Autoblog best practice: whether to fetch partial or full content from feed?

16 replies
Hi ,

I am not sure if I should post in this section or SEO.

I am looking for suggestion on this from sometime however not getting many.

I really need opinion and advice here. I have a website which I have started using as autoblog. I don't have time to write content so I thought of making use of autoblog. I am using Feedwordpress to fetch content from around 100 websites related to web design/development/photoshop and seo.

As I already mentioned that I don't have time and money for writing(or hire writer) own content. So want to make use of the website and if possible earn few bucks monthly. Keeping panda in mind and fear of being penalized what do you guys suggest:

Whether I should fetch full content from the rss feeds and display on my website (with link to original source off course)

or

Display partial/excerpts only and the title/read more link taking to the original source.

Which one is better and safe practice keeping google panda and its penalization in mind. Or both will have same impact.

Thanks
#autoblog #content #feed #fetch #full #partial #practice
  • Profile picture of the author acesites
    I have made a "news portal" on a specific niche with an autoblogger, I would say make it partial, that way if people want to read the whole article they will have to click the link and visit the original writer's page.
    This way you are adding value to the original content creator by sending them a visitor.
    Signature
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7011509].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Will Edwards
    Made me laugh; the combination of 'Autoblog' and 'Best Practice'
    Signature
    Is This The World's Easiest Way to Make Money?

    Click Here to Find Out
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7011538].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author rockrahul
    Thank you acesites
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7017296].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author CyberSEO
    Originally Posted by rockrahul View Post

    Autoblog best practice: whether to fetch partial or full content from feed?
    Forget about it. The old-school autoblogging concept doesn't work anymore. Scraping (stealing) content from other blogs is lame.

    You should syndicate media content instead. There are many resources (e.g. YouTube, IGN and others) that allow you to parse and embed their content absolutely legally. In the after-Panda world, Google doesn't care so much about the uniqueness of your content. Now it cares about your visitor activity.

    If your site can catch surfers and make them spend a lot of time there (browse it, bookmark it and then return again and again), Google will consider as it made for real people. This is the new concept of search engines and the new life for autoblogging in general.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7089982].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author ninjutsu
      Originally Posted by CyberSEO View Post

      Forget about it. The old-school autoblogging concept doesn't work anymore. Scraping (stealing) content from other blogs is lame.

      You should syndicate media content instead. There are many resources (e.g. YouTube, IGN and others) that allow you to parse and embed their content absolutely legally. In the after-Panda world, Google doesn't care so much about the uniqueness of your content. Now it cares about your visitor activity.

      If your site can catch surfers and make them spend a lot of time there (browse it, bookmark it and then return again and again), Google will consider as it made for real people. This is the new concept of search engines and the new life for autoblogging in general.
      I agree with you,, but do you have a solution in autoblogging way?
      Signature
      "what you give is what you get"
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7217201].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author MissTerraK
        Originally Posted by ninjutsu View Post

        I agree with you,, but do you have a solution in autoblogging way?
        Yes, don't use it at all.

        And yes, I did read that the OP doesn't have the time or money to invest in seeking out writers and paying them for his business and this is what perplexes me over and beyond why he wants to use auto blogging software.

        Any successful business owner as well as someone considering going into business understands that both time and money are needed for success.

        Sometimes you can exchange time for money by doing things yourself that you are relatively skilled in. Sometimes you can exchange money for time such as outsourcing those things that you find to be time burners or on the things that you just honestly don't have the skills to do proficiently.

        But believing you can be successful without investing neither time nor money in a business confuses me. :confused:

        Dream chaser, perhaps?

        OP, I wish you well in your endeavor, however I do greatly urge you to rethink your business plan.

        P.S. You forgot the neither option for your poll.

        Terra
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7217430].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author Alexa Smith
          Banned
          Originally Posted by MissTerraK View Post

          P.S. You forgot the neither option for your poll.
          Indeed so: I strongly suspect that that's why, one month later, there've still been only two votes.
          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7217543].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author CyberSEO
        Originally Posted by ninjutsu View Post

        I agree with you,, but do you have a solution in autoblogging way?
        Course I don't want give away all my own little secrets (everybody needs to own something private) but I have explained the new autoblogging (I really hate this word) concept here: http://www.warriorforum.com/main-int...ml#post7170188
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7219764].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author seotothecore
    If you aggregate content from the best sources on the web for a particular niche, then i do not see how an autoblog can provide no real value to the user. Getting only copied content to rank well is quite challenging however. You usually still need at least some unique content to make things worth algorithmicly...
    Signature
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7094159].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author CyberSEO
      Originally Posted by seotothecore View Post

      If you aggregate content from the best sources on the web for a particular niche, then i do not see how an autoblog can provide no real value to the user. Getting only copied content to rank well is quite challenging however. You usually still need at least some unique content to make things worth algorithmicly...
      Very easy. A properly-made autoblog aggregates scattered content from various sources and makes it available as a solid, cozy, well-structured and constantly updated website (find most popular and toprated things; sort them by tags and categories; use search function etc).

      For example, do you use Google image or video search services? Why would you do so if Google doesn't generate any unique content but just aggregates it from various sources and displays it as a picture gallery of a set of video previews? So the good autoblog does almost the same, and usually it does it even better because its owner sorts out the content sources manually and don't relay on keywords like search engines do.
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7096010].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author thebitbotdotcom
    Its all about adding value to the lives of your readers.

    My take: If you add unique and useful content to your site regularly, it keeps Google happy. If you supplement that with non-unique but still highly relevant and useful content, then this keeps your readers happy and returning. If the supplemental content happens to be automated then so be it.

    Personally, I would rather visit a site that has tons of "useful content" than one with "all original content". For me, usefulness usurps originality. Obviously automated content will never rank, but what it will do is make the user experience (that the original content brought you) a better one.

    SEO of the future = Who has the most value ON their site as well as plenty original content.
    Signature
    Do Your Copywriting Skills Suck?

    Let Us Help You Develop Your Writing Skills!

    Submit Guest Posts With [ TheBitBot.Com ]
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7096345].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author CyberSEO
      Originally Posted by thebitbotdotcom View Post

      My take: If you add unique and useful content to your site regularly, it keeps Google happy. If you supplement that with non-unique but still highly relevant and useful content, then this keeps your readers happy and returning. If the supplemental content happens to be automated then so be it.
      Doesn't work after Panda. You don't need to "make Google happy". Now you have to "make real surfers happy", because the surfers' behavioral is the most important thing for Google nowadays.

      Literally a year ago it was very easy to make Google happy paying a few coins to 3rd-World copywriters to fill out your blogs with "unique keyword reach" content. Panda has ruined such an approach on April 24th.

      Be honest with yourself, 99% of paid articles are garbage, because they are not intended for the real people. Course if your copywriter's name is not Stephen King ; ) An ability to write really good articles that will keep the surfers glued to your site is a very rare gift. For example I can't write anything that will touch the people and make them read my texts for hours (even when I write them in my mother language). If you can do that, I sincerely envy to your skills!
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7096435].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Randall Magwood
    I had no idea people are still using autoblogging. Doesn't Google banned Adsense users who follow this practice?
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7217823].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author CyberSEO
      Originally Posted by Randall Magwood View Post

      I had no idea people are still using autoblogging. Doesn't Google banned Adsense users who follow this practice?
      The smart people do not use autoblogging nowadays. They use various content automation methods. As I already mentioned somewhere above, Google itself is a good example of a self-populating site which does not produce its own content. Google just automatically aggregates a 3rd-party content from different sources and shows it to you as a well-structured collection of links, images, videos and other sorts of content you are interested in.

      Those who got this simple concept make serious money on self-populated sites. Others continue to buy boring and useless "unique" articles which can't make a surfer to stay at their sites even for a minute. They (the sites) get an outstanding bounce rate and end up in the "Mariana Trench" of the Google SERP's.
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7219820].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Lenovo
    Honestly, spun or duplicate content is poison for website particularly after google updates. What that update was basically about ? it was certainly to discourage the duplicate content. Even if your article which you are posting on different article directories are duplicate, you backlink will not be given authority.
    You can outsource writer s for your blog. You can find a unique article from 5 to 10 $. One more thing, its not the quantity of content which will help your site to rank but it is quality of your content. For my self even my single page website ranked with unique content.
    Signature
    >>>>> Grab My FREE 300 $ Daily CPA Method <<<<<
    Caution: Particularly for those who think that they cant make money online
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7219944].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author CyberSEO
      Originally Posted by Lenovo View Post

      What that update was basically about ?
      It was all about switching Google to the so-called behavioral model. Personally I think it was a good and wise move.

      Since the AI is not invented yet, the search engines can't estimate the quality of your content. In other words, Google's algo is still unable to read every article on the Internet and conclude something like: "Yeah, that was a real good sh*t, but I would add a bit more drama to the second act where Senior Pedro finds out he is the lost son of Donna Carmelita!"

      So the only proper way estimate the quality of a Web resource is to let the surfer to decide which site is better. Fortunately now its very easy to watch for the surfers using such a big arsenal of spy tools like Google toolbar, Chrome browser and that countless number of Google Analytics scripts on almost every site.

      It is exactly what Panda was about. And yes, I really love it!

      P.S. The only new update what did hit my networks was Penguin, which intended to fight so-called "link spam" when all those old good link exchange SEO techniques suddenly become useless and even harmful. However that's not fatal and there are proven ways to recover the sites penalized for "unnatural linking"
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7220056].message }}

Trending Topics