hmm, I only recently leared about the hilltop algorithm, and I don't really have a clue what to do with my sites. I ordered the scrapebox blast on Fiverr for a few quality, original articles I wrote, and I don't know if I expect it to help, or hurt. I remember hearing that Google likes to see a gradual increase in natural looking links over time, and I think as time goes on, back links will become less important, and things like bounce rate, social signals and on page structure and relevance will become more important. That has been the trend so far, as far as I can tell.
    Signature
    Social Media Marketing Services
    Custom Facebook page design, Facebook Ads management, Facebook likes, Twitter followers, Google Plus, Instagram, social sharing, SEO, content production, video production, whatever you want.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4300437].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author tpw
    Originally Posted by chrishonda View Post

    Hi, guys!

    I was just looking at Brad Callen's Article Submitter. (It looks like a great piece of software. There's a free and a paid version. You can find it via Google.) I think it would be useful in speeding up the process of article submission, but it has no spin option. So basically you have 600+ article directories, but he suggests that you send the same exact article to each one.

    Wouldn't this cause a problem? I've heard a lot about duplicate content and the importance of making sure your spin is x% unique. How true is that?

    I know that Alexa answered pretty much the same as I did in the first response in this thread.

    I am not reading the thread, but simply dropping one simple morsel of food for thought:
    Thousands of us make a living with article marketing, without ever having used an article spinner in our lives.

    I have been syndicating non-spun articles since 2000. It has never been an issue for me.
    Signature
    Bill Platt, Oklahoma USA, PlattPublishing.com
    Publish Coloring Books for Profit (WSOTD 7-30-2015)
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4300880].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author myob
      Originally Posted by tpw View Post

      Thousands of us make a living with article marketing, without ever having used an article spinner in our lives.

      I have been syndicating non-spun articles since 2000. It has never been an issue for me.
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4301907].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author CaptnJack
        cool vid. Just the facts, maam.
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4503750].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author 1million1
      Originally Posted by tpw View Post

      Thousands of us make a living with article marketing, without ever having used an article spinner in our lives.

      I have been syndicating non-spun articles since 2000. It has never been an issue for me.

      If you dont mind me asking how many sites do you submit one article to?

      Thanks
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4311775].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author H.Miller
      Originally Posted by tpw View Post

      I know that Alexa answered pretty much the same as I did in the first response in this thread.

      I am not reading the thread, but simply dropping one simple morsel of food for thought:
      Thousands of us make a living with article marketing, without ever having used an article spinner in our lives.

      I have been syndicating non-spun articles since 2000. It has never been an issue for me.
      I couldn't agree with you more. I also make a living with article marketing and do not spin my articles.
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4345237].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author PhilipT
        This has been a great thread, not least because it has so clearly spelled out the differences between article marketing and article syndication as well as disposing of the idea that article spinning is a worthwhile thing to do.

        Any marketing activity which focuses solely on the quantity produced rather than the content quality is at best a dubious exercise. It will also be curtailed by Google or whoever in due course.

        It is rather similar to the Amazon clampdown on PLR being used to create garbage Kindle products. If you abuse a system it will bite you in the end.

        Thanks to Alexa for her customary clarity of argument throughout this thread.

        Philip
        Signature
        Tucker Professional Services
        Professional Content Writing Service Personally Written By British Born English Speaker - articles, ebooks, product reviews Great Reviews
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4345762].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Kurt
    BTW, it's likely Google has never used LSI in the SERPs. Google bought the LSI tech to use with Adsense, not for SERPs, and most likely uses LSI to display advertising based on the context of the pages Adsense is displayed on.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4301618].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author scottmanesis
      This has been a very interesting thread to read. There are so many great minds on the warrior forum!

      I think that spinner have their place, but if used correctly they really don't save much time as you have to go through and make sure that the article is still readable and makes sense. You have to remember that when you publish your article online (even in low ranking article directories) there is a possibility that someone will actually READ it. I know, what a concept right?

      Understanding that you can ruin your reputation on build your reputation with a single piece of content, you should ALWAYS have quality on the FRONT of your mind and keep SEO on the back of your mind.

      That is the secret IMHO on how to build an ever growing list of engaged viewers/readers that will make you money. All the technical stuff (SEO etc)is secondary to offering value to your audience. 1 Million backlinks of crap content is just 1 million ways to ruin your credibility online, and that is typically what most people achieve with spinner and submitter software. Just something to keep in mind.

      ~Scott Manesis
      Signature

      Want to make $800 Per Sale By Promoting Master Copywriter Dan Kennedy's Soon To Be Released New Product That Hardly Anybody Knows About Yet?Dan Kennedy's Game Changer DNA.

      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4504747].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author netoptions
      I have been following several threads relating to article marketing, and the best way to do it. I have found some very good information, and not what I and many other aspiring marketers have been led to believe. Thanks to all of those offering good info. The name Alexa comes to mind.

      I had very good results from ezine articles for quite a while, but lately not so good.

      One thing I discovered is that lately my articles have been taken, and published with no link back to my content. This has happened quite a number of times. The article will be published with a lot of links in it that are self-serving to the site they are on, but nothing for me. I found one publisher who seems to be targeting anything I publish to ezine articles. My articles are republished on many many sites that all seem to link back to one site. There is no contact information on any of them.

      I also belong to a blog network that is only supposed to distribute articles within the membership, and the site I referred to above had an article from there as well. I contact the admin and reported it, but they claim the site is not in the membership. So how did it get the article? Since I couldn't find it published elsewhere I have to question this!

      So lately I decided to publish all my articles on my own site. The information that is outlined here falls right in line with this conclusion, and I'm sure has helped a lot of folks.

      I have a very dumb question, however. How can I be sure that a page is indexed? I have googled this and can find no answer.

      Being cached and being indexed are not the same are they? How do I determine if my page is indexed? (I should know this as long as I've been lingering online, but I must confess, I don't).

      I have greatly appreciated the wealth of information that I have found on this forum and have just about talked myself into forking out the small fee and see what else I am missing.
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4642436].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author Kurt
        Originally Posted by netoptions View Post

        I have been following several threads relating to article marketing, and the best way to do it. I have found some very good information, and not what I and many other aspiring marketers have been led to believe. Thanks to all of those offering good info. The name Alexa comes to mind.

        I had very good results from ezine articles for quite a while, but lately not so good.

        One thing I discovered is that lately my articles have been taken, and published with no link back to my content. This has happened quite a number of times. The article will be published with a lot of links in it that are self-serving to the site they are on, but nothing for me. I found one publisher who seems to be targeting anything I publish to ezine articles. My articles are republished on many many sites that all seem to link back to one site. There is no contact information on any of them.

        I also belong to a blog network that is only supposed to distribute articles within the membership, and the site I referred to above had an article from there as well. I contact the admin and reported it, but they claim the site is not in the membership. So how did it get the article? Since I couldn't find it published elsewhere I have to question this!

        So lately I decided to publish all my articles on my own site. The information that is outlined here falls right in line with this conclusion, and I'm sure has helped a lot of folks.

        I have a very dumb question, however. How can I be sure that a page is indexed? I have googled this and can find no answer.

        Being cached and being indexed are not the same are they? How do I determine if my page is indexed? (I should know this as long as I've been lingering online, but I must confess, I don't).

        I have greatly appreciated the wealth of information that I have found on this forum and have just about talked myself into forking out the small fee and see what else I am missing.
        Take a 8-10 word phrase from your article that is likely to be unique to the article, put it in quotes, then do a google search for it. if the page comes up in the search results, it is indexed.

        And yes, if a page is cached, it's been indexed, although they don't mean the same thing. Being "cached" is even better than being "indexed". It means Google is keeping a copy of it and likes it to some extent.

        A great way to get pages indexed is to start a Twitter account...Keep adding followers until you have about 500 following you back. Once this is done, every time you add a new page to your site, post a link to it on your Twitter account.
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4642677].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author JohnMcCabe
        Originally Posted by netoptions View Post

        One thing I discovered is that lately my articles have been taken, and published with no link back to my content. This has happened quite a number of times. The article will be published with a lot of links in it that are self-serving to the site they are on, but nothing for me. I found one publisher who seems to be targeting anything I publish to ezine articles. My articles are republished on many many sites that all seem to link back to one site. There is no contact information on any of them.

        I also belong to a blog network that is only supposed to distribute articles within the membership, and the site I referred to above had an article from there as well. I contact the admin and reported it, but they claim the site is not in the membership. So how did it get the article? Since I couldn't find it published elsewhere I have to question this!
        Both of the things you mention here can probably be blamed on unscrupulous types picking up your RSS feeds and plugging them into an autoblog setup.

        This is not a slam on all autoblogs - I don't want to start that range war again. But "articles are republished on many many sites that all seem to link back to one site" does point to an automated scraper which strips the links and inserts the self-serving links.
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4643983].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author netoptions
          So, if an article is first published on my site, why couldn't I just use the dropdown feature in firefox under pagerank which says 'show cache'?
          That would be easier as long as the page is on my site. Is this reliable?
          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4647565].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author rashoman
      posting on this forum must be very lucrative since certain people seem to be here 24/7 posting, doesn't seem to leave much time for actually marketing...oh I get it, this is actually marketing!
      Signature

      Affiliate links are not allowed.

      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4658710].message }}
  • {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4301789].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Matt281
    Wow thanks so much. One more thing before I get started (to anyone willing to help):

    1. A lot of my articles I have up on my sites don't have backlinks in them, or only have 1. Should I just work 2 backlinks in and then post on EZA? I'm interested in traffic through links, but since I just started off and I'm targeting some easy keywords I want to rank on google too.

    (ok 2 things)

    2. Anyone else know of some good posts/info on resource boxes? I looked at a few of the top writers on ezine...most seem to just say something about themselves/their website and post a link to the landing page, maybe another random link too.

    Thanks!
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4305893].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author Alexa Smith
      Banned
      Originally Posted by Matt281 View Post

      1. A lot of my articles I have up on my sites don't have backlinks in them, or only have 1. Should I just work 2 backlinks in and then post on EZA?
      Backlinks (at EZA) belong in the resource-boxes, not in the articles.

      Seriously, you'll need to read EZA's editorial guidelines before submitting articles there (they're only one page, but you'll really need to read them ).

      Originally Posted by Matt281 View Post

      I'm interested in traffic through links
      I strongly advise you not to try to use article directories for their own traffic.

      Remember that saying "I have a 25% click-through rate" (from an article directory) is just another way of saying "I'm losing 75% of my traffic".

      If you're using articles to attract potential-customer-traffic, clearly the last thing you want is for that traffic to find the copy in article directory rather than the copy on your own site.

      That's not what article directories are there for. At all.

      Originally Posted by Matt281 View Post

      I want to rank on google too.
      People don't rank on Google. Pages rank on Google. Make sure that the page that ranks on Google is the page on your own site, NOT the page in an article directory (otherwise you're back to "I lose 75% of my traffic", aren't you?).

      Fortunately, it's easy to make sure that that happens. Always publish all your articles on your own site first, before submitting them anywhere else. Do all your off-page SEO for your own site, not for anyone else's. In the long run, that's all you need to do, to make sure that that happens. Article directories are such low-ranking sites, and their backlinks are non-context-relevant PR-0 ones, so there's not much danger of that copy outranking your own unless your site's new-ish, and even then it'll only be temporary (fortunately) and the more quality content you get on your own site, the less it'll be a problem. Whatever you do, don't end up being one of these people who "can't even outrank an article directory" and ends up in desperation sending your traffic to article directories and even building backlinks to article directories, because that is decidedly not a way to make a living from it.

      Further explained here. Not to mention here, here, here, here, here, here and so on.

      Originally Posted by Matt281 View Post

      2. Anyone else know of some good posts/info on resource boxes?
      There are many here, really. The search function will bring them up.

      Originally Posted by Matt281 View Post

      I looked at a few of the top writers on ezine...
      How do you know who the "top" writers are, on EZA? Are you looking at numbers of articles, numbers of views, or something? With respect, you're looking at low earners, that way (relative to the number of articles they have). You may be looking at hard workers, but not necessarily very successful marketers at all.

      It depends how you define "top", you see?

      Many of the better ones have several different pen-names for their different niches, and you can't even tell how much they've written, anyway.

      A more worthwhile differentiation of EZA writers, in my opinion, is between those "writing for clicks" (often huge numbers of short articles and low income) and those "writing for syndication" (often fewer, longer articles, depending of course on how long they've been doing it for, but widely syndicated - as you can see by checking phrases with Google, of whatever) and very different resource boxes.

      Originally Posted by Matt281 View Post

      most seem to just say something about themselves/their website and post a link to the landing page, maybe another random link too.
      People who look at a resource-box as a "bio box" you can more or less ignore, in my opinion. Nobody wants/needs to know that "Arabella Smackhead is a graduate of Blunderbuss College of Technology and has previously worked in a fish-cleaning studio": it's of neither use nor value to any reader at all, really. And particularly not to Arabella Smackhead.

      Putting the last two sentences of your article in the resource-box and then moving very smoothly on to tell the reader that everything they've just read is typically the second-best solution to the problem and that the best one is discussed in detail on your website keyword-keyword.com, now, that's another matter.
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4306835].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author AnniePot
        Originally Posted by Derek Soto View Post

        the ONLY thing that counts as duplicate content is the title. Use different titles, that's it.
        What????????????????????
        Where on earth did you hear this???????????????????

        Originally Posted by Alexa Smith View Post

        People who look at a resource-box as a "bio box" you can more or less ignore, in my opinion. Nobody wants/needs to know that "Arabella Smackhead is a graduate of Blunderbuss College of Technology and has previously worked in a fish-cleaning studio": it's of neither use nor value to any reader at all, really. And particularly not to Arabella Smackhead.

        Putting the last two sentences of your article in the resource-box and then moving very smoothly on to tell the reader that everything they've just read is typically the second-best solution to the problem and that the best one is discussed in detail on your website keyword-keyword.com, now, that's another matter.
        This is exactly what I learned to do a long, long time ago. Treat you last paragraph as your resource / bio box. Alexa has described how to compose it, with the vital "call to action" smoothly blended into the wording.

        People reading your articles are really not remotely interested in what you've done with your life. They are, however, extremely interested in how to read more compelling information on the subject which brought them to your article in the first place.
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4307299].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author yborware
          Originally Posted by AnniePot View Post

          What????????????????????
          Where on earth did you hear this???????????????????



          This is exactly what I learned to do a long, long time ago. Treat you last paragraph as your resource / bio box. Alexa has described how to compose it, with the vital "call to action" smoothly blended into the wording.

          People reading your articles are really not remotely interested in what you've done with your life. They are, however, extremely interested in how to read more compelling information on the subject which brought them to your article in the first place.
          Putting the last two sentences of your article in the resource-box and then moving very smoothly on to tell the reader that everything they've just read is typically the second-best solution to the problem and that the best one is discussed in detail on your website keyword-keyword.com, now, that's another matter.


          This is worth all the time I have spent on this forum.John
          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4312240].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author Matt281
        Thanks so much Alexa, again.

        Originally Posted by Alexa Smith View Post

        I strongly advise you not to try to use article directories for their own traffic.

        Remember that saying "I have a 25% click-through rate" (from an article directory) is just another way of saying "I'm losing 75% of my traffic".

        If you're using articles to attract potential-customer-traffic, clearly the last thing you want is for that traffic to find the copy in article directory rather than the copy on your own site.

        That's not what article directories are there for. At all.
        Yeah I completely get that. What I meant by getting traffic is that I know some people will click through but I want the article re-posted with backlinks, so as to boost the ranking of my pages and therefore get more hits from google ranking as well as CTR from the websites that post it.

        By the way, I already have 2 articles up on EZA + expert status. I just think I went about it the wrong way (writing for backlinks rather than syndication, plus writing original articles).

        Fortunately, it's easy to make sure that that happens. Always publish all your articles on your own site first, before submitting them anywhere else. Do all your off-page SEO for your own site, not for anyone else's. In the long run, that's all you need to do, to make sure that that happens. Article directories are such low-ranking sites, and their backlinks are non-context-relevant PR-0 ones, so there's not much danger of that copy outranking your own unless your site's new-ish, and even then it'll only be temporary (fortunately) and the more quality content you get on your own site, the less it'll be a problem. Whatever you do, don't end up being one of these people who "can't even outrank an article directory" and ends up in desperation sending your traffic to article directories and even building backlinks to article directories, because that is decidedly not a way to make a living from it.
        Yeah thanks, I got this from previous posts and the research/link building I've already done.


        How do you know who the "top" writers are, on EZA? Are you looking at numbers of articles, numbers of views, or something? With respect, you're looking at low earners, that way (relative to the number of articles they have). You may be looking at hard workers, but not necessarily very successful marketers at all.

        It depends how you define "top", you see?

        Many of the better ones have several different pen-names for their different niches, and you can't even tell how much they've written, anyway.

        A more worthwhile differentiation of EZA writers, in my opinion, is between those "writing for clicks" (often huge numbers of short articles and low income) and those "writing for syndication" (often fewer, longer articles, depending of course on how long they've been doing it for, but widely syndicated - as you can see by checking phrases with Google, of whatever) and very different resource boxes.
        Good point.



        People who look at a resource-box as a "bio box" you can more or less ignore, in my opinion. Nobody wants/needs to know that "Arabella Smackhead is a graduate of Blunderbuss College of Technology and has previously worked in a fish-cleaning studio": it's of neither use nor value to any reader at all, really. And particularly not to Arabella Smackhead.

        Putting the last two sentences of your article in the resource-box and then moving very smoothly on to tell the reader that everything they've just read is typically the second-best solution to the problem and that the best one is discussed in detail on your website keyword-keyword.com, now, that's another matter.
        Great. I did search for resource box topics but didn't find anything definitive. Let me just make 100% sure I'm doing this right and I'll leave you alone =)

        EZA/resource box:

        1. Post article that's already on one of my sites

        2. Copy the last couple sentences into the resource box (is this so that people don't publish your articles without the resource box?)

        3. Transition in a way that people are likely to follow the links to other pages on your site. (Am I right that I'm looking for re-publishing on other websites, and click-through from those websites, plus the backlinks?)

        For example, the last sentences/resource box might look like:

        In conclusion, it's been well established that cholesterol itself doesn't cause heart disease. Cholesterol is simply produced in greater amounts by people damaging their heart health through other means.

        The real factors causing heart disease can be found in this article *anchor text link*, whereas methods for improving heart health can be found here *landing page [does anchor text matter for this?], or *anchor text link #2*


        Is that about right?

        Again, thanks so much.
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4310240].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author Alexa Smith
          Banned
          Originally Posted by Matt281 View Post

          1. Post article that's already on one of my sites
          Exactly.

          Originally Posted by Matt281 View Post

          2. Copy the last couple sentences into the resource box (is this so that people don't publish your articles without the resource box?)
          Yes; partly to get one of your two links (which is actually in the resource-box) looking as if it's in the article, so that if someone's outsourcee content-provider takes the article and quickly/carelessly just removes what they think is the resource-box and takes what they think is "the article" without it, you'll still get one link included. I know it sounds strange, but it works.

          Blah, blah, blah, blah, blah - end of paragraph 8, paragraph-break, end of "article box" (doesn't show to the reader), start of paragraph 9 (this is now technically "resource box" but it doesn't necessarily look like it) containing the last two sentences of the article and one more sentence with the first backlink to your landing page all run-on together, now another paragraph break (the article looks as though it ends here but in reality we've already been in the resource box for 2 or 3 sentences) ... then a new paragraph comprising one more sentence, with a clear change of subject/tone, which is actually the second part of what we think of as "resource box" but looks like the entire resource box, and this is the bit we're willing to lose if anyone truncates it. This trick really works. Sometimes.

          Originally Posted by Matt281 View Post

          3. Transition in a way that people are likely to follow the links to other pages on your site. (Am I right that I'm looking for re-publishing on other websites, and click-through from those websites, plus the backlinks?)
          Exactly.

          Originally Posted by Matt281 View Post

          For example, the last sentences/resource box might look like:

          In conclusion, it's been well established that cholesterol itself doesn't cause heart disease. Cholesterol is simply produced in greater amounts by people damaging their heart health through other means.

          The real factors causing heart disease can be found in this article *anchor text link*, whereas methods for improving heart health can be found here *landing page [does anchor text matter for this?], or *anchor text link #2*


          Is that about right?
          Exactly.

          (And I'm with you all the way: it has indeed been very well established that cholesterol itself doesn't cause heart disease, but that's another matter altogether!)
          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4310603].message }}
          • Profile picture of the author DireStraits
            Originally Posted by Alexa Smith View Post

            This trick really works. Sometimes.

            Adight, adight; karm darn, karm darn like.


            (Sorry, I sensed some slight overexcitement. )

            But yes ... in all seriousness, I can vouch for this technique (and thanks for alerting me to it some months ago, too).

            I can't recall having ever seen it described in detail (publicly) like you've done here, and always hesitated to "pay it forward" after I learned of it just in case it was considered The Lexy's Secret Recipe.

            Sneaky yet squeaky ... those are the best.
            {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4311007].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Derek Soto
    the ONLY thing that counts as duplicate content is the title. Use different titles, that's it.
    Signature

    Discover How to Create a Brand New $300 Income Stream Every Single Day! Click Here Before Sold Out <--------------------

    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4305917].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author albertoporter
    Banned
    [DELETED]
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4306211].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author stingrays06
      Originally Posted by albertoporter View Post

      Re: Article Marketing: is the spin really necessary?

      I am very confused whether to use spinning tool or not ? Because once i had used spin tool but it totally changed my content's meaning and above all it had so many grammatical mistakes...So please suggest me some good spin tool........
      When I did spin articles, I used The Best Spinner because it had a huge database of synonyms.

      However, if you use ANY spinner, it is going to change your content's meaning drastically -- if you only spin your article word by word. Instead, try rewriting each sentence 4 or 5 times. Then, change as many words as you can in those sentences up to the point where it still makes sense. This way, you can maintain the original meaning of your content and it won't read like a spun article. It takes a lot of time though -- I'd personally just outsource it. Good luck!
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4306803].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author boxoun
    I thought ezine refuses to accept your high quality duplicate content so how does syndication work in that case?

    I have nothing but "garbage links" and I'm dominating search for my niche.

    I'm not gonna say syndication doesn't work but I have to laugh when people say spun crap don't work.

    That's all I do lol. I'm with laclear on this one.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4307467].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author Alexa Smith
      Banned
      Originally Posted by boxoun View Post

      I thought ezine refuses to accept your high quality duplicate content
      You were mistaken.

      (And mistaken about what "duplicate content" is, too, it appears: what you're referring to is actually "syndicated content").

      EZA specifically invites its new authors to submit as articles anything previously published on their own blogs/sites which is the right sort of length and complies with the editorial guidelines. EZA has never required previously unpublished content.

      As explained several times, just above. With respect, reading the thread (rather than simply replying to it) may help you to become a little better informed.
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4307489].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author AnniePot
      Just a note regarding the persistent insistence by a few, that Ezine Articles doesn't accept so called "duplicate content".

      Can you then explain why Ezine Articles, until recently, encouraged publishers to place their own (EZA) plugin on their WordPress blogs? This plugin made it especially convenient for publishers to write a post, publish it on their blog, then, with just a couple of clicks, instantly pass that identical post across to Ezine Articles.

      I never used it because it meant that I was unable to allow Google time to index the articles on my blogs first, but nevertheless, it surely flies in the face of those who still pop up in threads here touting this myth.
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4307617].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author DireStraits
      Originally Posted by boxoun View Post

      I thought ezine refuses to accept your high quality duplicate content so how does syndication work in that case?
      Not to sound rude, but how many times in each and every thread on the topic of article marketing does this myth have to be dispelled before people stop coming in and repeating the same question?

      I mean come on ... play the game. If you expect others to spend their time reading your posts and answering your questions, at least be courteous enough to ensure they haven't already been covered.

      Originally Posted by boxoun View Post

      I have nothing but "garbage links" and I'm dominating search for my niche.
      You're probably competing for very weak keywords. No-one is saying you can't dominate the SERPs with low-quality, "irrelevant" backlinks - we're just saying that it takes far more of them, and pointing out the tedium of the process through which they often have to be acquired (use of ridiculous bots/spam-tools, etc).

      Originally Posted by boxoun View Post

      I'm not gonna say syndication doesn't work but I have to laugh when people say spun crap don't work.
      Spun crap and truly valuable syndication don't go hand in hand. They're pretty much mutually exclusive.

      Yes, spun crap can (but doesn't have to) have a place in SEO. Unfortunately, by using spun crap you're restricting yourself to SEO traffic only and are reliant on your sites' continued good standing in the SERPs.

      Those who go the high-quality route and utilise syndication can enjoy the fruits of well-targeted referral traffic in addition to direct search-engine traffic ... and the latter is probably more secure, in the long-term, with a high-quality approach too.
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4307619].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author David McKee
    Here is a tip list and some useful data for you who have been following this and the bazillion other threads about article marketing on this site. First of all, take everything Alexa says to heart - she knows what she is talking about. Heck, they named a website rating system after her!

    Anyway, here is the tip. What follows is a table of eight (8) Article websites. They are eight of the best as demonstrated by their rankings which I gathered today (ie: these are fresh counts).

    If you are just starting out, concentrate on one. EzineArticles. Do that: become an author, get an article or two published on this site (After publishing it and getting it indexed on your own site as Alexa mentioned). Then, perhaps concentrate on the first three sites. Get yourself published on those 3. Then get yourself published on all eight. Build a set of simple scripts or behaviors when publishing to these sites.

    You can go crazy after that, if you like, but you don;t need to. If you have the discipline to follow through on these simple steps, you will be getting traffic. period.

    Here is the list: (sorry I tried putting a table in to keep it neat, but no luck)

    Article Site : Google PR : Google BackLinks : Alexa Rank (US) : Yahoo Site Index

    1. eZine Articles: 6 1630 38 149583
    2. Suite101: 7 734 389 3260088
    3. ArticleBase: 6 572 152 15
    4. Helium: 6 401 139 6439486
    5. Buzzle: 5 188 158 434975
    6. Idea Marketers: 5 174 425 6830
    7. GoArticles: 3 435 336 3828
    8. Article Dashboard: 5 385 1028 584987
    Signature
    Are you an affiliate marketer? My site has tons of free stuff and 14,000 pages of Clickbank research. www.affiliatesledgehammer.com
    Buy a Freedom Bulb! Don't let the government tell you what kind of light bulb you can use!
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4307692].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author Alexa Smith
      Banned
      Originally Posted by David McKee View Post

      What follows is a table of eight (8) Article websites. They are eight of the best as demonstrated by their rankings which I gathered today (ie: these are fresh counts).
      David, please excuse my making three little points about your list:-

      (i) Some of them are article directories; others are not (of great significance to anyone intending to submit articles to them, of course, because the normal "article directory rules and principles" don't apply to the others);

      (ii) The page-ranks shown are simply the page ranks of their home pages, which isn't - of course - where one's articles will be published: they go on new PR-0 pages (in all of them, the directories and the others);

      (iii) "Buzzle" allows no external links at all (not even in a resource-box) and therefore has no value at all to article marketers within the meaning of that expression being discussed in the "article marketing threads" in this forum.

      Originally Posted by DireStraits View Post

      Not to sound rude, but how many times in each and every thread on the topic of article marketing does this myth have to be dispelled before people stop coming in and repeating the same question?

      I mean come on ... play the game. If you expect others to spend their time reading your posts and answering your questions, at least be courteous enough to ensure they haven't already been covered.
      It will go on for ever, I'm afraid.

      Or as long as people reply without actually reading the thread - but I don't see a way of stopping that.

      In contrast to EZA, there's no "quality control" in discussion forums: it's just caveat emptor, or in this case caveat lector, like everything else.

      Truly, in an Orwellian sense, "all opinions are of equal value, but some are more equal than others".
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4308319].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author David McKee
        Originally Posted by Alexa Smith View Post

        David, please excuse my making three little points about your list:-

        (i) Some of them are article directories; others are not (of great significance to anyone intending to submit articles to them, of course, because the normal "article directory rules and principles" don't apply to the others);

        (ii) The page-ranks shown are simply the page ranks of their home pages, which isn't - of course - where one's articles will be published: they go on new PR-0 pages (in all of them, the directories and the others);
        Good points which you made earlier - my main intention for showing the various rankings and back-links was to give an indicator of the quality of the site itself, rather than the link-juice one may receive. If an article is on a good quality site, the authority of the article is better - a rather vaporous term, but hopefully that makes sense.

        What I would like to know, beyond EzineArticles, what other Article sites are actually of high quality? What sites are more than just directories, but have standards that increase this "authority"?

        Even in the case of Buzzle, if you read a quality article there and see the authors name in the resource box, that name is something that can be searched for and can bring someone to your site. It may not help rank your site based on backlink algorithms, but if a particular name is searched for and that search takes people to a particular site - Google knows this.

        At any rate, it would be nice to have a list of 5 - 10 quality article sites in the order of their significance.

        -DTM
        Signature
        Are you an affiliate marketer? My site has tons of free stuff and 14,000 pages of Clickbank research. www.affiliatesledgehammer.com
        Buy a Freedom Bulb! Don't let the government tell you what kind of light bulb you can use!
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4308653].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author barache
        Originally Posted by Alexa Smith View Post


        It will go on for ever, I'm afraid.

        Or as long as people reply without actually reading the thread - but I don't see a way of stopping that.
        Amen! More disagreements are caused by that than almost anything.
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4309557].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author lustique
    I've used a few spinners before and they changed the intent so that it didn't even make sense. Made me look stupid :S
    Signature
    Sammylicious.net - Food, Fashion & Travel

    Need voiceovers, product reviews, video testimonials, blog articles, blog commenting? I can do all of that for you :) http://fiverr.com/lustique or email me at lustique @ gmail.com
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4308410].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Matt Ward
    As far as ezinearticles not accepting "duplicate" content, well, they will, but only if it's truly yours and you can prove it. If you don't link back to the site where the original is from (not necessarily the same page, just the site) or use the same author name, it will set off a red flag. I actually had my ezinearticles account frozen because I syndicated one of my articles there, but didn't use the same pen name or link back to the same site. I had to jump through a bunch of hoops to get my account reinstated, which included proving that the original article was mine (which wasn't hard).

    tl;dr: You can submit copies of your own articles to ezinearticles as long as you use the same pen name / link back to the domain the article originates from.
    Signature
    "Keep moving forward."
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4308739].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author Alexa Smith
      Banned
      Originally Posted by mattward View Post

      I actually had my ezinearticles account frozen because I syndicated one of my articles there, but didn't use the same pen name
      Yes indeed - clearly that's going to cause a problem.

      If you submit an article which has previously been published (anywhere online) in another name/pen-name, then one would certainly hope that might sound some rather loud alarm-bells for them. It's good that they check, and they're alert to the possibility of content-theft.

      I have 8 different niche-sites, and 8 different pen-names within my EZA author account. One does have to remember to use the right name.
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4308773].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author Matt Ward
        Originally Posted by Alexa Smith View Post

        Yes indeed - clearly that's going to cause a problem.

        If you submit an article which has previously been published (anywhere online) in another name/pen-name, then one would certainly hope that might sound some rather loud alarm-bells for them. It's good that they check, and they're alert to the possibility of content-theft.

        I have 8 different niche-sites, and 8 different pen-names within my EZA author account. One does have to remember to use the right name.
        Well, yeah, it's rather obvious that it would be a problem. I wasn't saying that it was a stupid policy, but I was just talking about my experience and giving an example of how you improperly syndicate your articles to EZA. As soon as I cleared up the problem they reinstated my account right away.
        Signature
        "Keep moving forward."
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4308953].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author davidtong
    After a while, it's just faster and easier to rewrite manually than using those applications, to be honest... Maybe it won't be logical when you want to spin it a hundred times, but for 10x or so, rewriting manually is more efficient for me.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4308851].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author stews
    Article submitting software is ok but I found for my own efforts its better to use 10-12 good article directories and manually submit them myself. Or use Ishare. Also, as mentioned in other comments distributing your articles is a form of syndication and not duplication. However, it doesn't hurt to change the title etc. good luck!
    Signature

    Get LIFETIME HOSTING for one LOW PRICE.. For more info follow this path

    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4309038].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Lori Kelly
    Alexa, thank you for this valuable information. I was struggling with writing the resource box and do not need to waste any more time. You saved me a lot of time, and time is money. THANK YOU!
    Signature
    Learn Website Tips, How to Do Keyword Research, & How to Write Killer Content.
    Stop Wasting Time.
    Start Living Your Dream.
    Click Here NOW to Get Your Hands on
    One of the Most Valuable Ebooks Ever!

    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4310669].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author boxoun
    Sorry guys I did read through the whole thread. All I saw was a bunch of egos going back and forth. Looks like I'm out of my league here.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4311398].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author DireStraits
      Originally Posted by boxoun View Post

      Sorry guys I did read through the whole thread. All I saw was a bunch of egos going back and forth. Looks like I'm out of my league here.
      All you saw was a bunch of egos?

      Excepting a few silly posts here and there (which I probably made), kindly point me to the ego.

      I will then point you to a person who's likely achieved great success with article marketing, knows their stuff and feels confident enough within themselves, for those very reasons, to speak authoritatively on the topic.

      That isn't ego. To me, a surer sign of an egotist would be someone who casually strolls into a thread, in which some recurrent posters are doing their best to help, and fires off a quick, snide (or at least ignorant) remark about how they're 'unable to see how it can work', providing nothing to substantiate their skepticism or disprove anything that's already been said, and even pulling the whole thread round on itself by dredging up baseless myths that've long since been refuted - earlier in that very same thread, no less.

      It might be seen as egotism by those random shoot-from-the-hip posters who don't have much stake in a thread's integrity (because their quick posts take but a brief moment to compose), but I'm fairly confident that it's nothing more than simple, pure, unadulterated frustration.

      It is to be expected in an online discussion forum, for sure. But that doesn't mean it'll be silently tolerated. Indeed, it is often met with expostulation.
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4313779].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author myob
      Originally Posted by boxoun View Post

      Sorry guys I did read through the whole thread. All I saw was a bunch of egos going back and forth. Looks like I'm out of my league here.
      You are not out of your league unless you have a big ego.



      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4315662].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author Nicola Lane
      Originally Posted by boxoun View Post

      Sorry guys I did read through the whole thread. All I saw was a bunch of egos going back and forth. Looks like I'm out of my league here.
      Thanks for that - I needed a good laugh this afternoon.

      You were trying to be funny weren't you?
      Signature

      I like to keep an open mind, but not so open that my brains fall out

      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4316093].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Jaymark
    I have heard that there is no problem if you submit the same article to different article directories. The problem comes in if you use the same article on your website. Then Google will slap you for duplicate content.

    At the same time even though I have heard that you won't get dinged for duplicate content to different article directories, I don't entirely believe it. So if possible you may want to create unique content every time you post even if it entails spinning the article. Google seems to demand unique and fresh content so the more you can provide that the better off you'll be.
    Signature
    Article Writers - American article writers, sharp pricing, quick turnaround, quality articles and web content
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4311500].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author Alexa Smith
      Banned
      Originally Posted by Jaymark View Post

      The problem comes in if you use the same article on your website. Then Google will slap you for duplicate content.
      This is completely wrong. And this from an article writer. Jaymark, you're confusing duplicate content with syndicated content. That isn't duplicate content. Explained here.

      I give in.
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4311722].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author John Coutts
        Originally Posted by Alexa Smith View Post

        This is completely wrong. And this from an article writer. Jaymark, you're confusing duplicate content with syndicated content. That isn't duplicate content. Explained here.

        I give in.

        Oh, don't give in, please! I've thoroughly enjoyed reading this thread, even if it is a couple of months old.

        I figured out the duplicate content thing some years back. Google themselves told me exactly what it is and what it isn't. I am amazed that so many others can't work it out for themselves, but I've resigned myself to accepting it as simply the way it goes.

        After all, where would we be without sheep who all mindlessly follow the one in front? It lets the rest of us get on with what really matters.

        John.
        Signature
        Write System - superior web content
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5112664].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Rose Anderson
    [DELETED]
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4311773].message }}
  • The best thing that you can do is test, test,test! See what's work for you. Some say spin, some say don't? The only way you going to know what's work best for you is test. The bottom line is that you need to provide quality information to the in user.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4311972].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author FXdarling
    Links from double content will not bring much value for your SEO. I suggest to look for a submitter that allows you to spin the articles.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4313855].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author Alexa Smith
      Banned
      Originally Posted by FXdarling View Post

      Links from double content will not bring much value for your SEO.
      This is nonsense.

      The link-juice value of any backlink isn't somehow magically changed according to whether the article to which it's attached is syndicated content or a "spun" copy. :rolleyes: :p
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4314786].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Matt Ward
    I am fascinated and very interested in the type of article marketing that Alexa, myob, tpw, etc. talk about. Having said that, SEO seems much more approachable than this type of internet marketing, and I suppose it would require a lot more networking skills, etc. The idea of myob obtaining 3-5 new outlets for his writing every DAY is mindblowing to me - I wouldn't even know where to begin. I suppose this really depends on the niches you're writing about? I have never experienced anyone syndicating my EZA articles to a quality site, only ripped and put on spammy sites or autoblogs. Then again, I have been mostly writing for the backlink and traffic, using quality just enough to be accepted by the directories.

    I guess this does sort of give me ideas for attempting some guest blogging, etc.

    Originally Posted by Alexa Smith View Post

    This is nonsense.

    The link-juice value of any backlink isn't somehow magically changed according to whether the article to which it's attached is syndicated content or a "spun" copy. :rolleyes: :p
    I dunno, I can kind of see that being true, actually. In any case, like I said earlier, in my experience Google is much less likely to index every copy of widely-spammed identical articles blasted out with something like AMR. In my tests I got roughly 50-75% more indexed articles by heavily hand spinning compared to blasting one identical article. I think most people would agree that if Google doesn't index the page, the backlink doesn't count for anything.
    Signature
    "Keep moving forward."
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4316212].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author DireStraits
      Originally Posted by mattward View Post

      In any case, like I said earlier, in my experience Google is much less likely to index every copy of widely-spammed identical articles blasted out with something like AMR.
      I don't partake in "spun article blasting" anymore, but have in the distant past and didn't reach the conclusion that spun articles conferred any additional benefit in relation to indexation.

      And if that was the case, I'm confident it has little to do with Google's assessment of the articles being unique/non-unique, but rather the "fault" of the site(s) to which they were submitted.

      Two things:

      (1) Are you sure these directories are approving and/or retaining those non-unique/unspun articles? The reason I ask is that although many of these sites profess to be article directories in the traditional sense, some use that label only as a ploy to incentivise the submission of content to them, but conveniently have little interest in accepting non-unique content because: (a) they perhaps know they'll benefit comparatively little from it in SEO terms (since most of their non-unique, syndicated article-pages are going to end up filtered out of the SERPs, into the supplemental index), or; (b) they don't appreciate the difference between syndicated content and duplicate content, and are afraid that it'll get their site penalised or deindexed.

      (2) The ones that are prepared to accept obviously spun articles typically receive so many spammy submissions that the site grows "too big for its boots": they comprise of far too many pages yet command nowhere near enough authority/backlinks to get it all indexed in Google.

      (Google openly states that they don't fully crawl/spider and/or index large sites that aren't deemed important/authoritative enough).

      Whatever the case, indexation of one's articles on such low-quality directories isn't of much concern to article syndicators, whose primary goal for using directories in the first place is to have their articles syndicated for referral traffic and high-quality backlinks - neither of which is offered by such sites.
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4316409].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author Alexa Smith
      Banned
      Originally Posted by mattward View Post

      I have never experienced anyone syndicating my EZA articles to a quality site, only ripped and put on spammy sites or autoblogs. Then again, I have been mostly writing for the backlink and traffic, using quality just enough to be accepted by the directories.
      Well, there you are: you've answered this point yourself. To get articles syndicated regularly/reliably, you really do have to write for syndication, at least to some extent.

      I know you don't mean it this way at all, Matt, but some people who post in these threads like to offer the observation that they don't believe syndication "really works" because they've submitted 5,000 articles and never had one syndicated ... the logic of this seems to me to be singularly reminiscent of that of the (many) article directory marketers who are apparently trying to rank their sites for the words "click here", i.e. their purpose was entirely different, from the outset, from the one they're later saying they've failed to achieve.

      Originally Posted by mattward View Post

      I guess this does sort of give me ideas for attempting some guest blogging, etc.
      Absolutely. And that can get you targeted traffic of the type that some syndication from directories can bring you, and some relevant backlinks with which article directory cra ... er, backlinks can never begin to compare in link-juice terms.

      Originally Posted by mattward View Post

      In any case, like I said earlier, in my experience Google is much less likely to index every copy of widely-spammed identical articles blasted out with something like AMR.
      I've done that myself (I'm ashamed to admit) and had no difficulty at all in getting indexed the minority that were actually published on sites that Google indexes at all - not that those backlinks are worth anything: that's about how and where they're submitted, though - not about whether their content is syndicated or spun!

      Originally Posted by mattward View Post

      I think most people would agree that if Google doesn't index the page, the backlink doesn't count for anything.
      I think they would. (In Google, anyway - there are other search engines, of course).

      But the proportion of articles submitted using software (whether spun or not) which ever get published on indexed sites is never going to be exactly high, you know, unless perhaps you're submitting to your own blog/site networks and aiming for 500,000 backlinks per day like another Matt, above? That, granted, is another matter altogether and I'm sure it works very well for him.
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4316466].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Amber Jalink
    Just a remark if I can add one ...

    For those who DO use article spinners and then submit to all the directories - PLEASE read your articles first out loud.

    SO much is garbage we as directory owners delete most of it. (At least legitimate directories who screen each article do!)

    Drives me insane.

    I would rather you submit one good article a month than 50 a day that is unreadable to the HUMAN who is the reason for this in the first place! I think people forget that.

    Amber
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4316246].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Matt281
    Can't tell you have helpful you've been alexa.

    Few more questions for anyone willing to help:

    1. I just submitted my first article for syndication on EZA and set up the resource box in the same way that was recommended in this topic. I linked to 2 different articles on the site rather than the landing page though because the article I posted on EZA is still at the top of my landing page. Is it generally best to use one of your backlinks for the landing page though?

    2. Do tags matter? If so, how much?

    Thanks!
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4334474].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author ocvseo
    Originally Posted by chrishonda View Post

    Hi, guys!

    I was just looking at Brad Callen's Article Submitter. (It looks like a great piece of software. There's a free and a paid version. You can find it via Google.) I think it would be useful in speeding up the process of article submission, but it has no spin option. So basically you have 600+ article directories, but he suggests that you send the same exact article to each one.

    Wouldn't this cause a problem? I've heard a lot about duplicate content and the importance of making sure your spin is x% unique. How true is that?
    Since the last update of google panda, I think yes, it is necessary, 30 percent is good and readable.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4334962].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author JoshuaZamora
    hmmm great explanation by Alexa! I have been thinking this whole time that it was a must to spin articles.

    But it makes sense to first publish it on your own blog and then once it's indexed syndicate it unchanged. Thank you
    Signature
    Learn How To Get Your First Wordpress Blog Online
    >>Get Instant Access Here<<

    FREE Video Marketing Report..Reveals How I Make Passive Income With YouTube
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4335262].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author chrisen
      Originally Posted by JoshuaZamora View Post

      hmmm great explanation by Alexa! I have been thinking this whole time that it was a must to spin articles.

      But it makes sense to first publish it on your own blog and then once it's indexed syndicate it unchanged. Thank you
      I thought the same thing until about a month ago I ran across a few of Alexa's posts discussing this. It was very illuminating and got me to start submitting articles to various places again. The whole spinning process was incredibly tedious to me.
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4335576].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author nicnac03
        OMG I can finally lay my article spinner to rest?!?!

        Are you really telling me that I don't have to waste hours upon hours to spin articles?

        Are you telling me that the SAME article on 5 different article directories gives the same amount of "link juice" towards my keyword as submitting a spun version?

        Please tell me this is all true!
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4336644].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author Alexa Smith
          Banned
          Originally Posted by nicnac03 View Post

          Are you telling me that the SAME article on 5 different article directories gives the same amount of "link juice" towards my keyword as submitting a spun version?
          Clearly ... how could it be any different?

          Why/how would/could spinning the content make the backlink attached to it worth any more/less?!

          It would be a seriously bizarre proposition, wouldn't it, to contend that the value of the backlink is somehow magically affected by whether the content above it is "spun"? Even people selling spinning software are not trying to allege that.

          Originally Posted by nicnac03 View Post

          Please tell me this is all true!
          It is ... but what's far more important to know (I'm sorry to say) is that submitting to 5 article directories, whether what you're submitting is "spun" or simply syndicated, can get you only a handful of non-context-relevant, PR-0 backlinks, and that's an activity almost entirely devoid of any SEO value at all.

          Even before Google's recent algorithm change devalued the article directories still further, the authors of many leading SEO textbooks were saying that typically one would need something between 50,000 and 100,000 of those backlinks to confer the same link-juice as one relevant backlink from an authority site. This isn't article marketing. It's just article directory marketing; and that hasn't been a viable business model for most people for at least a year or two.

          Seriously, if you have a long, slow, careful read through this fine three-page thread, which contains last week's discussions of this subject, you'll see accounts of the experience of many successful article marketers. And I think this shorter thread, also very recent, will be very helpful to you, too. You'll get a wide range of views, in those threads - and will be able to see them for what they are, I think, with only minimal "interpretation".

          According to some of the people promoting spinning/submission software/services, there are sometimes "problems" with threads in which successful marketers with experience of both spinning and not spinning compare the two - but don't let that put you off reading them for yourself.
          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4339748].message }}
          • Profile picture of the author nicnac03
            Originally Posted by Alexa Smith View Post


            Even before Google's recent algorithm change devalued the article directories still further, the authors of many leading SEO textbooks were saying that typically one would need something between 50,000 and 100,000 of those backlinks to confer the same link-juice as one relevant backlink from an authority site.
            When you say relevant backlink, did you mean an anchor text backlink that is within the content as oppose to a link that's in bio where no such content exists?

            If that's the case then I can do that with my articles by posting on squidoos and do my own in-content link. Clearly that would give more link juice right?
            {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4354618].message }}
            • Profile picture of the author Alexa Smith
              Banned
              Originally Posted by nicnac03 View Post

              When you say relevant backlink, did you mean an anchor text backlink that is within the content as oppose to a link that's in bio where no such content exists?
              No - not at all. I mean a backlink from a site whose content/context is specifically relevant to your own niche. Sorry, I've used the expression "relevant backlink" a little loosely, above: I must try to remember to say "backlink from a site whose content/context are specifically relevant to your own niche".

              I do think that backlinks from Squidoo (for all its other disadvantages, problems, lack of long-term security, and so on) are potentially worth much more than article directory backlinks, but that's opinion only, not "hard factual information".

              I used to use Squidoo as part of my own backlinking strategy, but I don't still do that now, for the reasons mentioned throughout this thread (though its title relates to something different, about using it as a primary site, which of course isn't suggested here at all), and the fact that it isn't an article directory anyway, so nobody much syndicates articles from it (and the people who do are doing so illicitly and unlikely to take your resource-box anyway).
              {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4354852].message }}
            • Profile picture of the author DireStraits
              Originally Posted by nicnac03 View Post

              When you say relevant backlink, did you mean an anchor text backlink that is within the content as oppose to a link that's in bio where no such content exists?

              If that's the case then I can do that with my articles by posting on squidoos and do my own in-content link. Clearly that would give more link juice right?
              A properly anchored backlink is most desirable, of course, but what she's really talking about is the superiority of backlinks from sites that are thematically related to your own.

              Typically:

              (1) A backlink with relevant anchor-text is more useful/powerful than one without, but;

              (2) a relevantly anchored backlink from a page with content that's topically related to the page/site it's linking to is even more powerful, and;

              (3) a relevantly anchored backlink on a topically related page of a site dedicated entirely to that niche or subject matter is the best you can get.

              In other words, all else being equal, backlinks to your radio-controlled model cars website from numerous republished instances of an article you've syndicated will be stronger from another site also dedicated to the same subject matter than they would be from that same article on a site like Squidoo, EzineArticles or Hubpages, which might possess some decent "general SEO authority" but certainly aren't specialist and probably aren't deemed as being too authoritative in relation to any specific topic.

              Hope this makes sense.

              EDIT: Sorry Lex, didn't see your reply until I'd posted.
              {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4354883].message }}
              • Profile picture of the author Kurt
                Originally Posted by DireStraits View Post

                A properly anchored backlink is most desirable, of course, but what she's really talking about is the superiority of backlinks from sites that are thematically related to your own.

                Typically:

                (1) A backlink with relevant anchor-text is more useful/powerful than one without, but;

                (2) a relevantly anchored backlink from a page with content that's topically related to the page/site it's linking to is even more powerful, and;

                (3) a relevantly anchored backlink on a topically related page of a site dedicated entirely to that niche or subject matter is the best you can get.
                I agree...We just need to add one more situation which we'll call 1B in this list: The words in close proximity to the anchor text.

                Of the 4, anchor text, close proximity text, page text and html and site-wide relevancy, I'd rank them in the order I just gave or:

                In order of importance:
                1. Anchor
                2. Close Proximity (same sentence/same paragraph)
                3. Page
                4. Site

                There's some other factors, such as link age, site/page age, if the link is contextual or clustered, do readers have access to the page (making it possible to add their own content/links), etc.

                All of these pretty much have to do with relevancy more than authority (generally speaking) but should give a good idea of what Google's looking for.
                {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4504004].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Retziki
    Alexa thanks for clarifying things out. I‘ve read lots of your previous posts and they really make sense.
    It looks like i was ready to make a big mistake by following the advice of a WSO and create links for an EZA article.
    Your posts made me think. A "25% click-through-rate" is just another way of saying "I'm only losing 75% of my traffic"!
    So common sense!
    We are entrepreneurs and building assets is our main goal. Not working for someone else (in this case EZA).
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4339569].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author jbeachum
    Thanks for initiating this conversation. I've read through the many threads and have learned SO MUCH!!!
    Signature
    FREE Video Exposes the "3-Step Formula" that allows Top Earners to Make as Much as 200% MORE MONEY PER CUSTOMER with YOUR Current Business! Click here now ==> SHOW ME THE VIDEO. ~ Julie
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4345163].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author dagaul101
    Some say it doesn't harm your site if you submit the same article, others differ, you could always do a split test to see which fares best
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4345225].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author nicnac03
    Thank you both, your replies were immensely helpful!
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4355217].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author joshcoffy
    Repetitive, Repetitive, Repetitive...
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4355286].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author AzzamS
    Here is a formula that has worked for a while now for me and plenty of clients to build a case study upon.

    1. Identify a site of authority that approve the inclusion of a unique article. This site has to be solely representative to a specific category i.e. business, finance, health, parenting, etc.

    2. Write content to the site that is relevant to the 'theme' i.e. parenting.

    3. Include within that article a paragraph that is related to your 'vicinity'. Vicinity is the neighbouring site that the link will connect to. If my site is selling cars then the paragraph included would connect Parenting + Cars and would have the desired anchor text in the content.

    4. Ensure that there is not beyond 10 external links on the page.

    5. Repeat for approx' 75 - 100 links.

    These are the quality of sites that you want to target and attract.

    Vetting these sites are important and crucial. That said the clientele that I represented has the funds to pay for the quality of writers to create content for these sites that they deemed valuable enough to integrate into the site with anchor text backlink.

    The alternative is to do syndication via press release. For this you would build a rolodex of editors that would include the content in their sites which you manually provide.

    Most of this is tedious and lengthy work but 75 - 100 keywords can get you to a high ranking position in the search engines for fairly competitive keywords.

    @alexa, you make mention of reading many SEO books and learning more on this subject thus I would like to email acopy of the SEO book I wrote as a WSO which I hope will be of interest to you and possibly shed some insight into what I have written here.

    I am not looking for a review of any sorts but whether the concept is building up to the understanding you are gathering around SEO now.
    Signature
    Download 101 Actions for a Complete Website SEO Technical Audit Sample FREE today and charge clients $$$ with it.
    SEO Case Study: 1.7M Visitors from 27,000 Keywords Click here to read the post .
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4361816].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author CaptnJack
    Originally Posted by chrishonda View Post

    Hi, guys!

    I was just looking at Brad Callen's Article Submitter. (It looks like a great piece of software. There's a free and a paid version. You can find it via Google.) I think it would be useful in speeding up the process of article submission, but it has no spin option. So basically you have 600+ article directories, but he suggests that you send the same exact article to each one.

    Wouldn't this cause a problem? I've heard a lot about duplicate content and the importance of making sure your spin is x% unique. How true is that?

    I tried the free version of his. Twice.
    Wouldn't even install. Emailed his support. No response
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4503687].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author RatRaceWatch
    It's really rough deciding which path to take, when you have all these people on different sides saying different things, I read through this whole thread, every single post.

    I was about to follow this strategy: THE Backlinking Strategy That Works | The Smart Passive Income Blog

    And use an article spinner.

    Now I'm having second thoughts...

    This will be a tough decision, because it's hard to say how effective split-testing would be, because it seems like either effort requires you in it for the long haul to actually see results.
    Signature
    At Manifest Income our mission is to Help You Build A Business That Matches Your Passion.

    We offer: Free Business Plans, Web Design, Online Marketing Training, Mentorship, & Support!
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4504583].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author Kurt
      Originally Posted by RatRaceWatch View Post

      It's really rough deciding which path to take, when you have all these people on different sides saying different things, I read through this whole thread, every single post.

      I was about to follow this strategy: THE Backlinking Strategy That Works | The Smart Passive Income Blog

      And use an article spinner.

      Now I'm having second thoughts...

      This will be a tough decision, because it's hard to say how effective split-testing would be, because it seems like either effort requires you in it for the long haul to actually see results.
      This is a very good point, as it's often just about impossible to get accurate test results.

      My strategy is, when you have different opinions on a subject that seem reasonable, the best strategy is to use a mix. For example, don't spin some articles, spin others "lightly" and others more heavily.

      Neither "side" is wrong here and both spinning and not spinning work. And each has its advantages and disadvantages.
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4504617].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author RatRaceWatch
        Well my goal, like many, is to get to the #1 spot on the 1st page of google. The problem is, using Seo Quake, I've been studying my competition's backlinks and I've noticed many of them have links from sites like this:

        dhhemergencynews.com (PR 5)

        hgtoday.com (PR 4)


        Do I just join the boat? And find services to get my post with direct links to my site from these PR4-PR5 blogs.

        And these must be working, I've looked through 1000's of backlinks from everyone ranked above me, and all the sites that had a good 40-100 links like these were high ranking.

        And of course the other scary thing is, if I find a network, there is no way I can guarantee my links will stay indefinently once they get the money.
        Signature
        At Manifest Income our mission is to Help You Build A Business That Matches Your Passion.

        We offer: Free Business Plans, Web Design, Online Marketing Training, Mentorship, & Support!
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4504659].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author Kurt
          Originally Posted by RatRaceWatch View Post

          Well my goal, like many, is to get to the #1 spot on the 1st page of google. The problem is, using Seo Quake, I've been studying my competition's backlinks and I've noticed many of them have links from sites like this:

          dhhemergencynews.com (PR 5)

          hgtoday.com (PR 4)


          Do I just join the boat? And find services to get my post with direct links to my site from these PR4-PR5 blogs.

          And these must be working, I've looked through 1000's of backlinks from everyone ranked above me, and all the sites that had a good 40-100 links like these were high ranking.

          And of course the other scary thing is, if I find a network, there is no way I can guarantee my links will stay indefinently once they get the money.
          Those are just blog networks you're linking to...You just need to do a little more than they are.

          If you're concerned your links won't last, the good news is that your competition is in the same boat. Like you said, they're working.
          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4504696].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author CED59
      Originally Posted by RatRaceWatch View Post

      It's really rough deciding which path to take, when you have all these people on different sides saying different things, I read through this whole thread, every single post.

      I was about to follow this strategy: THE Backlinking Strategy That Works | The Smart Passive Income Blog

      And use an article spinner.

      Now I'm having second thoughts...

      This will be a tough decision, because it's hard to say how effective split-testing would be, because it seems like either effort requires you in it for the long haul to actually see results.
      that's interesting man! that's the exact same reason I'm here too!
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4523283].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Anna Howard
    Well get this straight and clear in order to get a unique article spinning would be required. As the crawlers of the search engine are in search of quality and unique content so once found they will give credit to the article and links anchored in your article.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4504714].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Christine2011
    Awesome info here. Although, some of what has been said is a bit too technical for my taste.

    Anyway, spinning using software does not work for me. It is too much work. What I do is either rewrite the original article so that it is readable and makes sense or I outsource the rewriting to people on Elance or Odesk for around $2-$3 per article. However, if I do the latter, I always make sure to proofread and review their outputs.

    In the end, my way takes more time but ensures that my article is of good quality. And this is important since reputation is very critical in marketing. Furthermore, I have read a lot of articles about Google doing algorithm changes so that article repository sites or article farms do not profit from subpar articles. So, it does make sense to really put some effort and thought to the articles you submit as compared to simply spinning it using software.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4504837].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author murtuza
    I was personally confused with all the opinions flooding all around the net about spinning so I decided to give it a test. Here's what I did...

    I created a 30 page theme based content site with proper silo structure, theme based content, linking structure, keyword optimization and LSI keywords. I did my homework about researching keywords where I got keywords that had an average 1500 searches per month, selected 12 keywords to target and they were moderate competing keywords. What I mean is that I had to get PR 3, average 150 backlinks to my pages, etc to get to page 1. Also the urls were setup perfectly based on the keywords I had to target.

    I did this intial homework and started targeting for 12 keywords. I purchased the best spinner to spin my articles, also grabbed article marketing robot software as it does good job of submitting spun articles on schedule and I got started. For every keyword I wrote 2 spun articles, set them up on schedule with article marketing robot software and got the links to the exact keyword targeted pages. I got just 15 links per day to every page for the 12 keywords I was targeting.

    I was surprised and I checked my reports daily using seo elite. Out of 12 pages where I was targeting 12 keywords, 5 pages climbed from nowhere to getting indexed and finally landed up on 2nd and 3rd page in google within a week's time. Infact 2 of them were on the first page for a while and then shuffling back and forth.

    Other 7 keywords were moving around from 4 to 8 pages. I am talking this about google US which was difficult to beat. Infact these keywords had over 5 million competing sites, LOL...

    Results I got in one week's time were cool, however I am not sure whether these results were due to article spinning, seo optimization, accurate keyword research, LSI, silos, linking structure or article marketing robot. But it worked...:confused:
    Signature

    Want to know my true story & how I got started with my internet business? What kind of problems I faced to get started & how I finally cracked the internet code? I have also prepared a 30 day blueprint for you to get started. No signup is required, just rush in to check out pure content ==> how to start an online business - And yeah, if you like what you read don't forget to 'like' & 'tweet' it. All the best :0)

    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4505465].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author Alexa Smith
      Banned
      Originally Posted by murtuza View Post

      I am not sure whether these results were due to article spinning
      This is the typical problem, and is among the reasons for "spinning" being perpetuated: it's very easy for people less perceptive than yourself, who don't quite realise how difficult it is to attribute causation validly, to make the mistake of attributing benefits to spinning which they would have had to exactly the same extent (or even more) without having done the spinning - and especially those with their own financial interests in people believing in spinning!
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4505837].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author Kurt
      Originally Posted by murtuza View Post

      I was personally confused with all the opinions flooding all around the net about spinning so I decided to give it a test. Here's what I did...

      I created a 30 page theme based content site with proper silo structure, theme based content, linking structure, keyword optimization and LSI keywords. I did my homework about researching keywords where I got keywords that had an average 1500 searches per month, selected 12 keywords to target and they were moderate competing keywords. What I mean is that I had to get PR 3, average 150 backlinks to my pages, etc to get to page 1. Also the urls were setup perfectly based on the keywords I had to target.

      I did this intial homework and started targeting for 12 keywords. I purchased the best spinner to spin my articles, also grabbed article marketing robot software as it does good job of submitting spun articles on schedule and I got started. For every keyword I wrote 2 spun articles, set them up on schedule with article marketing robot software and got the links to the exact keyword targeted pages. I got just 15 links per day to every page for the 12 keywords I was targeting.

      I was surprised and I checked my reports daily using seo elite. Out of 12 pages where I was targeting 12 keywords, 5 pages climbed from nowhere to getting indexed and finally landed up on 2nd and 3rd page in google within a week's time. Infact 2 of them were on the first page for a while and then shuffling back and forth.

      Other 7 keywords were moving around from 4 to 8 pages. I am talking this about google US which was difficult to beat. Infact these keywords had over 5 million competing sites, LOL...

      Results I got in one week's time were cool, however I am not sure whether these results were due to article spinning, seo optimization, accurate keyword research, LSI, silos, linking structure or article marketing robot. But it worked...:confused:
      Good job...There's some folks that claim what you did doesn't work, often from people associated with writing services or selling expensive IM courses, so it's good you're testing things on your own.

      The next thing you want to do is take wait a few more days because more articles may be approved, assuming you did a great job spinning, then get your "Live Links" list from AMR.

      Run the root domains through Scrapebox and find the directories that are actually indexed by Google. This really should have been your first step before using AMR.

      Take your Live Links list that contains only the directories that are "live" in Google and submit those to bookmarking sites. You don't have to get 100s to each, just get a few bookmarks (10-20) to as many as you can.

      Take your Live Links and create an RSS pheed out of it, and submit it to the various RSS directories/aggregators.

      Then take your original "seed" article and beef it up a little, adding a few extra paragraphs of good content. Convert this to PDF and doc files and submit to the major document sharing sites.

      If you can, join one of the private blog networks like Linkvana and get yourself some incontext blog links.

      Take your beefed up seed article and turn it into a video, using narration and some images from www.Morguefile.com or www.animationfactory.com. Use Heyspread.com or other video submitting service to distribute the video.

      Send out a quality press release that has real, interesting info and not one that's boring that just talks about your site. Instead, refer to your site as an "authority" on the subject. Submit it using a high quality press release service if you an afford it, one that will get your PR on high quality news sites.

      This should put you in pretty good shape. AMR and spinning does work, but it's only one ingredient in a larger recipe. Keep building on what you have...
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4512862].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author murtuza
        Originally Posted by Kurt View Post

        Good job...There's some folks that claim what you did doesn't work, often from people associated with writing services or selling expensive IM courses, so it's good you're testing things on your own.

        The next thing you want to do is take wait a few more days because more articles may be approved, assuming you did a great job spinning, then get your "Live Links" list from AMR.

        Run the root domains through Scrapebox and find the directories that are actually indexed by Google. This really should have been your first step before using AMR.

        Take your Live Links list that contains only the directories that are "live" in Google and submit those to bookmarking sites. You don't have to get 100s to each, just get a few bookmarks (10-20) to as many as you can.

        Take your Live Links and create an RSS pheed out of it, and submit it to the various RSS directories/aggregators.

        Then take your original "seed" article and beef it up a little, adding a few extra paragraphs of good content. Convert this to PDF and doc files and submit to the major document sharing sites.

        If you can, join one of the private blog networks like Linkvana and get yourself some incontext blog links.

        Take your beefed up seed article and turn it into a video, using narration and some images from www.Morguefile.com or www.animationfactory.com. Use Heyspread.com or other video submitting service to distribute the video.

        Send out a quality press release that has real, interesting info and not one that's boring that just talks about your site. Instead, refer to your site as an "authority" on the subject. Submit it using a high quality press release service if you an afford it, one that will get your PR on high quality news sites.

        This should put you in pretty good shape. AMR and spinning does work, but it's only one ingredient in a larger recipe. Keep building on what you have...
        That's a great plan. However the plan I shared before was just a part of the overall process. I do most of the things you mentioned above but in an automated fashion using the help of rank builder. I have even heard SENuke X does most of the stuff too.

        Here's what I do. I load my seed article in rank builder and get it automatically submitted to web 2.0 sites, PR sites, etc.

        I grab all the submitted links of the articles from AMR as you said thru live links and get it bookmarked using RB. Also it does a good job of automatically converting all the live links to RSS feeds and submitting them to RSS aggregators.

        I take my articles and convert them into videos using article video robot and GFX video writer, yeah 2 videos from one seed article and submit them to youtube and other video dirs using automated software.

        Get the brief intro of the articles blogged and link them back to the unique versions of articles on my site...LOL, this strengthens the theme of the website.

        I also use automated link networks like neurolinker and also plan to use blog networks, there are several in my mind. Make sure you schedule your links using these automated networks to avoid problems. Again submitting your seed articles to these networks will add more power to your site.

        OOPS, this will drive probably hundreds if not thousands of backlinks to your keyword pages.

        And if you have structured the content of several articles you can easily go about creating a massive ebook out of it and sell it in future, or create several give away reports, audios, etc. That's a powerful plan to execute...
        Signature

        Want to know my true story & how I got started with my internet business? What kind of problems I faced to get started & how I finally cracked the internet code? I have also prepared a 30 day blueprint for you to get started. No signup is required, just rush in to check out pure content ==> how to start an online business - And yeah, if you like what you read don't forget to 'like' & 'tweet' it. All the best :0)

        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4521785].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Dentist
    This is an interesting thread. I was confused to some extent about duplicate content in backlinks as well. Thanks for sharing the valuable information.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4505930].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Bruce99
    SOOOOO many words and so many opinions. I just cant believe after panda reignited it all that anyone can seriously consider putting duplicate content out there will achieve anything? And how google works out that it is syndicated rather than duplicate (is there a syndication meta-tag)??

    It may have all been said before in these 120 odd comments of infighting, but this is what I know. I used to create long well researched articles for my site, then I would submit them to about ten article sites, manually (yes, old school). I soon found out that everyone suggested this would be duplicate content, and at the very best, rather than google penalising my site, they would pick the highest PR page that the article was on and display that in searches. Meaning that the other nine articles were only useful internally on article sites if they came up on internal searches.

    I ethically didn't like the idea of spinning, and it seemed so much trouble to go to, and you always had to amend the results, but I guess submitting the same article to many sites (unless you are a journalist breaking a major story) is also blackhat (or should be).

    Even if you change the title on every article, the body text remains the same, and yes ezine articles will reject it (been there). But surely it makes sense in general, if not for the purpose of link wheels that some people do, that each article look to viewer and Google as original as possible. eventually Google will find them all and penalize sites (at least by removing any link juice the secondary sites were providing). If they really hate it they will basically delist your site, and who wants that?

    I dont want to spin, but then again I dont want to pay someone in a third world money to write 500 words of original drivel that I can submit to sites, because I was too lazy to spin.

    So regardless of link juice, who will follow, NO Follow rules etc, I see that for the past, now and in the future, the same exact article submitted to multiple sites isn't going to achieve any seo aims (higher ranking). No? Yes?

    Convince me with your logic! Succinctly! Please ...
    Signature

    just a dog guy.

    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4516021].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author JimmyRose
    Whether spinning is required or not will be debated forever. IMO you are better off with it, but should only be used in key areas. I'm not going to go into it here though cause this thread is already the size of an essay!

    Either way, many blog networks, which are to date the most effective method I've used, REQUIRE the use of spin. And the higher your spin percentage, the higher the chance your article will be accepted by blog publishers. So it only makes sense to spin.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4516730].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Glad Warrior
    Well, IMO, spinning is quite necessary when it comes to distribute your articles to AD's. Write one article, spin it to 70% uniqueness and make 10 variations and submit all these variations to TOP 10 article directories
    If you don't spin you have to write a new piece of content 10 times which is really tiresome.
    Signature
    Money is a symbol of confidence in ourselves!
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4518966].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author DireStraits
      Originally Posted by shoaibahmad9999 View Post

      Well, IMO, spinning is quite necessary when it comes to distribute your articles to AD's. Write one article, spin it to 70% uniqueness and make 10 variations and submit all these variations to TOP 10 article directories
      If you don't spin you have to write a new piece of content 10 times which is really tiresome.
      Really?

      You have to?

      Says who?

      Someone should really inform EZA and other directories I use that I've been a bad boy in submitting all my non-unique articles there, then.

      I wonder what'll happen then?

      Wait a minute, the answer's coming ... I can feel it ... almost here ... here it is ...









      Absolutely nothing.
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4519095].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author myob
        Originally Posted by shoaibahmad9999 View Post

        Well, IMO, spinning is quite necessary when it comes to distribute your articles to AD's. Write one article, spin it to 70% uniqueness and make 10 variations and submit all these variations to TOP 10 article directories
        If you don't spin you have to write a new piece of content 10 times which is really tiresome.


        Originally Posted by DireStraits View Post

        Really?

        You have to?

        Says who?

        Someone should really inform EZA and other directories I use that I've been a bad boy in submitting all my non-unique articles there, then.

        I wonder what'll happen then?

        Wait a minute, the answer's coming ... I can feel it ... almost here ... here it is ...
        Apparently you have never removed mattress tags, have you? If you look on the reverse of mattress tags, it is plainly stated that sending non-unique articles to article directories is expressly forbidden, and must be spun at least 70%. So what is a law-abiding, mattress-owning, article directory marketer really supposed to do? :confused:
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4519368].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author DireStraits
          Originally Posted by myob View Post

          Apparently you have never removed mattress tags, have you? If you look on the reverse of mattress tags, it is plainly stated that sending non-unique articles to article directories is expressly forbidden, and must be spun at least 70%. So what is a law-abiding, mattress-owning, article directory marketer really supposed to do? :confused:
          I only wish I knew, Paul, but the truth is that prior to giving up spinning I hadn't a mattress to sleep on - only a bed of faecal-caked straw stolen by the armload from a pigsty.

          It wasn't until I gave up spinning that I really turned my life around to the point of being able to afford such luxuries. And, of course, these days my kinky Thai servants - bless their frilly little skirts - take care of such trivialities on my behalf.
          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4519640].message }}
          • Profile picture of the author myob
            I see why you may have been in such dire straits, spinning in fecal-caked straw. But you know, ever since I got off probation for tearing off my mattress tag and ignoring the underlying dire warning, life has been grand. Despite the terrifying consequences, all my spinning is only with kinky imported Russian babes on tag-free mattresses.
            {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4519740].message }}
            • Profile picture of the author larkykid
              The conclusion I come to is that article syndication is a technique which is wholly effective on its own, in terms of driving quality traffic and making sales. Whereas, mass submitting articles (spun or not) is just part of an overall strategy in trying get backlinks.

              Therefore, it's just a case of deciding what direction you want to head. As most tend to head down the SEO route at first, you're more likely to get exposed to the second option. The first option may not appeal to some either, as you would need to have a high standard of writing and shelling out a lot of dollars for this quality may not be a viable option.
              {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4520868].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author Alexa Smith
      Banned
      Originally Posted by shoaibahmad9999 View Post

      Well, IMO, spinning is quite necessary when it comes to distribute your articles to AD's.
      This is just plain factually wrong (but - alas - sadly typical of what these threads descend into, if they continue for long enough). :rolleyes:
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4519120].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author C A Perez
        What strikes me most about these discussions is that both sides of the issue of whether or not spinning is appropriate or inappropriate have valid arguments.

        That duplicate content is not an issue is easily substantiated by any search for the Declaration of Independence or any other quality document. That fact seems to deny the need for variety and it also does not address an inability by antagonists to see that it supports an aspect of article marketing, exposure.

        That submitting different unique quality rewritten content, spun or not, is also not an issue. After all is not variety the spice of life?

        What all the debaters fail to recognize is that there is a lack of agreement on the definitions of terms.

        If duplicate content is stagnant repetitive gibberish for the sake of gaming SERPS, I think most agree it should be penalized.

        If spun/rewritten content is diverse nonsensical gibberish, I think most would agree it should be penalized.

        Anne Pottinger's article noted in Alexa's post above defines duplicate content nicely.

        Unfortunately, spun content carries a negative connotation because of its robotic origins. Is it possible to rewrite content from a set of 'seed' articles and still create unique quality content that is indiscernible from its 'original' seed set?

        Mathematically it is possible.

        So the argument is more about whether or not the same content, syndicated or not, is more valuable than diverse content.

        One article's content says the same thing the same way all over the web. The other says the same thing in different ways. Which is better? Neither, they are performing the same with different approaches. MHO

        Carlos
        Signature
        A Blog for Newbie Affiliates, Article Writers
        and Article Marketers.
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4522314].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author ambassaroar
    From my experiences, article spinning isn't worth it at all. I'd rather have my high quality organic article posted on only my money site and MAYBE one other site, then have my low quality spun article on many sites. It's better for SEO, you get more linkjuice, and most importantly, it gives you clean traffic
    Signature

    ColocationAmerica.com – Industry Leader in Colocation and Dedicated Servers
    Locations in Los Angeles, San Francisco, New Jersey, New York, and Chicago

    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4520865].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Shannon Herod
    Here is the most recent set of tests I have done when it comes to spinning articles...

    Do links that land in the "supplemental results" pull as much weight as links found in the serps. By supplemental, I mean when you search for something and at the end of the results it says something to the effect of click here to see omitted results.

    The reason I did the test is the old "Bum Marketing" way of article marketing just does not work anymore.

    So, what I have found is that an article that is "worthy" of appearing in the SERP's pulls more weight (in terms of link juice) than one that is in the supplemental index.

    So, both count, one counts more than the other.

    What I also found was the old way of spinning "synonym spinning" does not work and usually results in the spun article being put in the supplemental index.

    So, that means you need to spin in an intelligent way that produces high quality articles. When I say high quality, i mean if a human reviewed two of the outputted articles, they would say that they were two different articles written on the same subject.

    How do you do that? By doing what I call crazy spins. That is were you rewrite each paragraph at least 4 times, and then each sentence in those paragraphs at least 3 times, and then rewrite at least 1 phrase per sentence.

    You need to do this in an intelligent way to get a good seed article. However it takes on average 6-8 hours to complete one of those articles so most people are not willing to do it. But, if you want spinning to work for you, that is how it has to be done.

    So, if it takes that much work why is it worth it? Well, because you want to get as many SERP indexed backlinks as possible, and if you spins the way I talked about above you can potentially get over 1 billion unique variations of the article. (that is using compounding math based on the amount of variations inside the article) I am not a math teacher so I can not explain the math.

    Anyways, to get good rankings you need a lot of things, one of the major factors is Backlinks, and the one thing you need that is the hardest to get for backlinks is good content that the SERP's classifies as unique.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4521149].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author NickBuzz
    .... heavy thread....
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4522716].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author manny2513
    I think Duplicate Content is a Myth but this is just my opinion. I have seeing lots of sites ranking well on Google with just Duplicate Content. I have 3 sites made off just duplicate conten (Ofcourse I always link back to content source) and I have never get penalized for it not even after the panda up-date.
    Signature

    ** Click Cash Magnet Solos Ads 100 - 1000 Clicks
    **
    Click Here and Book Your Spot


    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4522753].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author drmani
      I'll try and explain article 'spin' with an actual example below. I did this
      from a new article.

      First, there's the original version, then a 'spun' version I created for 3
      sentences/paragraphs.

      First 'spin' is almost 100% 'unique' to a search engine algorithm - though any
      human reader can tell it's the same story, rewritten in different style.

      Beyond this is when it gets interesting.

      Sentence/Paragraph Level 'Spin' #1 and #2 have simply re-arranged paragraphs
      of the original and 'spun' article - but the finished re-arranged version
      will still:

      * make sense
      * add some value to a human reader
      * be considered by a search engine algorithm to be 65% unique FROM THE ORIGINAL

      Of course, version the #1 and #2 version will have only 35% 'uniqueness' as
      compared to each other.

      But when you imagine how you can break down the CONCEPT by sentence, and then
      paragraph, apply it to a longer article, and then apply what Kurt shared a
      few posts above about PRIME number combinations from two or more 'groups',
      and THEN use a set of intelligent scripts to re-combine the snippets into
      diverse combinations... each of which will be submitted to SEPARATE sites or
      resources, with different audiences...

      THEN you'll start to see the REAL power of smart spinning.

      Below is the content to show case this concept. See if you like it

      = = = = =

      ORIGINAL VERSION:

      Less than a month ago, Large Hadron Collider boffins thought they were closing in on the Higgs boson particle, but the results they had observed now look like a statistical quirk.

      Nature is now reporting that a paper presented at the Lepton Photon conference in Mumbai, India, shows the “excess events” spotted at the LHC are fading – meaning that the physicists got worked up for nothing.

      With more data gathered – about twice as much as was used in the previous analysis – the likelihood that the LHC tests had found the Higgs boson fell from 99% to 95% (in formal statistical language, the significance of the results dropped from 2.8 sigma to 2 sigma).
      = = = =

      FIRST 'SPIN':

      Until recently, followers of the Large Hadron Collider project had seriously believed they were getting closer to identifying the Higgs boson particle, but unfortunately scientific errors seem to have crept into their analysis.

      Nature journal reports that what scientists said at the Lepton Photon conference in India, at Mumbai, were "excess events" were actually growing fainter and rarer at the LHC, a finding that indicates scientists were making much ado about nothing.

      Almost twice as much data has been collected as from earlier analyses, but still the chance that the LHC had discovered the elusive Higgs boson only dropped by 4% from an earlier estimate of 99% (a statistic that the pros call a fall from sigma 2.8 to 2).
      = = = =

      SENTENCE/PARAGRAPH LEVEL 'SPIN' #1:

      Less than a month ago, Large Hadron Collider boffins thought they were closing in on the Higgs boson particle, but the results they had observed now look like a statistical quirk.

      Nature journal reports that what scientists said at the Lepton Photon conference in India, at Mumbai, were "excess events" were actually growing fainter and rarer at the LHC, a finding that indicates scientists were making much ado about nothing.

      Almost twice as much data has been collected as from earlier analyses, but still the chance that the LHC had discovered the elusive Higgs boson only dropped by 4% from an earlier estimate of 99% (a statistic that the pros call a fall from sigma 2.8 to 2).
      = = = =


      SENTENCE/PARAGRAPH LEVEL 'SPIN' #2:

      Until recently, followers of the Large Hadron Collider project had seriously believed they were getting closer to identifying the Higgs boson particle, but unfortunately scientific errors seem to have crept into their analysis.

      Nature is now reporting that a paper presented at the Lepton Photon conference in Mumbai, India, shows the “excess events” spotted at the LHC are fading – meaning that the physicists got worked up for nothing.

      Almost twice as much data has been collected as from earlier analyses, but still the chance that the LHC had discovered the elusive Higgs boson only dropped by 4% from an earlier estimate of 99% (a statistic that the pros call a fall from sigma 2.8 to 2).
      = = = =

      By the way, this took me around 15 minutes to do MANUALLY.

      All success
      Dr.Mani

      EDIT: The answer to the question: "Why bother with all this?" is simply:

      To get your content listed on more than one spot on search engine results
      pages.

      Even the toughest detractors of 'article spinning' won't debate the value of
      having more 'entry points' for prospects to consume your content?!

      .
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4523576].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author celente
    It makes me nervous that people still talk about how good spinning is.

    Google put up the panda slap because people were doing this, so I do not know why people think it is so good.

    The only thing i do these days in terms of spinning is go for a drive in my import silvia S13... and spin the wheels.

    Look....google is always after clean high quality content, so in stead of hear her nagging all the time, give it to her. Fulfil here desires.

    Stop spinning and start writing your own quality content or outsource it, and watch the results.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4523988].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Bruce99
    Hi Alexa, and others fighting the anti spin fight ..

    it may be buried here somewhere, but can you give a quick specific intro to what you call syndicating and how it differs from sending duplicate content to many sites? Thanks. Bruce
    Signature

    just a dog guy.

    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4524111].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author Alexa Smith
      Banned
      Originally Posted by Bruce99 View Post

      Hi Alexa, and others fighting the anti spin fight ..

      it may be buried here somewhere, but can you give a quick specific intro to what you call syndicating and how it differs from sending duplicate content to many sites? Thanks. Bruce
      Hi Bruce. This thread covers "writing for syndication" (the whole thread's quite good, and it's not long).

      This post covers "getting syndication" (again the whole thread's good, and if you read it from the start, it explains how and why people are using EZA as part of the way they can get their work syndicated to relevant sites).

      Nobody sends "duplicate content to many sites". That's a misunderstanding of what "duplicate content" is (though it's perhaps what people selling spinning software would typically like you to imagine :rolleyes: ). This post explains the reality.

      The aim of syndication via an article directory is to use the directory as a stepping-stone to get your work onto some relevant sites with targeted traffic and backlinks that are actually worth something (unlike article directory backlinks). That's why article directories exist. It's the purpose for which they were created. They were never there for marketers to try to use them for their own backlinks or their own traffic. Article syndication marketing is and has been "article marketing" since before article directories existed. Article directory marketing, per se, was a late-comer to the game, which has now all-but-disappeared.
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4525012].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author DireStraits
      Originally Posted by Bruce99 View Post

      Hi Alexa, and others fighting the anti spin fight ..

      it may be buried here somewhere, but can you give a quick specific intro to what you call syndicating and how it differs from sending duplicate content to many sites? Thanks. Bruce
      It doesn't really, Bruce, because that's essentially what we're doing.

      It's just that "we" prefer to refer to the process by its proper name - syndication (used by established online and offline industry professionals alike, including by the Associated Press and Reuters who syndicate their articles constantly, unchanged, to thousands of outlets) - rather than by the term "duplication", one coined by search-engine programmers and subsequently abused by SEO service/product providers who have an agenda to further in selling and promoting their products off the back of various SEO myths and scare-tactics such as "duplicate content penalties".

      If you'd like information on how article syndication works, using the forum's search function for anything to do with "syndication" will reveal a goldmine of information (and you can probably be sure Alexa and Paul Uhl will pop up in many of them :p), and there's a brilliant product called Turn Words Into Traffic that explains the whole process in detail.

      In addition to that, Alexa dishes out her top tips for writing syndication-worthy articles in this post.

      EDIT: And she beats me again. *slaps forehead*
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4525024].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Alexa Smith
    Banned
    Originally Posted by 2011 View Post

    Yes...if your article is same as postd on other website then first come first serve basis adopted by google
    This is wrong. A "first come, first served" basis is not adopted by Google. (One of the comparatively few points over which the pro- and anti-spinning lobbies are actually united!).

    Originally Posted by 2011 View Post

    so your rankings will be lower and even more lower rankings as you make copy-paste ...
    This is both completely wrong and completely illogical. What do you think about the thousands of international news sites syndicating content from Reuters and Associated Press? It doesn't seem to be doing them any harm, does it? In fact it's the underlying basis of their websites. You have totally missed the point. :rolleyes:
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4525216].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author Richard Van
      Originally Posted by Alexa Smith View Post

      This is wrong. A "first come, first served" basis is not adopted by Google. (One of the comparatively few points over which the pro- and anti-spinning lobbies are actually united!).



      This is both completely wrong and completely illogical. What do you think about the thousands of international news sites syndicating content from Reuters and Associated Press? It doesn't seem to be doing them any harm, does it? In fact it's the underlying basis of their websites. You have totally missed the point. :rolleyes:
      Yup but then is someone with "buy Adsense clicks" in their signature really worth taking advice off?
      Signature

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

      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4525291].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author DireStraits
        Originally Posted by Richard Van View Post

        Yup but then is someone with "buy Adsense clicks" in their signature really worth taking advice off?
        Boooyaaaah. All hail the power of the mighty "Report Post" button.
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4525595].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author muratabryce
    I always learn so much from all the old pros here! That was both a large response and a great article. I'm getting a better understanding. So to be clear, article marketing directory is submitting articles to directories of many, while the association is the same, starting with your own blog?
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4642557].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Suellen Reitz
    Great discussion on this thread which I just found! I too was under the impression that you could not have duplicate content or Google would give you big grief... I truly appreciate the clarification of these great warriors!
    Signature
    Want great tips on how to increase your sales through facebook? Get your free video training with 4 great videos now...
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4657625].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author DireStraits
    Originally Posted by precious007 View Post

    I know what I'm talking about.
    You do?

    Originally Posted by precious007 View Post

    EZA, Articlesbase.com and Goarticles. (syndication is worthless, especially syndicating the same article to hundreds of article directories ...
    ... wait, you do? :confused:

    You're right in that there's little point in syndicating the same article to a ton of different article directories (beyond EZA, and perhaps a couple of others - maybe GoArticles and ArticlesBase, if you want to use any at all) for anything but weak backlinks, because article directories don't tend to have dedicated niche readerships and therefore are incapable of sending you targeted referral traffic (the primary benefit of syndication!); however, that's an entirely different proposition to syndicating the same article(s) to other targeted, niche-specific outlets from which there are many huge benefits to be had.

    If you haven't yet realised those benefits, you're either doing it all wrong or you simply haven't tried.

    To allege that "syndication is worthless" is just flat-out wrong, and there are many 5 to 6-figure monthly earners out there (here, even) who'd protest strongly against that, causing anyone ignorant enough to make such an assertion to look and sound pretty damn foolish.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4663592].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author Alexa Smith
      Banned
      Originally Posted by DireStraits View Post

      To allege that "syndication is worthless" is just flat-out wrong, and there are many 5 to 6-figure monthly earners out there (here, even) who'd protest strongly against that, causing anyone ignorant enough to make such an assertion to look and sound pretty damn foolish.
      Agreed ... and there are also plenty of 4-figure monthly earners who (just as I did a couple of years ago) have recently switched from their former unsuccessful/less-successful attempts at article marketing to using the syndication model instead, and are swiftly reaping the rewards. There are many threads with comments from them, to this effect. As ever, one thing's for sure: the people switching from from using article directories for their own traffic and their own backlinks to getting their articles syndicated to attract targeted traffic (and much higher-quality backlinks than anyone can get from article directories) certainly aren't switching back.
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4663670].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author Suellen Reitz
        Originally Posted by Alexa Smith View Post

        Agreed ... and there are also plenty of 4-figure monthly earners who (just as I did a couple of years ago) have recently switched from their former unsuccessful/less-successful attempts at article marketing to using the syndication model instead, and are swiftly reaping the rewards. There are many threads with comments from them, to this effect. As ever, one thing's for sure: the people switching from from using article directories for their own traffic and their own backlinks to getting their articles syndicated to attract targeted traffic (and much higher-quality backlinks than anyone can get from article directories) certainly aren't switching back.
        Where would you start to get involved in the syndication of articles?
        Signature
        Want great tips on how to increase your sales through facebook? Get your free video training with 4 great videos now...
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4682881].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author Alexa Smith
          Banned
          Originally Posted by Suellen Reitz View Post

          Where would you start to get involved in the syndication of articles?
          With this thread and this one, I think, Suellen ... :confused:

          But if I've misunderstood what you're asking, and those don't answer your questions, please say and I'll try again!
          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4682954].message }}
          • Profile picture of the author brentb
            This is the dumbest thread i've ever seen... sorry. Any webmaster who is putting up a bunch of duplicate content on purpose is an idiot (except in certain circumstances), whether you call it syndicated or not, Google can't tell the difference...

            Matt Cutts has said a million times that when duplicate content is detected its either not indexed or pushed down so that original, unique content is more likely to be found by the end users, plain and simple.

            How much clearer can it be?

            Does it hurt to syndicate your articles naturally? No, it will probably help.
            Can you build 100+ good backlinks through syndication? No not really because you risk duplicate content penalties (especially if their article gets indexed before yours).
            Does spinning get around this? Yes and no, its better than doing nothing. And just because you spin an article doesn't mean you have to post it on low pr sites, spinning and mass bulk submissions are two different issues but they seem to be only one on here.

            I would be mindful that taking all your articles and submitting them for syndication all over the place can make it more difficult to determine how much the site wrote its own content vs. just used syndicated content. - Matt Cutts

            ..."we're evaluating multiple changes that should help drive spam levels even lower, including one change that primarily affects sites that copy others' content and sites with low levels of original content." ...effect is that searchers are more likely to see the sites that wrote the original content rather than a site that scraped or copied the original site's content. - Matt Cutts
            {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4706768].message }}
            • Profile picture of the author Alexa Smith
              Banned
              Originally Posted by brentb View Post

              Can you build 100+ good backlinks through syndication? No not really because you risk duplicate content penalties
              This is utter nonsense.

              I do exactly that, repeatedly. So do many others here. Countless people here, in fact, are building our businesses very successfully by doing exactly that. Many of us have posted in this very thread.

              It isn't duplicate content, and there aren't penalties for it.

              Article Marketers - Lay the Duplicate Content Myth To Rest Once and For All | Internet Marketing and Publishing

              Those able and willing to read the thread, to think about all the international news sites syndicating all their content from Reuters and Associated Press, to listen to those building their businesses through article marketing, and to understand articles like the one linked to above can work this out for themselves. Others are destined to regurgitate and propagate urban myths of exactly the type above, based on fear, ignorance and prejudice.
              {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4706923].message }}
              • Profile picture of the author brentb
                Originally Posted by Alexa Smith View Post

                It isn't duplicate content, and there aren't penalties for it.
                Then what is duplicate content? Pretty sure when you copy and paste, that would be considered a duplicate.

                And when Matt Cutts or anyone from Google says that duplicate content is going to be pushed down in search pages, obviously there is some type of penalty there.

                I don't disagree, a backlink is a backlink... it won't hurt your page rank but your original article could be pushed down if google thinks its the copy.

                When you spin, not all the time but much more of the time, Google reads it as unique. So I don't see how that could hurt, and I do see it as helping since now you aren't pushing pages down (your own or the websites that are putting your content up).
                {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4707533].message }}
                • Profile picture of the author Alexa Smith
                  Banned
                  Originally Posted by brentb View Post

                  Then what is duplicate content? Pretty sure when you copy and paste, that would be considered a duplicate.
                  You say you're "pretty sure", Brent, but the reality is that (unlike so many other people above, who have cited references and links and quoted Google accurately, with evidence), you've clearly read nothing authoritative about this subject at all and are simply guessing - and in places making it up as you go along, in an attempt to exculpate and extricate yourself from it.

                  Article Marketers - Lay the Duplicate Content Myth To Rest Once and For All | Internet Marketing and Publishing
                  {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4708182].message }}
                • Profile picture of the author JohnMcCabe
                  Originally Posted by brentb View Post

                  Then what is duplicate content? Pretty sure when you copy and paste, that would be considered a duplicate.
                  And you would be wrong, at least as far as Google is concerned. Now if I copied/pasted one of my articles on a bunch of different pages on my site, a la the 'doorway pages' of old, that would be considered duplicate content. If the reason for the duplicates was innocent - like a blog having different urls for the same post (post, category, tags, etc.) - Google will pick one version of that article to display. If the pattern fits the footprint of someone trying to game the rankings (like those doorway pages I mentioned), the site will simply be deindexed.

                  Originally Posted by brentb View Post

                  And when Matt Cutts or anyone from Google says that duplicate content is going to be pushed down in search pages, obviously there is some type of penalty there.
                  You're missing one important point. While I want my copy to rank highest, obviously, if that isn't going to happen I want one of the other copies to rank. The search query isn't the only determinant of what is returned.

                  You and I are in the USA. Alexa is in the UK. If all three of us entered the exact same search query, we'd likely get three different sets of results just on the basis of geography. An article on a US site would tend to rank higher for us; a UK site would tend to rank higher for her.

                  Above all, I want my articles seen and read by people. If I can't get my first choice (my site), I'll take second choice.

                  Originally Posted by brentb View Post

                  I don't disagree, a backlink is a backlink... it won't hurt your page rank but your original article could be pushed down if google thinks its the copy.
                  Again, I just want my articles read.

                  Originally Posted by brentb View Post

                  When you spin, not all the time but much more of the time, Google reads it as unique. So I don't see how that could hurt, and I do see it as helping since now you aren't pushing pages down (your own or the websites that are putting your content up).
                  I've said it before, and I'll say it again. If I can't tell you used a spinner, I don't care. If you see that as helping, more power to you.

                  Most of the people who seem to gravitate toward spinners don't meet that standard. They call the mishmash of gibberish their autospinner of choice spits out 'quality content' because some other script based utility like Copyscape tells them their spin is XX% unique.

                  A thesaurus may say that "original" and "unique" are interchangeable, but I don't buy it. As both a publisher and a writer, I prefer "original" over "unique" every time, even if I'm not the only one with that original content.
                  {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4708841].message }}
            • Profile picture of the author DireStraits
              Originally Posted by brentb View Post

              This is the dumbest thread i've ever seen... sorry. Any webmaster who is putting up a bunch of duplicate content on purpose is an idiot (except in certain circumstances), whether you call it syndicated or not, Google can't tell the difference...
              Since we're talking so forthrightly here, I would remark that your post is possibly one of the dumbest in the thread, and that anyone who still can't get their head around what should be an array of very simple concepts - especially after all the times they've been discussed here - is something of an idiot.

              Originally Posted by brentb View Post

              Matt Cutts has said a million times that when duplicate content is detected its either not indexed or pushed down so that original, unique content is more likely to be found by the end users, plain and simple.
              Yes, because there is no point in presenting multiple identical articles in the SERPs for the same search-terms. That wouldn't much help anyone, would it? However, that doesn't prevent such articles from being indexed - they are still indexed, just not all presented together - and it doesn't stop their backlinks being counted, and it doesn't stop them sending referral traffic, and it certainly doesn't necessarily support the case for spinning at all.

              Originally Posted by brentb View Post

              Does it hurt to syndicate your articles naturally? No, it will probably help.
              Absolutely. At least we agree on something.

              Originally Posted by brentb View Post

              Can you build 100+ good backlinks through syndication? No not really because you risk duplicate content penalties (especially if their article gets indexed before yours).
              Wait, wait, wait ... you allege that Google can't tell the difference between "syndicated" and "duplicate" content, yet you believe Google can tell the difference between a "naturally syndicated" article (which "will probably help"), and a "forcefully"/"unnaturally" syndicated article and will apply penalties accordingly?

              Something doesn't add up here.

              Originally Posted by brentb View Post

              Yes and no, its better than doing nothing.
              Since when was syndicating articles as-is "doing nothing"? Or can "something" only be counted as such if it gets your express approval? :p

              Originally Posted by brentb View Post

              And just because you spin an article doesn't mean you have to post it on low pr sites, spinning and mass bulk submissions are two different issues but they seem to be only one on here.
              Of course it doesn't mean that. But, generally speaking (not always), mass spun articles read like crap and are only good for submission to low-quality sites because the high-quality ones won't accept them.

              (And there's no such thing as a low-PR site, anyway. You must surely know? Only pages have PR. Which brings me onto another point, which I'll make at the end ... )

              Originally Posted by brentb View Post

              ..."we're evaluating multiple changes that should help drive spam levels even lower, including one change that primarily affects sites that copy others' content and sites with low levels of original content." ...effect is that searchers are more likely to see the sites that wrote the original content rather than a site that scraped or copied the original site's content. - Matt Cutts
              Brilliant. I've never wanted syndicated instances of my articles to rank above my own in the SERPs anyway. That will often result in some of my visitors being led away by other sites' advertisements and other distractions. Where possible, I'd much rather my own site - "the original site" - rank highest, and I'll be happy to just receive additional visitors from my syndication.

              And again, speaking friendlily but forthrightly, forgive the observation that I wouldn't take too seriously, nor look upon too trustfully, the SEO advice of anyone who advertises his website as "PR3" (remember that only pages have PR: only your homepage is PR-3) as an apparent incentive to have people submit their sites to it for a an implied PR-3 backlink which they're actually not going to receive at all.
              {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4706986].message }}
              • Profile picture of the author brentb
                Originally Posted by DireStraits View Post

                ...there is no point in presenting multiple identical articles in the SERPs for the same search-terms. That wouldn't much help anyone, would it? However, that doesn't prevent such articles from being indexed - they are still indexed, just not all presented together.
                Only problem is if yours is the one presented last... Google does not always know which is original. Matt Cutts from Google even says this and suggests you don't keep posting the same article too much.

                Originally Posted by DireStraits View Post

                ...mass spun articles read like crap and are only good for submission to low-quality sites...
                What goes in comes out unless you are using an auto spinner... if you put in manual spin syntax it comes out perfectly fine unless you have poor writing skills.

                Honestly, I don't think what you are doing hurts but I think it would help more if it was spun, point blank. Why? Because what Google has been saying in many ways in many places for many years. That's all. I think if you can avoid the chance its seen as a duplicate of something out there, I think that's better than if google sees duplicate after duplicate of your articles.

                If you interpret the quotes above as meaning you shouldn't spin then good for you. You don't do SEO on my sites and neither I on yours.

                BTW my site domain is PR3, which even though the link page may not be, IMO is better than posting on a PR0 site. And really its not meant to be anything more than a free link to people who are looking for links, obviously some people appreciate it because they put their listings there.
                {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4707451].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author madmmd
    Why dont you just try it and see it for yourself.. See if it improves the site rankings or gets your website penalized for using duplicate content.. The result can be different in different scenarios.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4707565].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author EdBryant
      The problem I see with spinning articles in general is that's it is just a huge waste of resources. You are spending your valuable time and effort and in the end producing nothing of real value.

      Even if it "works" it is just exploiting a loophole and not adding anything that's better than the just the original version.

      Life is too short, and real success will come from building real value.
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4707652].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Submit5
    Some people believe that Google can't detect the articles "spun" by a $30 software!

    Rather than "spinning" and getting caught for trying to fool Google with Machine generated articles, it makes more sense to syndicate the same copy of articles to all directories / distribution networks.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4707779].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author michaelgrisso
    Kurt- thanks for the Google def. I don't why, but I'm really curious about the whole:

    Syndicate carefully: If you syndicate your content on other sites, Google will always show the version we think is most appropriate for users in each given search, which may or may not be the version you'd prefer. However, it is helpful to ensure that each site on which your content is syndicated includes a link back to your original article. You can also ask those who use your syndicated material to use the noindex meta tag to prevent search engines from indexing their version of the content.


    More so on the last part in red. Wouldn't that be a waste of time trying to do? I could see how a requirement on your website would make it mandatory, but I wouldn't imagine most people would do it anyways.

    I would also like to ask a question regarding another area of that post:

    Google will always show the version we think is most appropriate for users in each given search, which may or may not be the version you'd prefer.
    So, let's say you write an article, place it on your own website, then syndicate it everywhere else. During this time it is indexed on an AD quicker, although Google sees your initial piece is getting the backlinks (including from the article that was indexed faster).

    I might be reading too much into this (I do that a lot), but I can't figure out how it would end up being one we WOULD NOT prefer. Anyways, just something I conjured up while reading all the responses.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4722952].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Cyprus
    Duplicate content is a myth.
    I run more than 100 piggy bank websites all with 100% duplicated content and all perform and rank very well.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4729152].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author Alex Kage
      Originally Posted by Cyprus View Post

      Duplicate content is a myth.
      I run more than 100 piggy bank websites all with 100% duplicated content and all perform and rank very well.
      Do they outrank the pages where you got the content from, do you use something like WPUnique or something like that?
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4776943].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author missmystery
    The impression I get here is that spinners are not worth it? I was going to buy a spinner.

    I want to turn articles into documents, and submit to web 2.0s.

    If spinning won't help with these, then, well, no point, eh? I"ve enjoyed reading this thread.

    I hand write all my articles. Is syndication more than just submitting to RSS sites? I get them indexed on my sites.. then I guess its ok to blast them elsewhere?
    Signature
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4776327].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author Alexa Smith
      Banned
      Originally Posted by missmystery View Post

      The impression I get here is that spinners are not worth it?
      I'm very relieved indeed to hear that. I've been advising some complete beginners who know nothing at all about the subject to read this thread: I'd hate to imagine that anyone might come away from it thinking that it might be a good idea to spin articles!

      Originally Posted by missmystery View Post

      Is syndication more than just submitting to RSS sites?
      Yes, it's very, very much more than that: in fact "just submitting to RSS sites" isn't really part of what most professional article marketers would classify as "syndication" at all.

      For a quick general introduction to article syndication ...

      this thread may get the engine running,
      this one may get you some distance along the runway,
      this one may get you a little bit further and then ...
      parts of this one may even get you off the ground.
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4776436].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author mattlaclear
        Originally Posted by Alexa Smith View Post

        I'd hate to imagine that anyone might come away from it thinking that it might be a good idea to spin articles!
        We have generated over $500k in the last year using nothing but autospun articles and have grabbed well over 3,000 page one rankings during that same time.

        So I can't imagine why anyone would not want to spin articles.
        Signature

        Free Webinar - 5 Steps to Getting Targeted Traffic
        Unlocking Your Website's Profit Potential: Quick and Easy Steps to Generating More Traffic and Sales - Learn More By Clicking Here

        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4777121].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author JohnMcCabe
          Originally Posted by mattlaclear View Post

          We have generated over $500k in the last year using nothing but autospun articles and have grabbed well over 3,000 page one rankings during that same time.

          So I can't imagine why anyone would not want to spin articles.
          Tell the whole truth, Matt.

          You do autospin plr articles. And then you post them to a massive privately owned network. You are not "article marketing", you are running a backlinking service.

          Nothng wrong with that, it's obviously working.

          Popping up in all of these threads singing the praises of automated spinning 'your way' without telling the whole story seems a bit misleading.
          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4777378].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author myob
          Originally Posted by mattlaclear View Post

          We have generated over $500k in the last year using nothing but autospun articles and have grabbed well over 3,000 page one rankings during that same time.

          So I can't imagine why anyone would not want to spin articles.
          Every article I write generates an average $5,000 - $7,000 additional revenue each month. We completely bypass all the page one rankings in our niches.

          So I can't imagine why anyone would want to spin articles.
          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4777427].message }}
          • Profile picture of the author missmystery
            Originally Posted by myob View Post

            Every article I write generates an average $5,000 - $7,000 additional revenue each month. We completely bypass all the page one rankings in our niches.

            So I can't imagine why anyone would want to spin articles.
            Goodness.. seriously?
            Well done!

            Now I just need to figure out how you do it. :p
            Signature
            {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4777564].message }}
            • Profile picture of the author DireStraits
              Originally Posted by missmystery View Post

              Goodness.. seriously?
              Well done!

              Now I just need to figure out how you do it. :p
              No need to "figure it out", really: simply click his username, select "Find more posts by myob" and revel in the heaps of information he's generously revealed about the inner workings of his business in so many posts here over the preceding months, including but not limited to how he goes about generating massive traffic through article marketing (syndication) without any concern for search-engine rankings.

              It's quite a ride.
              {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4777711].message }}
              • Profile picture of the author Alexa Smith
                Banned
                Originally Posted by DireStraits View Post

                It's quite a ride.
                The quotation-posts, in themselves, are pretty "choice".

                "Quotations will tell the full measure of meaning, if you have enough of them" (James Murray).
                {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4777754].message }}
              • Profile picture of the author missmystery
                Originally Posted by DireStraits View Post

                No need to "figure it out", really: simply click his username, select "Find more posts by myob" and revel in the heaps of information he's generously revealed about the inner workings of his business in so many posts here over the preceding months, including but not limited to how he goes about generating massive traffic through article marketing (syndication) without any concern for search-engine rankings.

                It's quite a ride.
                Yes I was planning to do that and put the puzzle pieces together myself. But it will have to wait as it's 6am and I'm still up.
                Signature
                {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4777827].message }}
            • Profile picture of the author myob
              Originally Posted by missmystery View Post

              Goodness.. seriously?
              Well done!

              Now I just need to figure out how you do it. :p
              What I "do" is just what so many others have posted about article syndication such as Alexa, Mike, John and others. This thread may be helpful to start: http://www.warriorforum.com/main-int...ml#post3188316

              In addition, you will find that I often recommend (highly) this excellent ebook, "Turn Words Into Traffic" by Jim Edwards. That is essentially the model many of us use.
              {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4777838].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author John Romaine
          Originally Posted by mattlaclear View Post

          We have generated over $500k in the last year using nothing but autospun articles and have grabbed well over 3,000 page one rankings during that same time.

          So I can't imagine why anyone would not want to spin articles.
          Matt, I was speaking with my gym partner who works for a leading SEO company here in Australia - ewebmarketing.com.au.

          We were both in agreement that whilst short spun articles containing contextually relevant backlinks are an effective SEO strategy, that they their days could be numbered once algorithms change and more emphasis is given to social media - ie FB likes and G+1's.

          Its somewhat obvious that this is the way Google is heading.

          Given your success using spun articles, how do you see this affecting your current business model, once that shift takes place?
          Signature

          BS free SEO services, training and advice - SEO Point

          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4777836].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author missmystery
        Originally Posted by Alexa Smith View Post

        I'm very relieved indeed to hear that. I've been advising some complete beginners who know nothing at all about the subject to read this thread: I'd hate to imagine that anyone might come away from it thinking that it might be a good idea to spin articles!



        Yes, it's very, very much more than that: in fact "just submitting to RSS sites" isn't really part of what most professional article marketers would classify as "syndication" at all.

        For a quick general introduction to article syndication ...

        this thread may get the engine running,
        this one may get you some distance along the runway,
        this one may get you a little bit further and then ...
        parts of this one may even get you off the ground.
        Thanks for the links - you always provide useful answers. I won't buy the spinner then - I'll just send out my articles un-spun
        Signature
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4777141].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author Alexa Smith
          Banned
          Originally Posted by missmystery View Post

          Thanks for the links - you always provide useful answers.
          You're welcome. Those four threads mentioned just above are the ones which people have most recently contacted me saying they've found particularly helpful - and they're not (so far) full of posts from people who are promoting the spinning and/or auto-submission services they sell here.
          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[4777189].message }}
          • Profile picture of the author TaylorBauman
            Alexa, I've been studying these threads over the last couple of days for many hours. I was previously working on a strategy that involved exact match domains, low competition, link building etc to rank well on Google...not that I have to abandon everything from that method, but the article syndication approach makes so much sense! Spinning was my least favorite part of things, so thank you for clearing up "duplicated/syndicated" misconceptions! I know some people like it, I'm not here to open up that debate...just going to test some new things.
            How do you have time to drop so much knowledge and run your own biz!?
            {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6318887].message }}
            • Profile picture of the author DireStraits
              Originally Posted by TaylorBauman View Post

              How do you have time to drop so much knowledge and run your own biz!?
              The need or desire not to have to "run" much of anything on a day-to-day basis is what attracted many of us to online niche marketing in the first place.

              But more than that, the increased security, steady growth and peace of mind that comes from working smart — eschewing gimmickry and short-lived exploitative tactics in favour of asset-building and proper leverage — affords you more free time to do things other than dart around like a blue-arsed fly, which, rather unfortunately, is what so many people have to do as a consequence of constant setbacks faced due to an unhealthy obsession with using "shortcuts" and brute-force, quantitative methods to game systems (like search-engine algorithms) over which they have no real control.
              {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6320095].message }}
              • Profile picture of the author TaylorBauman
                Thanks Michael

                I'd assume then that your choice of time usage in helping others clear misconceptions and find their own success naturally comes from your own noble and charitable heart?
                {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6321902].message }}