Why Do Some People Want "Unique" Articles?

23 replies
I know this topic was covered in one of the many article syndication threads but I can't find it.

Someone contacted me who is launching a new website and looking for content related to my niche. She offered to put my articles there but wants them to be unique... in other words she'd prefer I spin my existing articles.

I don't get it, there wouldn't be any duplicate content penalties in this case. I'm wondering if this is common. I'd really rather not have to re-write my articles just to get them posted on her site.
#articles #people #unique
  • Profile picture of the author cashp0wer
    As long as there is not any duplicate problems in this case I don't see what the problem is. I do understand why everyone wants unique content on their websites however. Google will not rank your site high if it has duplicate content as everyone knows.
    Signature
    My Internet Marketing Blog - Warts And All!
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6542948].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Alexa Smith
    Banned
    Originally Posted by Christophe Young View Post

    I don't get it
    No ... you get it: she probably doesn't.

    Remember that many, many people don't understand the difference between duplicate content and syndicated content, and some of them even imagine that there might be some sort of "Google penalty" against their site, if they syndicate articles previously published elsewhere. :rolleyes:

    It's all pretty screwy and nonsensical, obviously, but this is what many people believe. :p

    Originally Posted by Christophe Young View Post

    I'd really rather not have to re-write my articles just to get them posted on her site.
    No, of course not. It's absolutely loopy. But notoriously difficult to educate people on these matters, because many have graduated from the Urban Myth School of Interent Marketing and/or have got their information from people who have, and/or from people who will say anything for the sake of selling "SEO services" of whatever kind.

    And - to be fair to her - it's probably true that syndicating articles will be of smaller SEO benefit to her than having entirely "unique content" and having the initial indexation rights to it.

    The thing is, there are so many people about who think the same way that she does, that some don't even find it "unreasonable", and if she can get away with it, she's found a way of getting people to produce "unique content" for her without spending a penny on it, hasn't she?

    You just have to decide whether you yourself want to do it.

    It's her site and she gets to make up the rules, just like we do on ours.

    Personally, I don't do this and wouldn't dream of it, but if you think she perhaps has (or will have) floods of highly targeted traffic that you really can't reach any other way, it could even - theoretically - be worth doing, from your perspective? :confused:
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6542995].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author yourreviewer
    Originally Posted by Christophe Young View Post

    I know this topic was covered in one of the many article syndication threads but I can't find it.

    Someone contacted me who is launching a new website and looking for content related to my niche. She offered to put my articles there but wants them to be unique... in other words she'd prefer I spin my existing articles.

    I don't get it, there wouldn't be any duplicate content penalties in this case. I'm wondering if this is common. I'd really rather not have to re-write my articles just to get them posted on her site.
    So let me get this straight.

    She is launching a NEW website and she was the one who contacted you. She has absolutely NO leverage at all for asking new content considering the fact her website is new.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6543012].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author Alexa Smith
      Banned
      Originally Posted by yourreviewer View Post

      She has absolutely NO leverage at all for asking new content considering the fact her website is new.
      Exactly so. But this doesn't always stop people from trying, you know? And - the thing is - maybe there are actually people who will provide her with free, unique content on that basis, too!
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6543018].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author yourreviewer
        Originally Posted by Alexa Smith View Post

        Exactly so. But this doesn't always stop people from trying, you know? And - the thing is - maybe there are actually people who will provide her with free, unique content on that basis, too!
        I guess the ever popular duplicate content penalty myth along with the recent Google updates have confused the hell out of people.
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6543043].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author tryme1
    Interesting perspectives here. The question is: why wouldn't she want unique content that can't be found elsewhere? It's not a matter of 'duplicate content' and perceived penalties or any of that stuff. It's more that people would prefer to have content on their website that can't be found elsewhere: that's what gives value to a site.

    I do understand your perspective, Christophe, and I wouldn't want to write a whole bunch of fresh stuff for a new website that had no traction either.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6543033].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author yourreviewer
      Originally Posted by tryme1 View Post

      Interesting perspectives here. The question is: why wouldn't she want unique content that can't be found elsewhere? It's not a matter of 'duplicate content' and perceived penalties or any of that stuff. It's more that people would prefer to have content on their website that can't be found elsewhere: that's what gives value to a site.

      I do understand your perspective, Christophe, and I wouldn't want to write a whole bunch of fresh stuff for a new website that had no traction either.
      The internet is so infinitely huge that this REALLY is not a problem.

      Yes, a small percentage of your visitors may have already read the same article, so what?

      Good quality content is always good quality content. It doesn't matter if it happens to be in multiple sites.

      The issue you talk about becomes a problem when all your website is just a mirror of another site.
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6543070].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author tryme1
        Originally Posted by yourreviewer View Post

        The internet is so infinitely huge that this REALLY is not a problem.

        Yes, a small percentage of your visitors may have already read the same article, so what?

        Good quality content is always good quality content. It doesn't matter if it happens to be in multiple sites.

        The issue you talk about becomes a problem when all your website is just a mirror of another site.
        The issue is not so much whether visitors have already read an article though. It's more about whether your website is originating good quality content. If your site has an exceptional piece of content, then all the social mentions, stumbles, likes and so on will be aimed at your site. If that content is also on another several websites, then the potential value of that piece of content will be diluted.
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6543254].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author yourreviewer
          Originally Posted by tryme1 View Post

          The issue is not so much whether visitors have already read an article though. It's more about whether your website is originating good quality content. If your site has an exceptional piece of content, then all the social mentions, stumbles, likes and so on will be aimed at your site. If that content is also on another several websites, then the potential value of that piece of content will be diluted.
          So going by your logic, if I write a great article and publish it on my website, will it get more likes, stumbles, social mentions and tweets than if I republish the same article in Huffington Post?
          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6543298].message }}
          • Profile picture of the author tryme1
            Originally Posted by yourreviewer View Post

            So going by your logic, if I write a great article and publish it on my website, will it get more likes, stumbles, social mentions and tweets than if I republish the same article in Huffington Post?
            If you only publish a piece of content in one place, then all the potential social value, for want of a better phrase, of that content is going to go to that site.

            At this point, if the Huffington Post or any other big site wants to reference that content, they can do so with an excerpt and a link and the value of the content is still maintained. If you allow something like Huffington Post to republish content they obviously feel has value (otherwise why would they want to republish it) then you are still diminishing the value of that content.
            {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6543542].message }}
            • Profile picture of the author Alexa Smith
              Banned
              Originally Posted by tryme1 View Post

              If you allow something like Huffington Post to republish content they obviously feel has value (otherwise why would they want to republish it) then you are still diminishing the value of that content.
              Don't look now, but you're "diminishing its value" so much that you might actually manage to make a living from it.
              {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6543623].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Angela V. Edwards
    Originally Posted by Christophe Young View Post

    I know this topic was covered in one of the many article syndication threads but I can't find it.

    Someone contacted me who is launching a new website and looking for content related to my niche. She offered to put my articles there but wants them to be unique... in other words she'd prefer I spin my existing articles.

    I don't get it, there wouldn't be any duplicate content penalties in this case. I'm wondering if this is common. I'd really rather not have to re-write my articles just to get them posted on her site.
    YOU might know that there are no duplicate penalties for this, but many folks THINK that there are. That's why this person wants "unique" articles.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6543115].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author rosetrees
    I'm going to be a lone voice here - but I don't think people are necessarily asking for, or offering, unique articles solely because they believe in the duplicate content myth.

    I suspect it is more because of the potential seo benefits. Ok, this person is building a new site, so probably can't send you traffic right now. But remember that a unique article (not an existing one that you've spun) might draw it's own traffic.

    When such an article is put on an established site, I personally think it's only fair to write a unique article IF it is asked for as the site will, after all, be hosting a link back to your site.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6543297].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Randall Magwood
    Tell her you're going to have to charge her if she wants you to re-write all of your articles.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6543669].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Christophe Young
    Great answers in this thread! Thanks!

    That's what I thought. Basically I'm going to offer my existing articles as is and I'm not going to re-write them. Take it or leave it.

    One other question... I'm writing a ton of new articles for my own website and each one has a soft sell for my ebook at the end. This is something that someone else in my niche is doing.

    Basically I write a great, content filled article and at the end I transition smoothly to a "if you want to learn more about this, than check out my new ebook. Here's the link blah blah blah...," blurb.

    These are for articles already on my own site and there's also an opt in box at the top of every article and in the side bar.

    BUT, for my articles on other sites, (for example my syndicated articles) doesn't it make sense to have a blurb going to my landing page at the end of each article instead? And this landing page will have an opt in box, not a "squeeze page" really, but a landing page.

    I figure my main objective is to get readers who find my articles on other sites onto my list first. Conversely, readers already on my site will likely already be on my list and are ready to be offered a paid product.
    Signature
    Under Construction
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6544019].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author Alexa Smith
      Banned
      Originally Posted by Christophe Young View Post

      BUT, for my articles on other sites, (for example my syndicated articles) doesn't it make sense to have a blurb going to my landing page at the end of each article instead? And this landing page will have an opt in box, not a "squeeze page" really, but a landing page.
      Yes, this makes complete sense.

      I'm biased, though: it's exactly what I do.

      (Certainly not a squeeze page. I can build bigger lists with squeeze pages - I've split-tested separately in 4 unrelated niches - but I still earn less money from those lists over the subsequent 6 months).

      Originally Posted by Christophe Young View Post

      I figure my main objective is to get readers who find my articles on other sites onto my list first.
      Exactly so.
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6548181].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author JohnMcCabe
        Originally Posted by Christophe Young View Post

        Great answers in this thread! Thanks!

        That's what I thought. Basically I'm going to offer my existing articles as is and I'm not going to re-write them. Take it or leave it.

        One other question... I'm writing a ton of new articles for my own website and each one has a soft sell for my ebook at the end. This is something that someone else in my niche is doing.

        Basically I write a great, content filled article and at the end I transition smoothly to a "if you want to learn more about this, than check out my new ebook. Here's the link blah blah blah...," blurb.

        These are for articles already on my own site and there's also an opt in box at the top of every article and in the side bar.

        BUT, for my articles on other sites, (for example my syndicated articles) doesn't it make sense to have a blurb going to my landing page at the end of each article instead? And this landing page will have an opt in box, not a "squeeze page" really, but a landing page.

        I figure my main objective is to get readers who find my articles on other sites onto my list first. Conversely, readers already on my site will likely already be on my list and are ready to be offered a paid product.
        Ain't it fun when the lights come on?

        That blurb to your landing page can include the fact that you have written a book on the subject. "Joe Blow, author of [Title], yada yada yada..."

        Or "If you want to learn more about this and get a free excerpt/sample chapter from my book [Title], yada yada yada..."

        Mike Stewart used to title some of his books "The Book on [Subject]" so he could tell people with a straight face that he 'wrote the book on the subject'.:p
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6548268].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Mike101
    I learned new stuff from this great thread. Thank you all for sharing your knowledge.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6544366].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author AndrewCavanagh
    Having unique highly targeted content on your website is obviously a huge part of getting pages ranked high on google.

    Sure you're probably not going to get penalized for having syndicated articles on your website but your pages aren't going to rank high on google either.

    One unique article that is optimized for a low competition long tail keyword phrase is likely to rank in the top 4 spots on google for that phrase...near number one if you get a few good quality backlinks.

    If a website owner doesn't want to create that content themselves they should be willing to pay a reasonable price for high quality unique content.

    Instead of seeing this as a problem and something to get annyoned about why not see it as an opportunity?

    Did you consider telling this website owner you can do it but there's a premium cost for creating unique website content?

    Kindest regards,
    Andrew Cavanagh
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6544715].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Christophe Young
    Thanks, will consider doing that.

    Normally, just getting lots of targeted traffic would fulfill the "what's in it for me?" requirement but since she's launching a new site, this likely won't be the case.
    Signature
    Under Construction
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6548143].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author ddev
    Back to your question, (Why Do Some People Want "Unique" Articles?), one answer could be...because they don't know Video Marketing (where google can't analyze its content in depth as it does with articles).
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6548163].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author drmani
    Originally Posted by Christophe Young View Post

    Someone contacted me who is launching a new website and looking for content related to my niche. She offered to put my articles there but wants them to be unique... in other words she'd prefer I spin my existing articles.

    I don't get it, there wouldn't be any duplicate content penalties in this case. I'm wondering if this is common. I'd really rather not have to re-write my articles just to get them posted on her site.
    I'll flip the question around and ask:

    "Why do/might YOU want to be published on THEIR site?"

    The answer to that question is more relevant, imho.

    If there's a good reason to, then you just do whatever it takes
    to get published on their site.

    If there's no reason to, then you simply turn down the request
    for "unique content" and offer them articles to syndicate.

    It's actually quite simple... though too often, we try to make
    it more complicated!

    All success
    Dr.Mani
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6548276].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author drmani
      Originally Posted by yourreviewer View Post

      So let me get this straight.

      She is launching a NEW website and she was the one who contacted you. She has absolutely NO leverage at all for asking new content considering the fact her website is new.
      SitePoint.com has a home page with PR7 today.

      SEO for Firefox tells me the 'Traffic Value' is 339,571.

      When I was invited to submit content for their website in 1999,
      it was a "NEW website" and had "absolutely NO leverage at all for
      asking new content".

      Yet, 13 years later, I'm getting traffic from some articles I
      submitted to the site - for free!

      Sometimes, things just aren't as intuitive or obvious as they may
      look at first sight

      All success
      Dr.Mani
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6548283].message }}

Trending Topics