Quit spinning your damn articles

119 replies
As the webmaster of an article posting Adsense-revenue sharing site that has seen its traffic and articles explode recently, this is my point of view.

Quit spinning your articles. I have no problem whatsoever with syndicated content on my site, and neither does Google because as Alexa has explained, syndicated content does not equal duplicate content.

But quit with the spinning. It's making your articles look like ****, and like nothing that any real people will actually read, and it's making my job harder. Not to mention, it's totally cutting you off from getting your backlink clicked if nobody's reading your article all the way through because it's unreadable.

That is all. (yes, I know you Warriors are not the ones responsible, but I know many of you practice article spinning when doing article marketing, and I want to see you all be part of the change for good).
#articles #damn #quit #spinning
  • Profile picture of the author gizmo222
    Agreeing! If you spin Articles and drop them immediatly without correction it looks not good. The result are non readable wordpiles with no aesthetic face.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5049496].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author AnniePot
      I built an article directory three years ago and ran it for two years before I gave up in desperation. It's still sitting on the web but I haven't accepted any content for just short of a year.

      99.9% of people adding content never ever bothered to read the published guidelines. Their submissions contained spelling errors, grammatical errors, links in the body text, were obviously spun and made absolutely no sense, or were in one block with no paragraph breaks, etc., etc.

      In the end, sifting through the crap was just too time consuming. It was an exercise in futility and I gave up.
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5049602].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author garyv
    Don't you mean - Stop rotating your dadgum written stories? Or could it be - Quit Oscillating your water-stopping newspaper fillers?
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5049807].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author RHert
    I'd have to say spinning articles works if you use the proper tool, i.e. Your Brain. The article spinners don't work because as stated above they leave the article an unreadable mess. But if you use your own brain you get great content that makes sense and people can still use it.
    Signature
    Copywriting at it's Best! - Tips and tricks to connect with your reader.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5049827].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author IceMustang
      Originally Posted by RHert View Post

      I'd have to say spinning articles works if you use the proper tool, i.e. Your Brain. The article spinners don't work because as stated above they leave the article an unreadable mess. But if you use your own brain you get great content that makes sense and people can still use it.
      Quoted for truth.
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5049961].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author RobHiness
      Originally Posted by RHert View Post

      I'd have to say spinning articles works if you use the proper tool, i.e. Your Brain. The article spinners don't work because as stated above they leave the article an unreadable mess. But if you use your own brain you get great content that makes sense and people can still use it.
      I couldn't agree more. It's all about original content. I see so many spun articles around the internet, and they make absolutely no sense whatsoever.

      You would think someone investing in a spinner, would have the knowledge to read it before submitting it.
      Signature
      “It’s much easier to double your business by doubling your conversion rate than by doubling your traffic.”
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5050211].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author BarryOnline
    Agree, people need to stop filling the net with junk!
    Signature

    We are the universe contemplating itself - Carl Sagan

    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5049834].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Seth Bias
    If your going to spin manually spin so it at least looks like someone actually wrote it. I know it takes time, just have a VA do it for you or someone off fiverr.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5049840].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Daniel Wilson
    So what? It makes easier for our quality content to stand out of the big pile of crap.
    Signature


    -25% WF PROMO CODE: "WFPROMO911" (expires on 1.1.2012)
    - High search volume keywords , high CPC keywords, easy to rank keywords
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5049846].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author BarryOnline
      Originally Posted by Daniel Wilson View Post

      So what? It makes easier for our quality content to stand out of the big pile of crap.
      Unfortunately, oftentimes the crap out ranks the good stuff.
      Signature

      We are the universe contemplating itself - Carl Sagan

      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5049875].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author HeySal
        Originally Posted by BarryOnline View Post

        Unfortunately, oftentimes the crap out ranks the good stuff.
        The Panda doesn't agree, LOL.

        What shocks me is how people that think they are intelligent enough to be in business are not sharp enough to realize what kind of idiots they look like when people start to read and realize that they are looking at trash and click off.

        Yes, the trash can get some quick SE results (or at least used to be able to), but why would a lucid human be in a hurry to mutilate their business reputation? The search engines might get trash to google #1 - but what happens when a real person clicks on from google #1 and sees that crap? But then, I think Panda already answered that question. When a SE company has to defend itself against trash peddlers, that's pretty sad.
        Signature

        Sal
        When the Roads and Paths end, learn to guide yourself through the wilderness
        Beyond the Path

        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5050135].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author Vcize
          Originally Posted by HeySal View Post

          The Panda doesn't agree, LOL.

          What shocks me is how people that think they are intelligent enough to be in business are not sharp enough to realize what kind of idiots they look like when people start to read and realize that they are looking at trash and click off.

          Yes, the trash can get some quick SE results (or at least used to be able to), but why would a lucid human be in a hurry to mutilate their business reputation? The search engines might get trash to google #1 - but what happens when a real person clicks on from google #1 and sees that crap? But then, I think Panda already answered that question. When a SE company has to defend itself against trash peddlers, that's pretty sad.
          I'm not following your line of logic here. If people are spinning and submitting to get ranked, then why would someone who clicks through to the main site ever see that spun article?

          They wouldn't...
          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5180280].message }}
          • Profile picture of the author Alexa Smith
            Banned
            Originally Posted by Vcize View Post

            If people are spinning and submitting to get ranked, then why would someone who clicks through to the main site ever see that spun article?

            They wouldn't...
            Then why use up the time and effort involved in spinning it? Why not just use an unspun, syndicated copy of the original (the exact business model of all those of us here who are so successfully making our livings and building our businesses through the widespread syndication of our articles)?
            {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5180352].message }}
            • Profile picture of the author GeorgR.
              Originally Posted by Alexa Smith View Post

              Then why use up the time and effort involved in spinning it? Why not just use an unspun, syndicated copy of the original (the exact business model of all those of us here who are so successfully making our livings and building our businesses through the widespread syndication of our articles)?
              Because every SEO "tells you" you *need* to spin your articles for higher success rate. You simply cannot submit ONE article to a bunch of directories..some might even reject you...let alone that Google might ignore your link since it sees it is a dupe.

              Heck if i could save that ANNOYING and tedious step of spinning articles i would be a happy man! Maybe i should just try it and skip that part. It might work if i use my own articles and then submit them, even if it's "clones"...
              Signature
              *** Affiliate Site Quick --> The Fastest & Easiest Way to Make Affiliate Sites!<--
              -> VISIT www.1UP-SEO.com *** <- Internet Marketing, SEO Tips, Reviews & More!! ***
              *** HIGH QUALITY CONTENT CREATION +++ Manual Article Spinning (Thread Here) ***
              Content Creation, Blogging, Articles, Converting Sales Copy, Reviews, Ebooks, Rewrites
              {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5180681].message }}
              • Profile picture of the author Alexa Smith
                Banned
                Originally Posted by GeorgR. View Post

                Because every SEO "tells you" you *need* to spin your articles for higher success rate.
                Not "every SEO". Some have some sense. Some are very professional and very highly skilled at their work. But they're telling people not to spin articles (if they mention that subject at all, or are asked about it), obviously.

                Originally Posted by GeorgR. View Post

                You simply cannot submit ONE article to a bunch of directories..some might even reject you...
                LOL - their understanding of article directories is honestly so poor that they imagine that article directories require previously unpublished content?! Some "SEO people" they are! :confused:

                Difficult to know, sometimes, whether people are just ill-informed and misguided themselves, or deliberately trying to deceive people, isn't it? :rolleyes:

                Originally Posted by GeorgR. View Post

                let alone that Google might ignore your link since it sees it is a dupe.
                But it isn't a "dupe" in the sense of "duplicate content" for being ignored by Google. Anyone who has read the references on Google WebMaster Central blog knows this. (Of course, I do appreciate that many of them haven't, and just rely on the fact that their clients haven't, either! :p ).

                They're the ones who are dupes.

                They've duped themselves into not knowing the difference between duplicate content and syndicated content. And their thinking about it is so cloudy and woolly that they just have this very vaguely and flexibly defined concept ("dupe") for referring to anything that's already been published online. :p

                I've known you for long enough to know that you see through them, Georg.
                {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5180737].message }}
              • Profile picture of the author Ken Marc
                Originally Posted by GeorgR. View Post

                Heck if i could save that ANNOYING and tedious step of spinning articles i would be a happy man! Maybe i should just try it and skip that part. It might work if i use my own articles and then submit them, even if it's "clones"...
                You should totally do that, if you are doing it JUST to get backlinks. Google (or any search engine for that matter) can't 'punish' you for that.

                Ken
                Signature

                Beware, all I do is speculate.

                {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5180764].message }}
            • Profile picture of the author Sara Young
              Originally Posted by Alexa Smith View Post

              Then why use up the time and effort involved in spinning it? Why not just use an unspun, syndicated copy of the original (the exact business model of all those of us here who are so successfully making our livings and building our businesses through the widespread syndication of our articles)?
              Alexa, I'm curious to know what your opinion is about the effect syndicated content might have on the article directories in the long term. In your opinion would a directory that is full of syndicated articles (or duplicate content) be devalued by Google for not having enough unique material?

              I'm not talking about the value of the backlinks here, but of the effect on the article directory itself.
              {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5185520].message }}
              • Profile picture of the author Alexa Smith
                Banned
                Originally Posted by Sara Young View Post

                In your opinion would a directory that is full of syndicated articles (or duplicate content) be devalued by Google for not having enough unique material?
                Excuse my being pedantic, but "syndicated articles" are not "duplicate content": Article Marketers - Lay the Duplicate Content Myth To Rest Once and For All | Internet Marketing and Publishing

                However, I'm saying that only to be pedantic and it doesn't answer your question at all.

                I don't know, but I suspect that this is closely related to the traffic shortage problems that article directories were commenting on (pretty publicly) after the first "Panda update".

                From the article marketing perspective, of course, this did us a huge favour: taking all those article directories off the front page of Google's SERP's made it much easier for us to rank our own sites, but article directories certainly suffered considerable traffic loss, and income loss, from it all, yes.

                They responded in different ways.

                At EZA they had a "consultation process" (on their blog) with their authors, and as part of that process they even considered (for all of 24 hours!) introducing a rule that they wouldn't accept previously published content, but very wisely changed their minds about that suggestion immediately (presumably realising that they'd just lose all their best authors, if they did that, because not many people would be willing to give an article directory the initial indexation-rights to their work).

                I'm only rambling, here, and don't really know the answer. But it's an interesting situation ... in my mind, it relates, in a way, to the inherent conflict that exists between an author using an article directory (and I'm a big user of EZA, myself - all my articles go there, eventually) and the article directory's own financial interest. What EZA really want is for lots of people to read my articles there and click on their AdSense ads. I want them to read my articles and not click on EZA's AdSense! Well, the moral of the story there is "don't ever let your potential customer traffic go to an article directory, if you can avoid it, because that isn't who the article directory copies are there for", but this also doesn't answer your question, sorry.

                "Running an article directory" can't be an easy or particularly profitable business model, these days, I'd think. (I certainly know a lot of people who have done that in the past but don't bother with it any more now). Sorry, Sara - for a long-winded answer that said nothing, really.
                {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5185715].message }}
                • Profile picture of the author Kurt
                  Originally Posted by Alexa Smith View Post

                  Excuse my being pedantic, but "syndicated articles" are not "duplicate content": Article Marketers - Lay the Duplicate Content Myth To Rest Once and For All | Internet Marketing and Publishing
                  Not to be pendantic, but I prefer Google's definition of duplicate content over Alexa's.

                  The following is quoted directly from Google's Webmaster Tools:

                  http://www.google.com/support/webmasters/bin/answer.py?answer=66359

                  Duplicate content
                  Duplicate content generally refers to substantive blocks of content within or across domains that either completely match other content or are appreciably similar.
                  As anyone can plainly read, Google feels syndicated content IS duplicate content.

                  Another way we can tell is how Google feels about duplicate content is how Google uses its duplicate content filter, and it isn't called a "syndicated content filter" for a reason. Does Google's doop content filter apply to only one domain or does it filter pages across multiple domains?

                  Also, this link was recently posted by marketingrep4u and points to a video about leveraging syndicated content from SEOMoz, one of the most respected SEO sites on the Web. Rand Fishkin obviously feels syndicated content is duplicate content too:
                  Leveraging Syndicated Content Effectively for SEO - Whiteboard Friday | SEOmoz

                  To be honest, I don't see how anyone can claim that two webpages, both containing the same exact article, aren't considered "duplicate" regardless of whether or not they are hosted on the same domain or seperate domains.
                  Signature
                  Serious about Print on Demand? Discover how YOU can join my FREE exclusive secret alliance
                  Plus how to get my Print on Demand Treasure Maps for FREE
                  {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5185855].message }}
                  • Profile picture of the author Alexa Smith
                    Banned
                    Originally Posted by Kurt View Post

                    I don't see how anyone can claim that two webpages, both containing the same exact article, aren't considered "duplicate" regardless of whether or not they are hosted on the same domain or seperate domains.
                    Strangely, some of the people selling spinning software and services do still (just about) contrive to interpret it that way, while all those of us so successfully building our business and making our livings by having our articles syndicated (many, if not most, of us having previously tried the "spinning" model unsuccessfully before we learned better) have very different experience.

                    And often even very different things to quote from Google WebMaster Central blog (as in one of the links above).
                    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5185897].message }}
                    • Profile picture of the author JB Jiles
                      Banned
                      Originally Posted by Kurt View Post

                      Now please answser my question about how the Google duplicate content filter works? Does the doop content filter filter out "syndicated" content or not?
                      Google's position is this, based on reading the content contained in your link:

                      "Google tries hard to index and show pages with distinct information. This filtering means, for instance, that if your site has a "regular" and "printer" version of each article, and neither of these is blocked with a noindex meta tag, we'll choose one of them to list. 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." .... " 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. "

                      The silence you are receiving on your question is interesting.

                      I, for one, am glad you brought this up about duplicate content and thank you for it. It doesn't change my opinion on seeing little value for spinning or rewriting content for what I am trying to achieve, but, just the same, I appreciated the link and really should have been more aware of Google's view myself.

                      So thanks again.

                      A copy of The Ox-Bow Incident for Chris Worner please!
                      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5186196].message }}
                  • Profile picture of the author JB Jiles
                    Banned
                    Does Google's doop content filter apply to only one domain or does it filter pages across multiple domains?
                    Dissension is good and necessary, I say!

                    Your question does jive with what Google says on the link you provided from the Google websmaster forum: "Duplicate content generally refers to substantive blocks of content within or across domains that either completely match other content or are appreciably similar."

                    So why shoot this messenger and start the collective disparagement?

                    Instead of getting personal, why not simply discuss the point that was made?

                    It was a good one.
                    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5186048].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author rooze
    I loving to reading a badish spin article. It give hope me and happy that one day I able to write that good an make big monies on intraweb.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5049962].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Lori Kelly
    I so agree.

    When I was taking time to see if my content was stolen, and I did find my articles on someone's website, the spun version made absolutely no sense. The spun content used some of my original content about real estate spun with health issues that resulted in a ridiculous article.

    I was going to take the time to contact the spinner to let him know he took my content but figured he deserved to look like a fool instead.
    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[5050010].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author PLRExpress
      No! Don't stop spinning your articles! Reading spun articles is one of my favorite hobbies - some of them leave me in stitches of laughter. Especially since spinning is actually pointless.
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5050200].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author TopKat22
        I agree, spinning is pointless for everyone and serves no real purpose.


        Originally Posted by garyv View Post

        Don't you mean - Stop rotating your dadgum written stories? Or could it be - Quit Oscillating your water-stopping newspaper fillers?
        LOL

        Originally Posted by RHert View Post

        I'd have to say spinning articles works if you use the proper tool, i.e. Your Brain. The article spinners don't work because as stated above they leave the article an unreadable mess. But if you use your own brain you get great content that makes sense and people can still use it.
        I actually do not consider this spinning. I can read other people's articles to get an idea and then write my own concepts about that but not use their exact points or quotes, etc. I do agree with just using your own brain, though.

        Originally Posted by NathanDevlin View Post

        No! Don't stop spinning your articles! Reading spun articles is one of my favorite hobbies - some of them leave me in stitches of laughter. Especially since spinning is actually pointless.
        You have got to be kidding. Most of them make no sense whatsoever.
        Signature
        44 days in and we broke the $10K a month recurring bench mark.

        Guaranteed 60% Opt In Rate Traffic-Real People-Fresh Today-High Quality Biz Opp traffic![/URL]
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5050244].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author edwood
        Originally Posted by NathanDevlin View Post

        No! Don't stop spinning your articles! Reading spun articles is one of my favorite hobbies - some of them leave me in stitches of laughter.
        Got ot agree with this. They're up there with Google Translate for comic potential.

        Michael
        Signature

        WSO

        --> Grab PLR to this FUN Ebook! <--


        (Affiliates: Earn 100% Commissions)
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5057085].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author Tony Marriott
          Originally Posted by LukePeerFly View Post

          If the articles are junk then there is a better chance they'll click one of my AdSense ads just to get off the page!
          While having garbage on your page may encourage people to click anything to get off it (even adSense ads) the garbage content will either not rank or get penalized and so no-one will see it anyway

          Originally Posted by edwood View Post

          Got ot agree with this. They're up there with Google Translate for comic potential.

          Michael
          Google translate - I thought that was a spinner
          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5177851].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author Sirr
          Firstly, those that spin articles, myself included, are not going to stop because somebody says so. Unless of course you're going to pay for the unique articles as a replacement for my spun articles.

          Now, lets move onto spun articles.

          A well spun article does not equal a poor article. An autospun article is the junk articles you're referring to.

          I spin my articles at the sentence and paragraph level. I also spin at word level, but only common words that have synonym replacements that makes the article perfectly readable. They even make it into ezine.

          When you can get 100 articles out of a single spun article, that escape "duplicate content" you begin to understand why people do it. It saves time. It saves money.

          Does it harm the web if each spun article is perfectly readable? No. Why syndicate articles when you can get more benefit from spinning the article? If the article is 100% readable and makes perfect sense then it's not junk and it's not damaging the web.

          Popping articles onto article directories and web 2.0 properties is just another part of the backlinking processes. So long as you're not causing any harm to the web I don't see a problem.

          I bet a lot of the people replying in this comment are guilty of spamming the web in some way. You can't all tell me your backlinks are all natural from users who enjoy your site. How many of you comment spam? Create forum profiles? Outsource the process? I know this isn't the case for all of those in this thread but it will apply to some.

          If you want a perfect web I think you need to take some advice from Matthew:

          "Why do you look at the speck of sawdust in your brother's eye and pay no attention to the plank in your own eye?"
          I'm not going to stop. It's extremely beneficial to my backlinking campaign and is exceptionally helpful when adding content to my upper tiers of my pyramids. I think I speak for others who are spinning articles correctly.

          Junk articles. Those are bad.


          Originally Posted by Alexa Smith View Post

          Unfortunately, people continue to do it even though it doesn't work, Lee.
          You're wrong. Just because you haven't tried the power of article spinning, or haven't spent enough time doing it, does not mean it does not work. Have you not read the success stories on the SENukeX forums? Or the success stories of Article Marketing Robot? For something that doesn't work so many people are having success doing it, including myself.
          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5178371].message }}
          • Profile picture of the author JB Jiles
            Banned
            Originally Posted by Sirr View Post

            When you can get 100 articles out of a single spun article, that escape "duplicate content" you begin to understand why people do it. It saves time. It saves money.
            You're wasting time, energy and even words writing about why you do it. You really are, Sirr. Once you realize duplicate content only applies to the same content on different pages of the same site, spinning or rewriting content in any form or fashion just doesn't make sense. There's no benefit.

            But check this out, I just read it. You might like it!

            "Hope means hoping when things are hopeless, or it is no virtue at all. And faith means believing the incredible, or it is no virtue at all." - G.K. Chesterton

            This one I like too and will throw it in just because I like St. Therese so much!

            "Discouragement itself is a form of pride." - St. Therese of Lisieux
            {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5178451].message }}
          • Profile picture of the author Alexa Smith
            Banned
            Originally Posted by Sirr View Post

            You're wrong. Just because you haven't tried the power of article spinning, or haven't spent enough time doing it, does not mean it does not work.
            On the contrary, I've "been there", I'm embarrassed to say, and have tried it extensively, even mistakenly believing for a long time that the successes I had were attributable to the spinning itself. :rolleyes:

            Have you tried doing exactly whatever you're doing but without the spinning stage? As so many others here have done, you'll find the benefits identical - and there are reasons for that.

            Originally Posted by Sirr View Post

            For something that doesn't work so many people are having success doing it
            Nobody's disputing that they're doing it and having success, but the point is that they're misattributing the success, i.e. causatively rather than correlatively, to the fact that they're doing it. If they learn what the difference is between duplicate content and syndicated content, they'll realize that they can have exactly the same success without the spinning, just as I did when I gave up spinning. But as explained above, I don't see that happening any time soon, given the strength of the widespread interests in perpetuating the myth and people's lack of willingness to examine the evidence objectively. :p

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

            The value to anyone's site of a given backlink on any given page of the web is not, somehow, magically improved by being attached to spun rather than to syndicated content!

            Now that really would take some explaining, wouldn't it?
            {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5178498].message }}
            • Profile picture of the author Sirr
              Originally Posted by Alexa Smith View Post

              On the contrary, I've "been there", I'm embarrassed to say, and have tried it extensively, even mistakenly believing for a long time that the successes I had were attributable to the spinning itself. :rolleyes:

              Have you tried doing exactly whatever you're doing but without the spinning stage? As so many others here have done, you'll find the benefits identical - and there are reasons for that.



              Nobody's disputing that they're doing it and having success, but the point is that they're misattributing the success, i.e. causatively rather than correlatively, to the fact that they're doing it. If they learn what the difference is between duplicate content and syndicated content, they'll realize that they can have exactly the same success without the spinning, just as I did when I gave up spinning. But as explained above, I don't see that happening any time soon, given the strength of the widespread interests in perpetuating the myth and people's lack of willingness to examine the evidence objectively. :p

              Article Marketers - Lay the Duplicate Content Myth To Rest Once and For All | Internet Marketing and Publishing
              I will be honest with you, because your reply was rather honest and I liked the way you came across. I have not tried the opposite, articles used to take me a long time to write and I got stuck into spinning from the start.

              I've just been doing what works for me. I'm much faster at writing. So, for the sake of testing this debate when I next write an article I will manually write the 20 articles and test the results

              If it works for me, then I've learnt something new. I'm always up for learning something new.
              {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5178547].message }}
              • Profile picture of the author Alexa Smith
                Banned
                Originally Posted by Sirr View Post

                I have not tried the opposite, articles used to take me a long time to write and I got stuck into spinning from the start.
                I hear you ... so did I, to be honest.

                Originally Posted by Sirr View Post

                I've just been doing what works for me.
                I understand ... nobody can criticise you for it. But there may be something quicker and easier for you which will work in exactly the same way.

                Originally Posted by Sirr View Post

                So, for the sake of testing this debate when I next write an article I will manually write the 20 articles and test the results
                Nobody's suggesting that you should do that. Indeed, doing that wouldn't actually prove the point at all. The way to satisfy yourself about it, evidentially, is simply to syndicate the same article without spinning it. You'll see that the backlinks you get are worth the same. (With respect, I suggest that it will take a lot more than 20 articles to compare the two different methods on a statistically significant basis, because if you're submitting spun articles, the link-juice value of the places to which you're submitting them may well be absolutely tiny to start with?!).
                {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5178601].message }}
                • Profile picture of the author Ken Marc
                  Originally Posted by Alexa Smith View Post

                  You'll see that the backlinks you get are worth the same.
                  I presume the referred backlinks being equated having "same worth" are of the following types...

                  1. backlinks from a single article submitted to 20 sites (all duplicate, or syndicated if you will)
                  2. backlinks from 20 spun versions of a single article submitted to 20 sites - one article per site (some uniqueness attributable)

                  In both the above cases, total of 20 articles are submitted, one per site, regardless of spun or not. Now, How can we be sure, that "the backlinks are worth the same".

                  Ken
                  Signature

                  Beware, all I do is speculate.

                  {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5178760].message }}
                  • Profile picture of the author Alexa Smith
                    Banned
                    Originally Posted by Ken Marc View Post

                    How can we be sure, that "the backlinks are worth the same".
                    Ken, are you seriously suggesting that spinning the content of an article somehow changes the value of a backlink attached to it?! (Sometimes it's like something out of "Alice In Wonderland", in here: you have to "believe six impossible things before breakfast" just for practice!).

                    You're surely not seriously suggesting this, are you? :confused:
                    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5178898].message }}
                    • Profile picture of the author Sirr
                      Originally Posted by Alexa Smith View Post

                      Ken, are you seriously suggesting that spinning the content of an article somehow changes the value of a backlink attached to it?! (Sometimes it's like something out of "Alice In Wonderland", in here: you have to "believe six impossible things before breakfast" just for practice!).

                      You're surely not seriously suggesting this, are you? :confused:
                      Hi Alexa,

                      He may be wondering if backlinks in syndicated content gets less value than back links in unique content. I did initially think this myself.
                      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5178932].message }}
                      • Profile picture of the author Alexa Smith
                        Banned
                        Originally Posted by Sirr View Post

                        Hi Alexa,

                        He may be wondering if backlinks in syndicated content gets less value than back links in unique content. I did initially think this myself.
                        I see ... thanks, Sirr.

                        I shouldn't discuss this, here, at all, to be honest. I confess I struggle to find "forms of words" that will offend nobody. I find that a seriously weird concept, and it baffles me how people can imagine that something as "strange" as that can possibly be true, when there's absolutely no conceivable evidence for it.

                        When you did think that, why did you believe that it might be so, if you can remember, Sirr? Was it that you thought maybe the backlinks indexed in Google's supplemental index somehow "carried less linkjuice" than those in the main index, or something? (But why?). :confused:
                        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5179024].message }}
                      • Profile picture of the author Ken Marc
                        Originally Posted by Alexa Smith View Post

                        Ken, are you seriously suggesting that spinning the content of an article somehow changes the value of a backlink attached to it?!
                        It seems counterintuitive to you (and may be others), but I guess that's exactly what I am suggesting. Here is why.

                        I write an article targeted to a keyword "my old keyword". Now I spin the article targeting the keyword "my new keyword". I would guess, both these articles will rank differently for both keywords. I suppose the value of the backlink depends more on the relevance (to the keyword, niche) of the content hosting/surrounding the link, rather than anything else (save anchortext). IpsoFacto!

                        Originally Posted by Alexa Smith View Post

                        (Sometimes it's like something out of "Alice In Wonderland", in here: you have to "believe six impossible things before breakfast" just for practice!).

                        You're surely not seriously suggesting this, are you? :confused:
                        I am afraid I just did that.

                        Originally Posted by Sirr View Post

                        Hi Alexa,

                        He may be wondering if backlinks in syndicated content gets less value than back links in unique content. I did initially think this myself.
                        No, sirr, that's not what I mean.

                        The question is even more important because, the above referred scenario can materialize intentionally or automatically, in which case, the value of backlinks may differ - for batter or worse. And if so is the case, spinning may indeed be a tool for manipulating SERPs, although the ROI (in terms of time and efforts) may be questionable/debatable.

                        Ken
                        Signature

                        Beware, all I do is speculate.

                        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5179103].message }}
                        • Profile picture of the author Alexa Smith
                          Banned
                          Originally Posted by cedricloi View Post

                          A lot of people think that. Why do they think that? I don't know.
                          Nope ... I don't, really.

                          You can perhaps explain some of it by the widespread confusion between duplicate content and syndicated content, and some of it by the widespread pressures of service-providers (people making their livings by promoting spinning software and services) to perpetuate some of these ill-informed and misguided beliefs, but ultimately there's no reason I can see why anyone should imagine that the value to anyone's site of a given backlink on any given page of the web could somehow, magically, be improved by being attached to spun rather than to syndicated content!

                          It just "surpasses all understanding".

                          Amazon.com:  Why People Believe Weird Things:...Amazon.com: Why People Believe Weird Things:...
                          Originally Posted by Ken Marc View Post

                          It seems counterintuitive to you (and may be others), but I guess that's exactly what I am suggesting. Here is why.
                          You say "here is why" but the "explanation" you offer actually lends absolutely no evidence in support of that belief at all! :p

                          I promise I don't mean it rudely (and I apologise if it still comes across that way) but ultimately it's just too weird for me to be able to take it seriously. Sorry.
                          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5179138].message }}
                          • Profile picture of the author Ken Marc
                            Originally Posted by Alexa Smith View Post

                            You say "here is why" but the "explanation" you offer actually lends absolutely no evidence in support of that belief at all! :p
                            Err, I'm sure you did interprete it as "here is why [I suggest that...]", but still, that was wrong choice of words, even in that case. So you see, you are not the only one who struggles to find words!

                            You ARE correct that I have not provided any evidence, nor do I have one. On the contrary, I am seeking the evidences, for or against, of your statement or my conjecture (belief is an overstatement, really).

                            Originally Posted by Alexa Smith View Post

                            I promise I don't mean it rudely (and I apologise if it still comes across that way) but ultimately it's just too weird for me to be able to take it seriously. Sorry.
                            I am sure you did mean well, and so will I maintain. The referred too much weirdness is still escaping me.

                            Ken
                            Signature

                            Beware, all I do is speculate.

                            {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5179275].message }}
                            • Profile picture of the author Alan Petersen
                              Google's algorithm keeps getting "smarter". Let them continue putting all their eggs in the article spinning basket and see how that eventually turns out.

                              Back in the early AdSense days peeps went from 15K/month to pennies once Google caught on.

                              Think long term. All the time you saved from not writing articles or outsourcing the writing will be for naught when your swept up in one of future slaps.

                              I've never spun but I've done things just to add crappy content for SEO and I think the time I wasted since those sites were zapped.

                              I have thin sites with original content still standing and earning vs. my 100+ page crap fest sites which have now bit the dustbin.
                              Signature
                              {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5179770].message }}
                              • Profile picture of the author Ken Marc
                                Originally Posted by Alan Petersen View Post

                                Google's algorithm keeps getting "smarter". Let them continue putting all their eggs in the article spinning basket and see how that eventually turns out.

                                Think long term. All the time you saved from not writing articles or outsourcing the writing will be for naught when your swept up in one of future slaps.

                                I have thin sites with original content still standing and earning vs. my 100+ page crap fest sites which have now bit the dustbin.
                                First off, no matter how 'smart' google's algorithm gets, it would still be inferior to a human brain, that is, there will still be bugs exploitable by human brain. Otherwise, SEO would have been history, period.

                                Article spinning has nothing to do with putting all one's eggs in the same basket, so to speak. Even those, not using article spinning, IF depend on SEO 'solely' for traffic generation ARE putting all the eggs in the same basket. Now, long-term or not, unique content or spun, if your primary focus is SEO traffic, you are still dependent on search engines and the referred 'slap' may hurt you evenly.

                                IF thin sites with original content earns you, then that is NOT because the content is original, rather, because the content may have "quality" (and SEO). It wouldn't have made any difference if the content had been copied/syndicated. Same goes for your content rich "crap" sites, in converse.

                                Ken
                                Signature

                                Beware, all I do is speculate.

                                {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5180122].message }}
                                • Profile picture of the author NicoleBeckett
                                  Originally Posted by Ken Marc View Post

                                  First off, no matter how 'smart' google's algorithm gets, it would still be inferior to a human brain,
                                  LOL... that's what I say about all of the spinners out there!!

                                  In all seriousness, though, I've never understood why people spend so much time spinning. Even the people who say they've had success with it admit to spending hours or even days spinning individual words and sentences. Wouldn't it just be easier to write a new article??? :confused:
                                  Signature
                                  Sick of blending in with the crowd? Ready to stand ahead of the pack? The right content writing services can get you there...
                                  {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5180242].message }}
                                  • Profile picture of the author Ken Marc
                                    Originally Posted by NicoleBeckett View Post

                                    In all seriousness, though, I've never understood why people spend so much time spinning. Even the people who say they've had success with it admit to spending hours or even days spinning individual words and sentences. Wouldn't it just be easier to write a new article??? :confused:
                                    If article spinning (say producing x versions) takes them more time then writing x articles, they wouldn't do it (or would they? ). Certainly, however, it is not at all easier for ALL of us to write a new article (rather then rewrite/spin), not to the same degree anyway.

                                    Ken
                                    Signature

                                    Beware, all I do is speculate.

                                    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5180445].message }}
                                • Profile picture of the author Alan Petersen
                                  Originally Posted by Ken Marc View Post

                                  First off, no matter how 'smart' google's algorithm gets, it would still be inferior to a human brain...
                                  Yep, and you have the best engineering human brains coming out of Stanford vs. a spinning software.

                                  A bit ironic, since a lot folks using spinners do so because they're too lazy to use their human brain.
                                  Signature
                                  {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5180610].message }}
                                  • Profile picture of the author Ken Marc
                                    Originally Posted by Alan Petersen View Post

                                    Yep, and you have the best engineering human brains coming out of Stanford vs. a spinning software.

                                    A bit ironic, since a lot folks using spinners do so because they're too lazy to use their human brain.
                                    I am not sure if this is a rebuttal of my statement you quoted, but if so, I guess you are looking it out of context. Nowhere in my posts in this thread have I referred "a spinning software".

                                    Ken
                                    Signature

                                    Beware, all I do is speculate.

                                    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5180658].message }}
                          • Profile picture of the author Ken Marc
                            Originally Posted by Alexa Smith View Post

                            ...there's no reason I can see why anyone should imagine that the value to anyone's site of a given backlink on any given page of the web could somehow, magically, be improved by being attached to spun rather than to syndicated content!

                            It just "surpasses all understanding".
                            Alexa, if I may bother you again, I shall urge you to re-read my post #73. You seem to believe that by change I implied somehow 'improved' (magically or otherwise), which is not the case. However, I still maintain that context of the page DOES alter the value of the link.

                            Let me elaborate on that, as I guess we are subscribing to different notions as far as backlinks go (and no, I am not one of those referred in your above quote). I better clarify that for my own sake.

                            This is what I understand.
                            Backlinks can serve three purposes: 1. Leach PR 2. Impart Authority (based on relevance) 3. provide organic traffic (not SE traffic). Now, the 'value' we (hopefully) are referring here concerns itself only with the second point, i.e. Impart Authority, based upon relevance, which is the MAJOR factor helping you SEO-wise from building backlinks, PR being minor (or even unimportant) factor.

                            If previous para is factually correct, it follows that the relevance of the link IS altered by spinning, and so does the value of the backlink (irrespective of the PR related value or anything else). That is, IF I rewrite an article about "Ferrari" to one about "McLaren" (Quoted text being the keywords), both articles will rank differently in SERPs when searched for these keywords. Now, that should still hold true, for all keywords (say, "how to lose weight" and "lose weight fast" pair). In this context, the values of the backlinks are NOT the same. Or is it still?

                            Ken
                            Signature

                            Beware, all I do is speculate.

                            {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5180621].message }}
                            • Profile picture of the author GoreBlogger
                              Originally Posted by Ken Marc View Post

                              That is, IF I rewrite an article about "Ferrari" to one about "McLaren" (Quoted text being the keywords), both articles will rank differently in SERPs when searched for these keywords. Now, that should still hold true, for all keywords (say, "how to lose weight" and "lose weight fast" pair). In this context, the values of the backlinks are NOT the same. Or is it still?

                              Ken
                              I came in from lurking because I really feel like this is the crucial question.
                              {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5180832].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author sydneypm
          Not sure that I agree with the no spin zone... I regularly spin my articles but I spin each sentence. When I am done, I have a number of well written articles and each has a slightly different message. On the other hand I do have an automated spinner that I never use because every time it does turn out like gibberish. It takes more time to go through and correct that mess than it does to rewrite each sentence three times.

          Just a note about directories: Some article directories, like Buzzle and Searchwarp, only accept unique, unpublished articles.

          As far as taking other people's articles and spinning them for your own use without giving credit - personally I feel that is the same as plagiarism. If you do not know what you are talking about and have to copy other people's articles, you should not be writing about that subject. I, too, have seen my own articles reused and spun terribly. If you are going to spin, use your own article and do it right.

          Is this better than syndication? It is for me. If I syndicate an article without spinning, Google gives me credit for one link even though the article is published numerous times. If I spin the same article, I get credit for a lot more of the backlinks from various directories. This has been true for years for my sites. (Believe me, I watch and if syndicating an article worked just as well, I would not waste my time spinning.)
          Signature

          The only true colon cleanse and whole body cleanse info on the net.

          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5185771].message }}
          • Profile picture of the author Ken Marc
            Originally Posted by sydneypm View Post

            Is this better than syndication? It is for me. If I syndicate an article without spinning, Google gives me credit for one link even though the article is published numerous times. If I spin the same article, I get credit for a lot more of the backlinks from various directories. This has been true for years for my sites. (Believe me, I watch and if syndicating an article worked just as well, I would not waste my time spinning.)
            This is interesting (and unheard of, for me). The thing about backlinks. Can you elaborate more on this?

            Ken
            Signature

            Beware, all I do is speculate.

            {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5185809].message }}
            • Profile picture of the author sydneypm
              Originally Posted by Ken Marc View Post

              This is interesting (and unheard of, for me). The thing about backlinks. Can you elaborate more on this?

              Ken
              I'm not exactly sure what you mean about backlinks but I will try to elaborate how I get the most backlinks for any one of my articles... I have used article submissions for four years. I tried UAW to distribute articles and noticed that, when done consistently, my sites would move up either to page one or closer for their keyword. (I would spin each paragraph to put a slightly different twist on each keyword.) When I would check backlinks to my site from the articles - I would see different backlinks from the same spun article, but from various directories.

              After some time, I grew tired of the monthly UAW fee. I eventually bought AMR instead. I would write an article for a major directory (like ezine) then "syndicate" it through AMR. After doing this a few months, I noticed backlinks to my site seemed to be at a stand still. Upon checking my backlinks - out of sending out over 1000 articles at a time, getting 400-500 published (I would attempt to index the links) only one or two would show as backlinks to my site!

              After a few months of this - I started spinning my articles again. Not the automated, replacing synonyms spin, but I spin the sentences and sometimes paragraphs myself. Three months later I checked through backlinks and found that, once again, I was receiving backlinks from my spun articles.

              Keep in mind that in the last two scenarios, I did make an effort to get the url's indexed for the articles.

              I am not saying that syndicating has not value; major news sites kind of prove it does. So I use a combination of both. But I really don't think my strategy would work if I used other people's articles and let the software do a crappy spin. What I do is time consuming, but worth the effort.

              I hope this helps!
              Cindy P.
              Signature

              The only true colon cleanse and whole body cleanse info on the net.

              {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5186101].message }}
              • Profile picture of the author Ken Marc
                Originally Posted by sydneypm View Post

                I'm not exactly sure what you mean about backlinks but I will try to elaborate how I get the most backlinks for any one of my articles... I have used article submissions for four years. I tried UAW to distribute articles and noticed that, when done consistently, my sites would move up either to page one or closer for their keyword. (I would spin each paragraph to put a slightly different twist on each keyword.) When I would check backlinks to my site from the articles - I would see different backlinks from the same spun article, but from various directories.

                After some time, I grew tired of the monthly UAW fee. I eventually bought AMR instead. I would write an article for a major directory (like ezine) then "syndicate" it through AMR. After doing this a few months, I noticed backlinks to my site seemed to be at a stand still. Upon checking my backlinks - out of sending out over 1000 articles at a time, getting 400-500 published (I would attempt to index the links) only one or two would show as backlinks to my site!

                After a few months of this - I started spinning my articles again. Not the automated, replacing synonyms spin, but I spin the sentences and sometimes paragraphs myself. Three months later I checked through backlinks and found that, once again, I was receiving backlinks from my spun articles.

                Keep in mind that in the last two scenarios, I did make an effort to get the url's indexed for the articles.

                I am not saying that syndicating has not value; major news sites kind of prove it does. So I use a combination of both. But I really don't think my strategy would work if I used other people's articles and let the software do a crappy spin. What I do is time consuming, but worth the effort.

                I hope this helps!
                Cindy P.
                Thanks Cindy for a detailed reply, and my apologies for not phrasing my question appropriately.

                To clarify further (sorry for being too thick), we have two example scenarios...
                1. You write an article (with links to your own site), and spread many (manual/well) spun versions across many directories.
                2. You write an article in EZA (with links to your own site) and resubmit the SAME article (without spin/alteration) across many outlets.

                Yo get more backlinks to your site in case 1 than 2. Am I correct?

                Ken
                Signature

                Beware, all I do is speculate.

                {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5186194].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Leslyaviel
    I agree, spinning in most instances results in unreadable content which is clouding the web with non useable information. Financial Freedom comes from the building and application of skills. Unfortunately too many online marketers are looking for a push button solution. They fail to realize that the successful marketers had to develop certain skills along the way. Yes there are certain ways of advertising that does not require much skill; for example, safelists, banner advertising, traffic exchanges. On the other hand, article marketing, seo, and ppc requires some skill. So I agree, if you are not willing to learn the skills, stick with the stuff that doesn't require your brain to function. By the way, no offense.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5050167].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author paulosully
    As a noob, I recently considered spinning to increase my productivity and get some stuff out there quickly. I downloaded a well know free spinner and took it for a test drive. What it produced was absolute garbage. I wouln't want to put my name on any of it. Nevermind the fact that no one is going to read this stuff.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5050375].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author shawoon98
    Spinning is a shortcut. And shortcuts seldom come with quality. Spinning might be stopped. But people will find another shortcut and continue filling internet with junk.... Junk is an inseparable part of internet.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5050386].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author LukePeerFly
    If the articles are junk then there is a better chance they'll click one of my AdSense ads just to get off the page!
    Signature

    ^ My Blog

    Are you an affiliate that runs PPV advertising? You need my PPV target scraper!
    Have a Facebook Page? FPTraffic, manages over 1,000,000,000 (BILLION) Likes! Check it out :)
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5050412].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author mounds
      Originally Posted by LukePeerFly View Post

      If the articles are junk then there is a better chance they'll click one of my AdSense ads just to get off the page!
      I'd like to know if there is any validity to this strategy. To me, it would be a lot easier to just hit the "Back" button, and check the other search results.

      Does this actually work?
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5051392].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author webjedi
      Originally Posted by LukePeerFly View Post

      If the articles are junk then there is a better chance they'll click one of my AdSense ads just to get off the page!
      OMG Luke your a Warrior!
      I was going to quote and laugh about this post as to the real hidden intent of spun **** on the Internet, makes people click to leave it !!
      Signature

      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5057228].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author john pearson
    what if you write the SIntax yourself and spin it so that it makes sense. I use this way and my text make sense.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5051112].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author Alexa Smith
      Banned
      Originally Posted by john pearson View Post

      what if you write the SIntax yourself and spin it so that it makes sense. I use this way and my text make sense.
      You're better off that way than having it all mangled, John, but you're still no better off than if you didn't spin it at all.

      A backlink to your site from any specified page on the web is not suddenly, magically, improved at all by being attached to spun rather than to syndicated content (and even the people selling spinning software and services can't and don't allege that it is).

      If you do it that way and make a really good job of it, then you'll be losing no readers at all, and no backlinks, and all you'll have lost is the time you spent entirely unnecessarily doing it: that's about the best outcome you're going to get out of it.
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5051170].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Jason X
    Yes I agree, Do not spin your content, After the Google Panda Update, this will hurt you, if not right away it will over time, Take your time and put out the good quality content that readers will get some value from, If you take the time to put out the quality content, it will actually over time increase your sites value, traffic, overall goal of the content in the first place.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5051221].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author dave_hermansen
    I couldn't agree more.. Do not (and never have) spun articles to get backlinks!! If you're going to take the time, why not do it right & just make the work count?
    Signature
    StoreCoach.com- Learn How to Dropship the Right Way - Buy & Sell Websites - Partner with Coach
    My PROVEN ecommerce process, as seen on: Fox News, the NY Times & Flippa
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5051226].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author ShayB
      Hello!/Salutations!/Greetings!

      I {found/came across/discovered} your {post/article/passage} and found it to be {informative/helpful/entertaining}.

      I {agree/concur/nod} with the {content/topic/paragraphs}.

      Thank you!/Gracias!/Danke!
      Signature
      "Fate protects fools, little children, and ships called Enterprise." ~Commander Riker
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5051412].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author absolutelee
    I would have to agree with this, except for one fact. Most spun content is never meant to be read by a human. It's used for SEO purposes. Creating a text backlink. And, used like that, I can't see that it matters. Having said that, I personally don't use machine spun content.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5051439].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author Alexa Smith
      Banned
      Originally Posted by absolutelee View Post

      Most spun content is never meant to be read by a human. It's used for SEO purposes. Creating a text backlink. And, used like that, I can't see that it matters.
      You don't think it "matters" to fill the web with almost infinite quantities of nonsense, just to try to game Google's algorithms and get inflated rankings out of it?

      Please excuse the observation that I'm very happy Google disagrees with you about that, Lee.

      (And then people wonder why internet marketers "enjoy" the collective reputation that we do).

      But the point here is that it doesn't actually "matter" whether or not it "matters": you can "create a text backlink" with syndicated content anyway, by doing whatever it is you do but without the "spinning" stage, and without being in any way disadvantaged because of that: a backlink to your site from any specified page on the web is not suddenly, magically, improved at all by being attached to spun rather than to syndicated content (and even the people selling spinning software and services can't and don't allege that it is).

      All you're really saying, in your post above is that you think there's no disadvantage.

      Who cares, when there isn't any advantage, either?
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5051497].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author Nicola Lane
      Originally Posted by absolutelee View Post

      I would have to agree with this, except for one fact. Most spun content is never meant to be read by a human. It's used for SEO purposes. Creating a text backlink. And, used like that, I can't see that it matters. Having said that, I personally don't use machine spun content.
      Which is why the value of those backlinks has been steadily falling and will one day get to zero.

      Which actually hurts people who don't use this type of "content vomit"

      A long time ago you could write a few articles, syndicate them to quality directories, get good backlinks and rank well.

      Then the "easy money" brigade got into the arena, they created article directories that were auto approve, and spinning software - and most article directories turned into cess pools.

      And even good directories let their standards slip so they could rake in the cash.

      Eventually it got so bad that the search engines began to notice - so they had to update their algorithms, so that blatant crap didn't get such good ratings.

      So the people who had been trying to do good work got tarred with the same brush.

      Which means that ten good syndicated articles won't make an impression on the search engines - so even people who produce really good sites have to put more work into getting the site ranked than they do working on the site!


      And then you say it doesn't matter!!!!
      Signature

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

      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5051611].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Alex Barboza
    People should also take into account the fact that they are wasting their time spinning for backlinking purposes. Do you think that Google will count a link better if the content where it is placed is "unique"?

    The time you spend spinning should be used writing new articles.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5051626].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author CoryW
    Wow. This is news to me. I would never put spun content on my money sites, but I've always used spun articles for SEO purposes and have not seen negative impacts...or maybe my sites that won't make it to #1 on page one of Google is b/c of this reason?

    It is important to note that I still have sites ranked #1 that use this method for SEO purposes.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5051713].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author Alexa Smith
      Banned
      Originally Posted by CoryW View Post

      I've always used spun articles for SEO purposes and have not seen negative impacts
      Nobody's suggested that you necessarily will/would, Cory.

      The point is that you also haven't seen any benefits from the fact that you've spun them.

      In such conversations, people (and I specifically exclude you from this, Cory, because I know you're not one of them!) often say "I've been spinning and experienced this benefit, and that benefit, and the other benefit by having spun my articles", and what they don't tell you (presumably because they genuinely don't know - or because they are themselves promoting a spinning service, of course: we get plenty of that, too) is that they would have had those exact same benefits without the spinning.

      In other words, it's not that the factual component of their claims is untrue: as so often, it's just the attribution of causation that's a mistaken one.

      Originally Posted by CoryW View Post

      It is important to note that I still have sites ranked #1 that use this method for SEO purposes.
      Nobody's questioning that.

      I'm simply stating, factually, that that doesn't prove that you've benefitted from the spinning. The point being that if you'd done exactly the same without spinning, your SEO would be exactly the same (as so many of us here learned when we stopped spinning). Because a backlink to your site from any specified page on the web is not suddenly, magically, improved at all by being attached to spun rather than to syndicated content.
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5051904].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author kindsvater
    It's not just spinning. People are autoposting pure junk. I think they are going to random web pages, highlighting all, copying, and posting as an 'article' with their link at the end. English. Chinese. Wookie. Doesn't matter.

    The problem, I assume, is some article directories are set to automatically accept articles so quality doesn't matter in the horde's mindless search for a "link."

    What you need is to find a tighter control over who can subscribe and post to your site.

    You should also be banning entire countries in your .htaccess.

    I've been down this road. You have to be overly, and perhaps to some, unfairly aggressive about this. Otherwise, just pack up your site because the spam flood is obscene.

    .
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5051959].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author celente
    I still do not know why people are doing this.

    Google has said it a million times, which of these do you think google is saying right now

    1) "Oh yes, we love your jibberish articles that have been spun 899 times till next sunday, people are going to love reading them, especially 4 year olds, as they can make better sense of them"

    OR

    2) "Hey now I like this guy, he has given us what we are looking for all along....WHat do you say guys, should we reward this guy for doing what we have always wanted...hmmmm sounds good to me. WOW and the article even make sense...ok fellas, let reward him and give him a big yellow star"

    LOL

    My point is, google even before the panda wants you to give quaility and will reward you for doing so. For those people that STILL think spinning is great and you should do it, you should not be involved with the article marketing world.

    I know for experience that one good 800 word article is better than 400 spun articles. It is not about QUANTITY people, its about QUALITY, it always has been. SO stop spinning articles and being lazy. Work hard and give quality that will actually help or enrich someones life. That way you will see better results.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5051999].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author rooze
    I watched a Matt Cutt's vid a few days ago where the question was asked "does Google pay attention to spelling and grammar when ranking sites?".

    His response was quite enlightening - (paraphrasing) - "No it does not, however our team is looking at sites statistically from the point of view of their quality, vis a vis grammar/spelling, and by pure coincidence the sites with a higher level of readability and grammar/spelling accuracy, consistently outrank the lower grade sites".
    He went on to point out the difficulties in checking these factors in their algorithm, pointing to wide use of jargon and non English websites as hurdles. But it sounds like they're working on it.

    So at some point you can expect any site hosting crappily spun articles to get another google slap on the noggin, thus devaluing the links from your spun articles even further.
    The problem when that happens is that all of a sudden a website with a lot of spun content pointing at it will suddenly see their rankings fall. If 1000 of your incoming links get devalued overnight by an algo change, you're going to wish you'd spent your energy elsewhere.
    Employ common sense SEO for the long haul - you'll be glad you did it!!
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5052006].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author paulpower
    I would have to say that article spinners are good for newbies, but I would say if you truly want to spin an article, do a rewrite of your original, that way when you submit it to a site you can be sure that it is still unique.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5052031].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author John Coutts
      Originally Posted by paulpower View Post

      I would have to say that article spinners are good for newbies...
      Why?

      Why impose crap on any poor, unsuspecting person new to Internet marketing? Wouldn't it be better to point them in a direction that could prove beneficial to them?

      John.
      Signature
      Write System - superior web content
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5185673].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author SocialMediaOwls
    Can I get an ETA when this horrendous method of info dissemintation will go away?

    I will ask Santa to get me that for Christmas.

    Dear Santa, please make Article Marketing, Article Syndication and anything related to this crap fest go away....

    That's the start of my letter
    Signature

    I am looking for web traffic gurus

    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5052052].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author Richard Van
      Originally Posted by SocialMediaOwls View Post

      Can I get an ETA when this horrendous method of info dissemintation will go away?

      I will ask Santa to get me that for Christmas.

      Dear Santa, please make Article Marketing, Article Syndication and anything related to this crap fest go away....

      That's the start of my letter
      Same goes for all that awful social media nonsense too...

      Webkingseo - Simply because as we all know spiders are too strong.
      How big are the spiders where you live?
      Signature

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

      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5055340].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Helping
    Banned
    Yeah original content is really not that hard to create. People are just too lazy and look for the easy way out.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5052827].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Webkingseo
    But i think spinning the content is absolutely good and the thing is that on how much sites you are submitting it. If you are going to spin an article and make it readable then there is no problem but if you are submitting it more than 10 sites then it will create problems for you. Simply because as we all know spiders are too strong. In my opinion you have to just use a new fresh content every time when you are going to make a blog.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5055303].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Mizzy Princess
    I agree! Spun articles are hard to understand because of grammatically wrong.
    Signature
    Know more about paper crafts and be amazed!
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5055354].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author tpw
    If you don't enjoy reading your spun article, what makes you think that other people will enjoy reading it?

    Isn't the point of article marketing or creating any kind of content to get people to your website who will hopefully buy what you are selling?

    If people don't enjoy reading your content, what makes anyone think that potential customers will follow those articles to their website to make a purchase?

    Oh yeah right. They are not putting their spun articles on THEIR OWN websites. They are trashing other people's websites to get the mighty back links to impress Google's search algorithms.

    Yet, that other guy created a website so he could make money, and you are taking a big stinky dump in the middle of his yard for your benefit!! You are crapping on his future.

    What happens when that other guy doesn't make money he is trying to make?

    He closes his website in a few months, when his domain registration expires...

    Then all of your powerful back links will be gone forever, leaving you where you started -- with nothing!!

    This indicates to me a very special kind of karma. You took a crap in someone else's website, and in the end, you are left holding nothing but crap in your hands.

    Karma works in mysterious ways.
    Signature
    Bill Platt, Oklahoma USA, PlattPublishing.com
    Publish Coloring Books for Profit (WSOTD 7-30-2015)
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5055362].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author PatriciaJ
      Originally Posted by tpw View Post

      If you don't enjoy reading your spun article, what makes you think that other people will enjoy reading it?

      Isn't the point of article marketing or creating any kind of content to get people to your website who will hopefully buy what you are selling?

      If people don't enjoy reading your content, what makes anyone think that potential customers will follow those articles to their website to make a purchase?

      Oh yeah right. They are not putting their spun articles on THEIR OWN websites. They are trashing other people's websites to get the mighty back links to impress Google's search algorithms.

      Yet, that other guy created a website so he could make money, and you are taking a big stinky dump in the middle of his yard for your benefit!! You are crapping on his future.

      What happens when that other guy doesn't make money he is trying to make?

      He closes his website in a few months, when his domain registration expires...

      Then all of your powerful back links will be gone forever, leaving you where you started -- with nothing!!

      This indicates to me a very special kind of karma. You took a crap in someone else's website, and in the end, you are left holding nothing but crap in your hands.

      Karma works in mysterious ways.
      Couldn't have said it better myself.

      It would be great karma if somebody took a dump on the sites of the crap spinners, but hang on Google will do that eventually to those who actually stick the crap on their own sites, but most just do it on other peoples sites don't they because it won't be good enough for their own.
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5055439].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Suzann452
    Banned
    [DELETED]
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5055380].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author mounds
      Originally Posted by Suzann452 View Post

      Agreeing! If you spin Articles and drop them immediatly without correction it looks not good. The result are non readable wordpiles with no aesthetic face.

      Is this post the result of spinning? Cause if it is, that's a clever prank
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5056024].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author Richard Van
        [DELETED]
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5056064].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author tpw
          Originally Posted by mounds View Post

          Suzann452
          Is this post the result of spinning? Cause if it is, that's a clever prank



          She is dropping blank images into the posts. When people are curious to know what the image is, they load the image and get redirected to an affiliate sales page.

          I am betting that in some forums -- not this one apparently -- that the blank image loads as a redirect to the affiliate page.
          Signature
          Bill Platt, Oklahoma USA, PlattPublishing.com
          Publish Coloring Books for Profit (WSOTD 7-30-2015)
          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5056089].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Terry Hatfield
    I think that many people spin articles just because they are to lazy to write them themselves. They grab an article from an article directory, that someone else wrote, and spin it beyond recognition with the push of one button. Then they submit the new spun junk to many article directories.

    They don't have to take the time to write the article or pay for an article to be written so they are happy.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5055708].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author Richard Van
      Originally Posted by Terry Hatfield View Post

      I think that many people spin articles just because they are to lazy to write them themselves. They grab an article from an article directory, that someone else wrote, and spin it beyond recognition with the push of one button. Then they submit the new spun junk to many article directories.
      Not only that, the article they "grab" and spin, then becomes derivative works, as Brian Kindsvater was kind enough to point out on a thread some time back.
      Signature

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

      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5055741].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author CoryW
    Never knew there were so many strong opinions about this topic. Thank you for educating me everyone! I appreciate all of the informative info in this thread.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5056008].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Casper C
    I agree with this very much. If you write an article on the web, you're better off spending your time on creating other unique content rather than spinning it.

    People should avoid putting articles through spinning software as it ends up in ridiculous results. This does not make you look good, even if you're just doing it for backlinks. Re-writing an article from scratch might be acceptable, but if you are indeed just doing it for backlinks, then it's not worth the time. There are quicker ways to go about doing that.
    Signature
    I write high quality articles starting at $5.50 - Original content written in native English!

    --> Click to check out my services
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5057173].message }}
  • I totally agree. What you said could not be more true at this day of age.
    Signature
    Visit my Blog Where I Display Affiliate earnings, ways to make A LOT of Money Online and much more...
    >>> The Swedish Affiliate.com - How to Extract Money From a Nation In Recession
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5057240].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Benjamin Ehinger
    Originally Posted by IceMustang View Post

    As the webmaster of an article posting Adsense-revenue sharing site that has seen its traffic and articles explode recently, this is my point of view.

    Quit spinning your articles. I have no problem whatsoever with syndicated content on my site, and neither does Google because as Alexa has explained, syndicated content does not equal duplicate content.

    But quit with the spinning. It's making your articles look like ****, and like nothing that any real people will actually read, and it's making my job harder. Not to mention, it's totally cutting you off from getting your backlink clicked if nobody's reading your article all the way through because it's unreadable.

    That is all. (yes, I know you Warriors are not the ones responsible, but I know many of you practice article spinning when doing article marketing, and I want to see you all be part of the change for good).

    I AGREE 100%!!!!!!!

    The problem is there are still idiots out there teaching strategies that worked 3 to 5 years ago that include spinning. These are lazy people not willing to spend the time to write a new article and also people that don't understand "Duplicate Content" or "Article Syndication".

    SPINNING = GARBAGE!!!!!

    Benjamin Ehinger
    Signature
    Ready to Explode your Content Marketing?

    Discover How to Increase Revenues with My Complete SEO Content Strategy Here!
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5057307].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author down
      Originally Posted by Benjamin Ehinger View Post

      I AGREE 100%!!!!!!!

      The problem is there are still idiots out there teaching strategies that worked 3 to 5 years ago that include spinning. These are lazy people not willing to spend the time to write a new article and also people that don't understand "Duplicate Content" or "Article Syndication".

      SPINNING = GARBAGE!!!!!

      Benjamin Ehinger
      Agree, sometimes people won't invest a money and just do shortcut to get profitable business.
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5177719].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author IM Lover
    Does not matter what you think if it works people will continue to do it, it's a hard pill to swallow if it's annoying you of course. But, if something is working for people they are not going to stop because it hurts your feelings.

    -Lee
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5177881].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author Alexa Smith
      Banned
      Originally Posted by Warrior Lee View Post

      if it works people will continue to do it
      Unfortunately, people continue to do it even though it doesn't work, Lee.

      As with so many other analyses and interpretations in internet marketing, their attribution of causation is typically a mistaken one.

      The standard sort of sentiment observed is something along the lines of "I've been spinning hundreds of articles and have been getting some Google SERP's first page rankings out of it". The mistaken logic is the "out of it" part: they fail to appreciate that they could have achieved the same benefit by doing whatever it is they've done without the spinning component.

      Correlation is not causation.

      But, as you say, they'll continue to do it (at least until they realize that there's no benefit ... but attitudes and beliefs from the Urban Myth School of internet marketing are often very deeply entrenched, and they'll be really slow to realize that).

      For myself, I admire (but manage to share only intermittently) Mike Tucker's conclusions regarding this situation.
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5178345].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author nicnac03
    Spinning is great if you spend the time to do it properly. However, most people just throw them through an auto spinner which of course generates garbage. Proper spinning lets you get more out of your articles.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5178270].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author savvybizbuilder
    Time to change your hat to white. Quality content articles provides you better ranking in Google.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5178428].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author jivens
    Banned
    spun articles are absolutely awful. Put on some music and just type for a few hours and get some articles done. It's really not that hard. Or for God sakes go to FIVERR and pay someone $5 for a well written article if you're that lazy.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5178473].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author seanpearse
    i agree....these auto-spun articles are absolutely dreadful and they can only be counter-productive long-term but to get the most out of a quality article I don't think there is anything wrong with spinning it to a high standard. i often spend just as much time spinning the article as i did creating it and i make sure that it reads almost as well as the original before submission.

    like everything it's those that abuse a little loop hole that spoil it for everyone else
    Signature

    What the world needs is more geniuses with humility, there are so few of us left!

    Local SEO Ireland

    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5178651].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author cedricloi
    Yeah I'm pretty sure that's what a lot of people think. (that links from non unique content carry less link juice than links from unique content) I see that everyday all over the Internet. A lot of people think that. Why do they think that? I don't know.
    Signature
    SEO FOX: Your One Stop Shop For All Your SEO Needs!
    Blog commenting | Guaranteed Approval Article Writing + Submission | Google News Press Releases
    Link Pyramids | Social Bookmarks | Guest Blog Posts | Video Creation + Submission
    Your Search For Exceptional SEO Services Ends Here
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5179059].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author Ken Marc
      Originally Posted by cedricloi View Post

      Yeah I'm pretty sure that's what a lot of people think. (that links from non unique content carry less link juice than links from unique content) I see that everyday all over the Internet. A lot of people think that. Why do they think that? I don't know.
      That's because it's intuitive. Uniqueness has certain appeal to it (even for search engines).

      It's only when you ponder deep about the duplicate content (originated from copying the original) and how will the search engines rank them, you start to see that it is impossible for search engines to attribute the plagiarism to even verbatim duplicates. That's because, the seemingly duplicate content may be the original but the search engines may have failed to crawl/index it first (probably the crawling was purposefully restricted by the webmaster himself!). This is why they can not 'punish' any site for having duplicate (or syndicated ) content.

      Ken
      Signature

      Beware, all I do is speculate.

      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5179179].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author positivemagic
    What does spinning articles mean? I write articles around 300-500 words and post to 7 article sites. Is that what you mean? Should I not post to all my sites? Please explain thanks.
    Signature

    Ps. What if instead of hunting people down until they begged you to stop... pre-qualified prospects actually sought you out and asked you what you do and how you do it? Click here.

    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5180335].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author marketingrep4u
    Originally Posted by IceMustang View Post

    As the webmaster of an article posting Adsense-revenue sharing site that has seen its traffic and articles explode recently, this is my point of view.

    Quit spinning your articles. I have no problem whatsoever with syndicated content on my site, and neither does Google because as Alexa has explained, syndicated content does not equal duplicate content.

    But quit with the spinning. It's making your articles look like ****, and like nothing that any real people will actually read, and it's making my job harder. Not to mention, it's totally cutting you off from getting your backlink clicked if nobody's reading your article all the way through because it's unreadable.

    That is all. (yes, I know you Warriors are not the ones responsible, but I know many of you practice article spinning when doing article marketing, and I want to see you all be part of the change for good).
    Ok. You really have my attention with this issue.

    I'm trying to figure out how effective it is to only use "syndicated content" on an Adsense site.

    Can you define "syndicated content"? Is it an article reprint from Ezinearticles.com or GoArticles.com where you cite the author in an author box?

    What bearing will it have on AdSense CTR rates if you only use "syndicated content" versus original content?

    In regards to "spinning", I just don't have the patience to do it. Typically, I just hire writers to produce some really great SEO articles for my AdSense sites. However, it would be interesting to know if anyone has had any success using only "syndicated content".

    What do you think?

    Rich
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5180446].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author GeorgR.
    Originally Posted by IceMustang View Post

    As the webmaster of an article posting Adsense-revenue sharing site that has seen its traffic and articles explode recently, this is my point of view.

    Quit spinning your articles. I have no problem whatsoever with syndicated content on my site, and neither does Google because as Alexa has explained, syndicated content does not equal duplicate content.

    But quit with the spinning. It's making your articles look like ****, and like nothing that any real people will actually read, and it's making my job harder. Not to mention, it's totally cutting you off from getting your backlink clicked if nobody's reading your article all the way through because it's unreadable.

    That is all. (yes, I know you Warriors are not the ones responsible, but I know many of you practice article spinning when doing article marketing, and I want to see you all be part of the change for good).
    Here is the harsh reality:

    No one cares about "clicking my link" from a random article-site. While you might be right from your point of view (which i understand!)...for the people who DO submit spun articles it's irrelevant.

    All what counts for them is placing the link...and making sure that most of the articles get indexed, recognized by Google. By submitting 100s of 1:1 copies you simply can't to that. If i had the choice i would also rather submit ONE great (and always the same) article to *all* the article directories out there...but its just common understanding that this is NOT EFFECTIVE from a link builders point of view.

    The 2 people who might click from within the article directories are simply not of interest. Sorry to tell you about the reality.
    Signature
    *** Affiliate Site Quick --> The Fastest & Easiest Way to Make Affiliate Sites!<--
    -> VISIT www.1UP-SEO.com *** <- Internet Marketing, SEO Tips, Reviews & More!! ***
    *** HIGH QUALITY CONTENT CREATION +++ Manual Article Spinning (Thread Here) ***
    Content Creation, Blogging, Articles, Converting Sales Copy, Reviews, Ebooks, Rewrites
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5180660].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author Alan Petersen
      Originally Posted by GeorgR. View Post

      Here is the harsh reality:

      No one cares about "clicking my link" from a random article-site. While you might be right from your point of view (which i understand!)...for the people who DO submit spun articles it's irrelevant.

      All what counts for them is placing the link...and making sure that most of the articles get indexed, recognized by Google. By submitting 100s of 1:1 copies you simply can't to that. If i had the choice i would also rather submit ONE great (and always the same) article to *all* the article directories out there...but its just common understanding that this is NOT EFFECTIVE from a link builders point of view.

      The 2 people who might click from within the article directories are simply not of interest. Sorry to tell you about the reality.
      That actually is a good point. Spinners could care less about the end user experience or pissing off webmasters who need to clean up the slop.

      Same reason why spammers still spam, because it must work.

      It's just different mindsets and we'll probably never agree so it's best just to agree to disagree on article spinning.
      Signature
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5180890].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author marketingrep4u
    I found this GREAT video on how to use syndicated content effectively from the guys over at SEOMOZ:

    Leveraging Syndicated Content Effectively for SEO - Whiteboard Friday | SEOmoz

    Enjoy!

    Rich
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5184769].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author wimbledonwoman
    As a writer I agree. I am amazed at marketers who boast about how much money they make then offer to pay peanuts for articles. The only spinning I do is done manually. I go through every sentence and rewrite it so it makes sense. I've seen so many spun versions of my articles online. At first I used to get mad but now I just laugh, thank goodness my name isn't attached to any of them!

    I thank my wonderful clients who refuse to spin articles and keep coming back to me for well-optimized, interesting articles that people actually read!
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5184838].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author anthony2
    I think most marketers are just lazy.
    To be honest.

    They don't have the money to afford
    to have writers.

    They really don't want to write there own
    content.

    So they get PLR articles off the web and
    there to lazy to take the time and rewrite
    so they throw it into some article spinner.

    Then they submit the articles to tons of article directories
    without re-reading the content.

    Now there's pure junk all over the web.
    Signature
    "I Leveled The Playing Field And Removed Every Roadblock
    To Helping You Make Maximum Profits In Minimum Time"
    Click Here Now To Find Out How!
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5185134].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author tomcroll
    I think a small, considered amount of spinning with The Best Spinner or some other tool is fine if you do it properly i.e. yourself!

    Okay, Google has no problem with syndicated content, however it will not index as many of your links if they are seen to be identical.

    The problem comes when people are too busy to properly write and spin the articles themselves or don't have the money to employ a decent writer.

    Onward rotating during modicum portions although gain well quality
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5185286].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author Alexa Smith
      Banned
      Originally Posted by tomcroll View Post

      Okay, Google has no problem with syndicated content, however it will not index as many of your links if they are seen to be identical.
      This is simply untrue.

      Not only is it completely wrong (and a really bizarre thing to believe, by the way) but it's also readily verifiable by anyone interested in testing for themselves rather than regurgitating incorrect beliefs right out of the Urban Myth School of internet marketing.
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5185382].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Invert Planet
    I hate spinning articles, but enjoy editing them.

    I have spun a few and look at it thinking "what the hell is that?" then I spend a couple hours going over it and re-editing it.

    It takes longer than it should but the end result is nice and what I hope it to be.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5185737].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Chris Worner
    Once again Kurt you allow your emotions towards Alexa to cloud your judgement and common sense.

    You are much wiser than I and Alexa so I shouldn't have to but am going to point out to you that actions speak louder than words.

    I trust you have noticed the increase in people espousing the virtues of article syndication, why would that be I wonder if syndication is the same as duplicate content which Google according to you and others frown upon and in turn 'Google Slap?"

    -Chris
    Signature

    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5185970].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author Kurt
      Originally Posted by Chris Worner View Post

      Once again Kurt you allow your emotions towards Alexa to cloud your judgement and common sense.

      You are much wiser than I and Alexa so I shouldn't have to but am going to point out to you that actions speak louder than words.

      I trust you have noticed the increase in people espousing the virtues of article syndication, why would that be I wonder if syndication is the same as duplicate content which Google according to you and others frown upon and in turn 'Google Slap?"

      -Chris
      Irrelevant. My post has NOTHING to do with the virtues of syndication. Maybe it's your own emotions getting in the way? Syndication is a fine method of marketing. I dare you to find a single comment of mine to the contrary.

      My post is simply about the definition of duplicate content. And I never said I frown on duplicate content. It has its place. As does unique and original, and even spun content in some cases.

      Now please answser my question about how the Google duplicate content filter works? Does the doop content filter filter out "syndicated" content or not?
      Signature
      Serious about Print on Demand? Discover how YOU can join my FREE exclusive secret alliance
      Plus how to get my Print on Demand Treasure Maps for FREE
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5186016].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author Chris Worner
        Originally Posted by Kurt View Post

        Irrelevant. My post has NOTHING to do with the virtues of syndication.
        Missed my point entirely.

        My post is simply about the definition of duplicate content. And I never said I frown on duplicate content. It has its place. As does unique and original, and even spun content in some cases.
        I didn't say you frown upon it I said Google does. Perhaps I should add a comma;

        "duplicate content which Google, according to you and others frown upon."

        Although I do believe my prior spelling is grammatically correct and you misread it.

        Does the doop content filter filter out "syndicated" content or not?
        You already know the answer to that Kurt but for some reason feel compelled to argue.

        -Chris
        Signature

        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5186059].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author Kurt
          Originally Posted by Chris Worner View Post

          Missed my point entirely.



          I didn't say you frown upon it I said Google does. Perhaps I should add a comma;

          "duplicate content which Google, according to you and others frown upon."

          Although I do believe my prior spelling is grammatically correct and you misread it.



          You already know the answer to that Kurt but for some reason feel compelled to argue with Alexa in every single thread on this topic.

          -Chris
          So in other words, you are saying I am correct, but can't bring yourself to actually say it. And I'll bet you I don't post on 1/4th of the threads Alexa does on this subject.


          BTW it takes two to "argue". If people can't handle opposing opinions to their comments, then they shouldn't post on 3rd party forums, or insist on having the first and last word.
          Signature
          Serious about Print on Demand? Discover how YOU can join my FREE exclusive secret alliance
          Plus how to get my Print on Demand Treasure Maps for FREE
          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5186113].message }}
          • Profile picture of the author Chris Worner
            Originally Posted by Kurt View Post

            BTW it takes two to "argue". If people can't handle opposing opinions to their comments, then they shouldn't post on 3rd party forums, or insist on having the first and last word.
            Your the one who believes you have to post in order to 'balance' the discussion any time Alexa posts on the topic of syndication and whether it is duplicate content. Quite clearly you have some emotional attachment in doing so.

            And if you knew anything about me my dear fellow you would know that at many different points during my time as a member here I have and still do defend spinning articles depending on the situation.

            Meanwhile it is 6:26 AM Wednesday morning here down under where I live so I ought to get some sleep.

            Until next time...bonjour!

            -Chris
            Signature

            {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5186229].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author Ken Marc
      Deleted.

      Already responded by someone...

      Ken
      Signature

      Beware, all I do is speculate.

      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5186050].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author DanEitreim
    It IS possible to spin articles without making them completely unreadable garbage. But unfortunately, it takes some extra time and work...which most most people spinning articles try to avoid like the plague.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5186296].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author dougb
    It gets frustrating to no end, how does spinning gain such popularity and make those who provide these services so much money.
    Spinning has been gaining popularity it seems and there is no lack of services or software that provide spinning.
    I do work to make the best spun articles possible but why should I spend the time if there is no benefit. It gets costly trying to keep up then find out its all for not.
    Original good content and syndicate, ok
    Signature

    Learn IM for Free. Gain access to Information,Audio and Video Tutorials, Downloads and More
    The Newbie Marketing Center
    Follow my trek as I log the ups and downs of my marketing business.
    My Marketing Trek

    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5186430].message }}

Trending Topics