Whats a huge decine..10%, 20%, 25% percent loss?

Well, actually, that hasn't always been the case, you know, lol.

It doesn't.

Not only doesn't it, but it actually states expressly and openly that it doesn't (on Google's WebMaster Central Blog, among other places).

Duplicate content and syndicated content are also two completely different things.

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

In any case, people who syndicate articles from directories (or by private arrangement) are not doing so for any "SEO benefit". They're doing so because they have a need for content, to share with their readers/subscribers.

Perhaps I should say nothing, because a very large (and increasing) number of us here who make our livings through article syndication perhaps wouldn't mind everyone thinking this, and thinning out the competition a little, but it's actually not so at all.

Yes, without syndication it would be totally pointless.

Nobody wants to "gather" their traffic that way (i.e. send their own potential customer-traffic to EZA instead of to their own site - that would be absolutely loopy: we all lose most of that traffic, of course). And the backlinks you can forget. They're non-context-relevant, PR-0 backlinks: 100,000 of those "backlinks" and $3.50 will buy you a cappuccino at Starbucks.

No, the value is all in the syndication from EZA. But that's real value. People are successfully building businesses that way.

http://www.warriorforum.com/main-int...ries-work.html

Sunray, of course it's ludicrous and pointless. It produces nothing. Write your content, stick it on your website, and let Google reward you for it. Anything else splits interest/clicks among a bunch of measly little websites that has no real motivation to help you.

For sure - no question about that.

For anyone trying to use them for their own traffic, that would be "bad news", but realistically that was never a sensible way to try to use an article directory anyway. Nor is it what they're there for, of course.

To article marketers, using EZA for its intended purpose, the decline in traffic is an advantage, of course, for all the reasons explained and linked to above.

Wow....Thats a huge drop off for Ezine Articles.

Thanks for posting the image.

I think this is a brilliant strategy.

I agree!

You're generous and sensitive to a fault, but I promise you have no need at all to feel sorry for me.

I have 1,600+ articles on EZA, submitted over the last 3 years, and I make a fantastic living from article marketing.

I'd be horrified to get direct traffic from Ezine Articles. That would be very bad news for me indeed.

That's not what article directories are there for.

Let's assume/guess/pretend that your average click-through rate from EZA is 25%, ok? On that basis, here are two scenarios to compare ...

Scenario A: 100 people put into Google a keyword from one of your articles, and they find listed in the SERP's an article of yours in EZA. They click on the link in Google's SERP's and that takes them to your article inside EZA. Whatever happens to them from there (i.e. whether they read all or some or none of your article, whether they click on an EZA AdSense advertisement, whether they get distracted by something else there, whether they read someone else's articles too, whatever ...) we know that on average 25% of them click your resource-box link and arrive at your website, and that the other 75% don't. You lost the other 75%. Only 25 people out of the original 100 ever arrived at your website.

Scenario B: 100 people put into Google a keyword from one of your articles, and they find listed in the SERP's an article of yours on your own site. They click on the link in Google's SERP's and that takes them to your website. 100 people arrived at your website.

Both scenarios start off the same way, with 100 potential customers, but scenario B gives you four times as much traffic as scenario A.

The reality is that, by going about it the right way, you actually get to choose which copy they find in Google's SERP's: the one that brings you 100% of the traffic or the one that brings you only 25% of the traffic.

Not a very difficult decision, is it?

The key concept is that customers search in Google (and/or in other search engines) and publishers search in EZA. The purpose of EZA is to offer your article to publishers, not to customers. As you've seen above, you'd lose three quarters of the customers, that way. Don't believe most of what you read on this subject: it's very easy to imagine that you're "getting traffic from an article directory" whereas what you're really doing is unnecessarily sending your traffic to an article directory and losing most of it.

It doesn't really matter what your click-through rate from EZA is, if you're writing for syndication, because your article in EZA (or in any other directory, but EZA's the one the publishers go to, so it's the best one to use) is there only to get republished. Sure, it matters what the CTR is from the sites to which it gets republished, because those are the ones with your targeted traffic, relevant to your niche (but unfortunately that isn't normally measured). The article directory itself doesn't have your targeted customer-traffic (not if you know what you're doing, anyway!).

Some of my articles, deposited in EZA after I'd finished publishing them myself, have been re-published in really large numbers of other places. Places that have targeted traffic (otherwise they wouldn't want to re-publish it, would they?) which comes to my website, opts in to my list, and buys from me.

Trying to attract customers from/with article directories is a really fundamental misunderstanding about article marketing.

I do not know anything about abusing Ezine Articles, but sometimes I feel like there's an Ezine Police disapproving and cutting you off for little mistakes, especially grammar.

I believe if the message is sent across well, grammar would not matter as much (but at least proper spelling is needed). Most successful marketers make a lot of grammatical mistakes, but let's face it, we do not write on Ezine just to get an "A."

The college education conditioning is brought to Ezine as a policy which is why, in my opinion, their popularity decreased.

I think more than one person here needs to get a grip. EZA has its terms printed on its site. Arguing "what EZA says" isn't productive. Go to EZA - read the terms - interpret it for yourself.

Being rude or arrogant isn't productive for anyone - it creates a perception of who "you" are that may not be correct but may be believed. Not all EZA experiences are the same - nor should they be. One person's "results" may be another's "myth" and that's not odd, either.

kay

From what I understand, the backlinks are worthless. Who writes 200 word articles? Oh, and EZA serves a purpose as a place to get your articles syndicated (you know, it's original intent).

Right.

Because "most marketers" were trying to use EZA for its own traffic and/or its own backlinks, and that just isn't a viable use of an article directory.

Hence all the forum threads started off by people announcing "Article Marketing Is Dead", who don't actually understand what article marketing is.

For the minority using EZA for its intended purpose, things are actually flourishing and improving.

Wrong.

All you can get there (just as in any other article directory) is a non-context-relevant, PR-0 backlink of almost no value at all. As the SEO textbook-writers were saying even before the Panda updates devalued article directories so much, 100,000 of those backlinks and $3.50 would get you a cappuccino at Starbucks. :rolleyes:

Totally right.

Just not the one you're thinking of.

It still serves the exact purpose it always served (which had nothing to do with backlinks at all), but it now serves it better and more safely and more easily than ever. http://www.warriorforum.com/main-int...ries-work.html

(By the way, EZA doesn't accept 200-word articles, anyway).

This is exactly the way I see it.

EZA started cracking down on articles they would accept. Hence, marketers started using them less and less, resulting in less traffic. I have submitted quality articles that get rejected, then I have to figure out WHY it was rejected. Sometimes they will tell you and it's for some goofy rule of theirs.

I much prefer goarticles.com. They accept whatever I post, and usually I see my articles rank pretty quickly. EZA was becoming a waste of my time to deal with anyway, so I'm not that upset about this new development.

lol my thoughts exactly - "oh look another thread created with the same heading as last week's"

Is that traffic lost from the directory itself or traffic lost from sites that the articles were syndicated on. If you are talking traffic from EZA directly, it was to be expected.

I actually have blogs that I have swiped articles from EZA and GA from with the author's resource box and the attribute intact and actually found that it helped my site. There is actually a belief that linking OUT from your site helps SEO wise. Try it. You'll like it!

If you are talking about "duplicate content" you are mistaken. Whole other ball of wax and I say that we don't ruin this thread that has turned into a big ole love fest by talking about duplicate content, what it is and what it's not.

Thanks all for the kind words. I'm not really anything special. I learned things the hard way. I'm not even close to being done yet and I learn more from Richard and Lexy than anyone else here.

I guess my point was that I do focus on search engine rankings. That has been my focus over the past few months but like I said, I am still learning. I just know that my income goes way up when a site hits #1 for a keyword. I don't even have to check it to know it. I know because my income multiplies.

I do understand what you guys do but I must admit that I am chicken****. Yeap... too chicken**** to contact someone and ask them to publish my stuff. Call it laziness or fear of rejection or what have you. My stuff is pretty good, it ranks well and people like it but I like hiding behind a pen name way too much.

By the way, as you can see from posts like this, Google is going to some lengths, at the moment, to confirm to people that syndicated content is NOT a form of duplicate content (as one or two people have been known to allege for reasons of their own).

That's far from a "fact": it's effectiveness to many of us has actually increased since the Panda updates (which is why there are so many threads here on this subject full of posts from article marketers explaining what a favor Google has done us all: we can now submit our articles to EZA for publishers to find without the risk that our potential customers might find those copies - rather than the ones originally published and indexed on our own sites - listed in Google's SERP's. Which is a huge plus, of course).

But if you're trying to use EZA for its own traffic, then yes: it's effectiveness to you will certainly be worse.

I don't mean it impolitely, but that decline in effectiveness to you exemplifies what can happen when you try to use something for a purpose other than the one it's there for.

http://www.warriorforum.com/main-int...ries-work.html

I see the accuracy of your "information" is up to its customary standard, here.

And it took all of about 5 seconds to check, and paste in these words: "you may not reprint more than articles per year".

It's on this page: Terms of Service For Publishers Who Wish To Reprint Any Content From EzineArticles.com

However much it pains you - for reasons best known to yourself - to acknowledge it, large and increasing numbers of us, here, as you can see in so many other threads, are very successfully building our businesses and earning our livings incorporating that as part of our syndication methods. Now that one really is a "fact".

You must have been very interested in the reports of Google's recent conference, though, in which they went to some lengths to clarify that Google likes syndicated content, and that syndicated content isn't a form of duplicate content, because they're two completely different things?

As explained here: http://www.warriorforum.com/main-int...ml#post5273419

And commented on here: http://www.warriorforum.com/main-int...ml#post5286678

From the author personally? I'm sorry, but that's not the issue at hand. What you arrange with authors outside of EA is moot.

I guess you didn't realize that a follow tag tells Google to index a link. A nofollow tag tells Google not to index it.

!!!

Says who? That would be incredible dumb, by the way.

If you want fast results, and if you have excellent content, guest post on the highest trafficked sites you can find within your niche. And don't let anyone tell you that guest blogging doesn't require original material.

Submit one, unique, quality (and relevant) article to a blog that has a high Alexa and PR rating, then sit back and watch the traffic flow in.

Just make sure you have enough quality material on your own site to keep people engaged after they click through to learn more about you. Guest blogging will bring you traffic, but how you keep that traffic is up to you.

Should have known better than to waste my energy trying to have a discussion with an echo...

According to a relative of mine (a retired homicide detective), there are usually three sets of facts - yours, mine and the truth. Our obstreporous buddy here only sees one of them.

Have to give the devil his due...

This is the first post I've read from you that actually makes sense. The only change I would make is that some guest blogging requires original material - and is worth the effort.

When I cross over from pure syndication to guest blogging, I try to customize previously published content for the given blog. This is usually pretty quick to do after spending enough time on the blog to determine if the opportunity matches the effort. But the 'guts' of the content is the same as originally published.

One of the key points about article syndication is that it's a way of building a business that ISN'T dependent on Google for its traffic.

(It isn't dependent on Ezine Articles for its traffic, either, although admittedly syndication from EZA can provide a very welcome "extra" for us, and for some people a convenient way of "starting off", too.)

Article marketing is a traffic-generation method in its own right, not "a way of doing SEO".

Why would the fact that Google's continually re-evaluating how it treats articles, article directories and so on matter much to article syndicators?

If Google de-indexed all my websites tomorrow, I'd still have 80% of my traffic.

It's painful for some people (not meaning yourself, Rooze!) who so much love to argue about this subject to admit it, I know, but Google actually isn't too important at all in this context.

And that's exactly the point that so many people miss.

http://www.warriorforum.com/main-int...ml#post5035794

I agree with everything you said, except "no one". I've posted comments suggesting we take a look at recent Google changes, but they get ignored by those that say Google doesn't matter to them, then constantly bring up something related to SEO.

While Google may not directly affect article syndication and free lance writing, in many cases it does affect those that publish their articles.

Recently, Google started giving those that use their Webmaster Tools warnings about their pages being duplicates of others on the web. It appears that Google is starting to only include one version of a page, then deindexing the other doops.

It used to be that Google's doop content was "filtered" into the supplementary index. It may be soon that these doop pages are simply deindexed, which is worse than being penalized, especially if the page being deindexed is the original on your own domain.

Seems many of the syndicators are totally ignoring the recent changes and haven't updated their opinions despite being presented with new facts. They claim they aren't dependant on Google.

However, what about the publishers? If it's true that Google is planning on deindexing doop content, will the publishers still be willing to publish doop content, knowing the page may very well be deindexed?

I'm sure the answer will vary from site to site. But it really doesn't hurt for the syndicators to have a Plan B and realize that they may need to submit totally original and unique articles in order for many publishers being willing to publish them.

Exactly so.

And a real win/win - and a blessing for article marketers, of course, as so many of us have been saying in so many threads, because (a) with all those article directory copies out of the way, it's far easier for us to rank the copy originally published and indexed on our own sites, and (b) even beginners with new-ish sites can now submit a copy of their articles to EZA without their former problem that their prospective customers (rather than just prospective publishers) might unfortunately find that one rather than finding the one on their own sites.

There are many ways to go deep sea diving without the need for Ezine Articles, too. And Ezine Articles has about as much to do with deep sea diving as it does to do with being a backlink provider. Article directories are not there for people to try to use them for their own backlinks: they're simply a stepping-stone to better places: http://www.warriorforum.com/main-internet-marketing-discussion-forum/488368-how-do-article-directories-work.html

Earlier this year, SearchEngineLand showed some University of Utah students the type of content found at these article directories, and you know what they did?

They laughed at it.

I guess Google had the same reaction, except that laughter sounded like a slap.

Er, what does what mean? This thread hasn't been on just one topic. The conversation has deviated numerous times. Which piece of information led you to ask this question?:confused:

EZA is not the place to become an authority on something. Things like your own highly-trafficked website, published books, degrees and certifications, real-world experience, published interviews, and teaching make one an authority figure!

I know some companies that wouldn't be caught dead having content in EZA because of that very reason.

When you submit a relevant article within your niche to EZA, and it is subsequently published, you are effectively given an implied endorsement by publishers to their subscribers/readers. The potential for this type of endorsement should not be underestimated. Its value is as real as tangible business assets; much like brick and mortar chain stores adding new outlets.

And by having multiple articles archived on EZA, this serves as a showcase of your writing prowess. The real value of EZA for writers lies in its leverage for article syndication, but becoming an "authority" is entirely dependent upon one's skill as a writer for producing the quality expected by prospective ezine publishers.

It just isn't.

That's not what article marketing is about, at all. Article marketing is a traffic-generation method in its own right, not a way of getting traffic from search engines! The point, and value, of article marketing is that it's a method of attracting targeted traffic without being dependent on Google.

This little thread clarifies the whole thing, if it helps: http://www.warriorforum.com/main-int...ries-work.html

Every morning, without fail, I come into the main section and find this thread at the top, and see more more of this:
Well, at least I caught up on it before nm5419 came in. Merry Christmas article marketers!

If you're referring to my post just above yours, it has nothing to do with traffic from Google.

It depends on Google (or Yahoo or Bing) indexing those pages, and returning them when a very specific search query is used. Whether those pages get any search traffic is an entirely different question.

BTW, if you think $14/lb for salmon is outrageous, come to Florida and pay $27/lb for grouper...

You are making a very dangerous assumption that those websites we syndication folk submit our content to are themselves dependent solely on SEO to get traffic.

Very unwise.

Respectfully
Chris

That's it, you have officially hurt my brain.


She has shown you the gold mine and given you the pickaxe & shovel-- she isn't trying to sell you anything-- and you think she needs to prove something for you?

Two Cents from a Coder's Point of View on Ownership and Where to Publish First

Bottom Line: IF this is original content, AND you intend to syndicate said content, THEN publish on your own Site first, AND get that page into the Google Index first, THEN wait for 3 more visits from the GoogleBot that retrieves said page text before syndicating, IF you want to establish solid ownership of said original content.

AND if it does not score as "Original Content" in the first place, THEN none of this matters anyway

From the Point of View of a Coder, who could be working on the Google index algorithms, establishing ownership of Original Content by "First Date Published" is dead easy. With these numbers right here, and coders love numbers.

26122011

Would work something like this... The algorithms crunch retrieved text and find some "original content"... meaning a lot of words in a group between <body> and </body> that "don't fit any pattern seen previously in our indexed pages". Then it is flagged as Original... this is logic based on those conditional logic statements coded in... that IF THEN ELSE stuff.

And it assigns to that "group of words on a page", 26122011 DOMAIN it came from.

Now we have an owner/originator in the simplest, most efficient way possible. So simple. It's even fair some would say.
CUTAWAY to Scene 42: The engineers in the Google basement wagging heads up and down.

Is this official from Google? No. Is this the way it is really done. Danged if I know, but I assure you it is what 999 out of 1000 coders would do if directed to establish the Ownership of Original Content. And they were tasked to do exactly that a long time ago.

What does Google Say?

Not really sure and don't really care for my purposes. There is a lot I do care to know, but not this one. Been established for a long time in my view.

BTW, I do get some sideways information that indicates it resembles a zoo over at Mountain View fueled by the huge disconnect between engineers, management, and spokespersons on the blogspot. No real communication or direction. I take what is posted at the BlogSpot with a lot of salt. And in the end, the outcome of the debates or issues there, don't really matter for my business.

With the engineers, even "who's in charge" is often up for grabs in many departments, or so I'm told and hear. The numbers of new hires is staggering. Teams are huge and spread around in different locations. Google started with a decentralized you-have-a-PHD-do-want-you-want-when-you-want-to-do-it Corporate Culture, and that's not easily changed... frustrating as that is to the money boys up in the Penthouse offices.

Suggestions Please... What are the Best Syndication Sites or Resources?

I came here for a reason searching the forum... Can someone point me to a list of the currently best places to syndicate some articles? paid or un-paid. Please share. I've looked around for current opinions and come up dry so far.

Would like to place some low-searched thematically relevant articles and not let them get picked up outside the same specific theme. IOW, "XYZ topic" business articles that will only be picked up by "XYZ topic" business websites.

Thanks in advance.

Best Regards,
Jan Gregory

PS Why 3 visits from GoogleBot? It makes lots of mistakes retrieving and the index algorithms take awhile to digest new additions, so be safe and wait. Duplicate content penalties are a total myth. Spin the titles if you want, forget the rest and just spread your great content around. And please, focus on writing truly unique, interesting, valuable content... and the rest will pretty much fall into place. The internet needs great content, and Google thinks so too and will reward you.

And what about the targeted website traffic we all want to see from our content? Which is the only kind that matters to me. In our experience... 75% of targeted traffic comes from referral domains that have our content with a link in it. We also track every visitor and every keyword, and every visitor source, and connect all that to conversions on the Money Pages. Very revealing and highly recommended if you want to maximize your efforts.

It's just a suggestion, Ezmystic, but you may find you do a lot better by distributing them yourself to people with ezines and/or websites in your niche who want to share them with their already-targeted readers/subscribers.

That way you can get targeted, buying traffic (and some valuable relevant backlinks) from them. Many of us have found that this makes the difference between making a living from them by building up some true residual income from work already done, and not making a living from them.

Definitely makes since.

1. I'd assume EZA is still making enough ad money for Google to want to keep them around. I agree though that what they have done so far is "wishy-washy" and in a perfect world they would take your approach.

2. I couldn't answer that one.

3. In regards to EZA, you are right. You have accomplished pretty much nothing (assuming you don't get a stray customer or two; but that's a lot to hope for). This is why one must build their own personal syndication network, so that they are not dependent on one site such as EZA.

Why should they?

What business is it of Google's "what EZA was originally for"?

What would give them to right to single out an individual site for "special/different punitive treatment"?! :confused:

That's in the rules (a maximum of 250 articles per year) simply to give them a legal remedy in the case of someone copying their entire database and "setting up in opposition". They don't enforce it and don't intend to, but it protects them against that far-fetched possibility, anyway. Lawyers are paid to think of things like this! :rolleyes:

I don't understand what you're asking, with this question - sorry.

This part interests me more than anything else, how a company reacts to losing a large chunk of their market share overnight.

My own business offices were a 1/4 mile down the street from the Industrial park that Chris Knight chose to build his brand new, state-of-the-art facility (Sparknet - eZine). I've since moved an hour north from Ashwaubenon but I still see information about his company in the local press. The facility he built is pretty amazing, I've been there a couple times and admired its minimalistic styling on the outside, but the modern and high-tech layout on the inside. He's built a pretty amazing facility for his 70 or so employees, and it's huge, he clearly built it with expansion in mind. They have a modern cafeteria, weight room, fitness center, conference and training center and an amazing lobby area all kitted out in a money-no-object approach.
Of course this was all built a year before his website took a dive. Can you imagine that, making such a financial commitment to the future, then being hit so hard by Google?
I don't know how diverse his operations are these days. When I first had dealings with him he operated a corporate email server business (Sparknet) though my understanding was that he'd ditched that along the way to building his eZine empire.
Anyway, Chris Knight is a pretty amazing guy with a very positive philosophy on life. I hope he bounces back, both for him and the 70 people he employs in my local area.
We sometimes forget what's behind these things when they happen. We look at graphs and jest about the decline of a website, but there's often a whole bunch of jobs depending on the business to stay afloat.
WRT to the OP title, I know eZines is far from dead, but it's pretty badly wounded. I hope CK keeps it together and finds a way to bounce back.