Is if copied articles Literally to my blog i get bad seo

by geekmo
21 replies
  • SEO
  • |
i have a blog on blogger and i was wandring if i copied articles from other blogs literally with mention the source , Is it have bad impact to the SEO
#articles #bad #blog #copied #literally #seo
  • Profile picture of the author MrMintyBluez
    When you copy articles you are putting duplicated content on your website which is a terrible idea. EVEN if you put the source on your website Google knows who made the article first.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10496236].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author expmrb
    Originally Posted by geekmo View Post

    i have a blog on blogger and i was wandring if i copied articles from other blogs literally with mention the source , Is it have bad impact to the SEO
    What exactly your intentions are? Are you trying to give updates of every blog in your niche? Like a news update?
    Signature
    SEO Motionz Forum & Blog- Digital Marketing Forum & Blog,
    Forum Management & Promotion, SEO Tips, Money Making tips etc.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10496263].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Synnuh
    There's ways to do what you're talking about doing, but judging from your post I'm going to tell you that it's not safe to approach.

    Original content, unless you want to spin your wheels 'til you figure out how to force duplicate content to the top of the SERPs.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10496284].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author yukon
    Banned
    Originally Posted by geekmo View Post

    i have a blog on blogger and i was wandring if i copied articles from other blogs literally with mention the source , Is it have bad impact to the SEO

    Your blog pages which are most likely weak as far as backlinks will be buried in Google Supplemental SERPs (no traffic). It's sort of bad If your goal is search traffic.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10496319].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Engineer2Blogger
    You can do this every now and then, (more like once in a blue moon), but if 95% of your site is duplicate content then you'll be penalised like crazy. Not worth it.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10498009].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Shreyasingh
    Google doesn't entertain duplicate article as it treated it as a spam. So, keep in mind that a duplicate content won't help you to rank your website or your blog. Make fresh and unique content with complete information of the topic in which you are writing. It will assist you to generate huge traffic on your website easily. Write an attractive content guys.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10498492].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author nettiapina
      Originally Posted by Shreyasingh View Post

      Google doesn't entertain duplicate article as it treated it as a spam.
      Not necessarily. As Yukon pointed out it just gets filtered to the supplemental index, and will never be seen by any real user. I guess you could get a manual spam penalty or something, but the automated systems keep you from ranking.

      Originally Posted by Shreyasingh View Post

      It will assist you to generate huge traffic on your website easily. Write an attractive content guys.
      Only if you actually go and "generate" that huge traffic. Marketing is an essential point. No matter how good your content is it's not going to work if nobody knows about it. You don't need to have deep pockets. Just start from social media and your circle of contacts.
      Signature
      Links in signature will not help your SEO. Not on this site, and not on any other forum.
      Who told me this? An ex Google web spam engineer.

      What's your excuse?
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10498532].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author mariajerek
    Originally Posted by geekmo View Post

    i have a blog on blogger and i was wandring if i copied articles from other blogs literally with mention the source , Is it have bad impact to the SEO
    Copying content from other's site is completely unethical way as per google guidelines. And the technique you are following to mention the source is not a good idea. Because your post will never get rank on SERP. But yes if you write the content in your own words and then you can put the source as a reference then it would be beneficial for your post. First you have posted a unique and fresh content so it could be rank on SERP and if you give preference then it will increase your social presence and may be in future the other person will also recommend you....
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10498598].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Sumon2k7
    It's a bad idea. However you can mention the original source link in your own created content. It'll give as much as benefit as you were planning to get by submitting another websites content to your posts.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10498640].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author paladinseo
    well i did outrank sites from which i copyed article word by word so...
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10498903].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author nettiapina
      Originally Posted by paladinseo View Post

      well i did outrank sites from which i copyed article word by word so...
      Sure, it's possible. It's not ethical, or something that a business should do. It's also not something that a newbie can pull off.
      Signature
      Links in signature will not help your SEO. Not on this site, and not on any other forum.
      Who told me this? An ex Google web spam engineer.

      What's your excuse?
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10498992].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author geekmo
    I found this code in a blog

    <link href='www.example.com/' rel='canonical'/>

    and the publisher says that if you have added it to your blog ,Google will considered Articles copied just as important with Original articles, is that true
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10499223].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author DABK
      Google shows the article that seems most popular and closest to the search phrase.

      If you copy an article and do better SEO than the original has, you're going to be shown. If you copy and your SEO is worse, the original will be shown searchers.

      Originally Posted by geekmo View Post

      I found this code in a blog

      <link href='www.example.com/' rel='canonical'/>

      and the publisher says that if you have added it to your blog ,Google will considered Articles copied just as important with Original articles, is that true
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10499517].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author paulgl
        The internet runs on copied content.

        I find it quite odd when some people above talk about
        how google despises it, or it's the end of the world.

        Google does not despise it. Google is filled with
        dupe content. Ever been to youtube? Google news?
        No? Probably not....as I assume you have no clue about
        google.

        Ever been to NYT? Yahoo? Reuters? API? USAtoday?
        WIkipedia? Ebay? Amazon? No? Probably not,
        as you have no clue about the web.

        Having the same articlet as another site, is not
        in itself bad. Google never ever ever said anything
        like that. People quote 25% of what google says,
        then claim to be experts. Look at the other 75%
        and you can learn a thing or two.

        It's not about duplicate content. It's how it's used.

        As far as copyright, that only holds true for the US
        and sometimes it's partners who have signed
        agreements.

        You can use tons of copyrighted material, if you
        follow the rules.

        You can also copy anything the US government
        publishes as its own. They cannot by law
        copyright it. Third party stuff is another matter.

        I am using a copied page from the US govt
        about certain national parks, word for word.
        I exploit this to the max.

        At the moment, I outrank the park page...

        You are free to copy wikipedia stuff as well
        if you follow the creative commons.

        Now, all that was in reference to the google
        loonies who don't know how google works,
        and scream the sky is falling.

        That was not about the silliness of copying
        an article from another blog, just because.
        That is a different matter.

        Google could care less if you stole it...
        They are not a police force, and will take
        no action unless directed to.

        You'd think they would de-index lyric sites,
        videos, torrents, wikileaks, etc. But they
        don't. They fight for the right to keep the
        internet a free for all.

        Paul
        Signature

        If you were disappointed in your results today, lower your standards tomorrow.

        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10499559].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author yukon
      Banned
      Originally Posted by geekmo View Post

      I found this code in a blog

      <link href='www.example.com/' rel='canonical'/>

      and the publisher says that if you have added it to your blog ,Google will considered Articles copied just as important with Original articles, is that true


      Canonical tags are redirects, they're not an obvious redirect like a 301/302 but they're still considered redirects by Google.

      So... If you add a canonical tag on your copied page pointing to another domain odds are your copied page will be buried in supplemental SERPs where it will never be seen by traffic. So... it's pointless to copy another webpage, even less useful from an SEO point of view to point a canonical tag on your copied webpage back to the original author domain/page.

      Canonical tags can be cross domain redirects, they're not strictly for internal pages.

      [Google source]
      Addressing syndicated content.

      If you syndicate your content for publication on other domains, you want to consolidate page ranking to your preferred URL.
      ...which is what the original author is trying to get you to do, redirect (canonical tag) all copied pages back to the original domain/page.

      Even If you don't do any type of redirect the page with the best SEO wins in the SERPs. Odds are If you're scraping the web for content you probably have just as much effort in link building (weak backlink profile).
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10499595].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author nettiapina
      Originally Posted by geekmo View Post

      and the publisher says that if you have added it to your blog ,Google will considered Articles copied just as important with Original articles, is that true
      If you didn't get Yukon's excellent explanation, here's a TL;DR:
      It's the exact opposite. You'd be asking Google to honor the other article as the copy that they should show.
      Signature
      Links in signature will not help your SEO. Not on this site, and not on any other forum.
      Who told me this? An ex Google web spam engineer.

      What's your excuse?
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10500447].message }}
  • The whole copied article is not so good idea. Here are a couple of things you can do.

    1) Rewrite the whole article.
    2) Take the whole blog but use cannonical tag with original URL.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10499249].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author sdoviratan
    according to the rules of google panda your article or content must be unique otherwise google count your website as a spam..
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10500514].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author nettiapina
      Originally Posted by sdoviratan View Post

      according to the rules of google panda your article or content must be unique otherwise google count your website as a spam..
      There's no "rules of Google Panda" that anyone of us know about, and your comment about spam is misleading. You'd know this already if you just would've read the thread.
      Signature
      Links in signature will not help your SEO. Not on this site, and not on any other forum.
      Who told me this? An ex Google web spam engineer.

      What's your excuse?
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10500550].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Petson10
    If you copied an article from original source and mention in your blog, Google will come to knows from where you have copied the article. Believe me is an a bad ideo for seo, as Google will be penalize your site.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10500568].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author DABK
      Google will not penalize your site. At worst, it will put your article in a dark corner of its basement. At best, it will be #1 in the results for one or more keywords... It all has to do with SEO, with backlinks.

      Originally Posted by Petson10 View Post

      If you copied an article from original source and mention in your blog, Google will come to knows from where you have copied the article. Believe me is an a bad ideo for seo, as Google will be penalize your site.
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10500617].message }}

Trending Topics