Duplicate Content & Google

This is wrong ... Google has no idea who the "original publisher" is .. PR has nothing to do with it either, backlinks has a great deal to do with it. I personally do not re-publish anyones articles but many on this very forum do and yes they can outrank the "original publisher" easily with backlinks.

James

That's what I'm saying...

But it seems that if you backlink a lot to all your posts, you still can have multiple listing of duplicated content!

At least you still spin articles, unique content is king !

Agreed, there are different degree of uniqueness here, as I said, Google prefer unique content, the more the better.

Let's start a challenge here, let's pick a keyword we all agreed and start a thread just for experiment and fun!

We all prepare articles to that keyword and see who rank faster, who rank longer and who's articles dominate the search engine

That way, we all start from the same ground.

I invite James, Brandi, Loz and 1 more people to join me in this challenge, this would be fun!

Anyone vote for this challenge to begin?

Kok Choon

One word "Authority"...

But authority only lasts so long.

When Michael died, millions and millions were linking to places, and talking and reciting his songs in text and what have you. It's no different than Traffic Geyser to blast out videos to heaps of places... what T.G was doing was creating a horde of links and videos on all these video sites with your keyword in the title and description and backlinks... when they all hit the surface at the same time, it creates that authority type presence to it, so google jumps on those pages and shows the same content.

If you do that now, you'll find that those places that came up before, are no longer, just the main authority sites will be.

Google will ONLY show one duplicate article at one time, you can not compare loads of media sites with article directories, they're both weighted differently.

And spinning articles is just fine... who ever told you it wasn't, must be on drugs.

Yes, that's one part of their filter, but it does not mean there's other filters for the same content spread across these article directories.

Go run a test where you know you have 1 article spread across 100 article directories that were all indexed. How many show up when you type in your phrase?

1, right? Right! Google will ONLY show one result, why? cos you never pointed enough links to those other pages (article directories), you never created a wave of links, to give google the presence of that site to be worthy to check out. So it will show the other articles on page 2, 3, 4, etc, and if you phrase match the articles, say, the subject line, or a sentence, you'll notice that google will show approx 12-16 of those duplicate articles, with a link under the last result saying they ommited more results that matched your query and to click on it to view more results, when you do, bobs ya uncle, there's all your other links / articles that google will NOT count!

the other 12-16 that came up, the links in those articles lose weight as more dup content is found. I've done these tests years ago, and the fact still remains the same.

If you follow the "guidelines" that Google lays out, you'll find that you will not jump around in SE's SERP's when they have those algorithm updates... my rankings have remained stable throughout each one, while others have dropped off the planet or on page 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10.

Do as Google says, and you'll see the rankings you want, copy what wiki-pedia are doing, build a relationship with your hosted pages, turn them into authority pages, give google a reason that the main page that links up to other pages of relevancy are in fact relevant, once google knows that, your rankings stay rock solid.

No one said its not impossible to make money with dup content sites. Google changes the pages rankings all the time, they randomly change the page that ranked on page one, to push them back to page two, etc., some pages do stay on the same page for a while, all depends how you're getting your backlinks and how your site structure was made.

I told Greg on skype the other day, what he is doing is not a stable business... he said for as long as his sites were making him money, he was happy... fair play, fair enough, i got no quarrels about that... if something works for you, great... Greg is the type of guy that if something works, he'll do more of it, once it stops working, he'll work out why, but, he's not been in this game for as long as I have...

I said "what would you prefer, a site that makes money here and there regularly then drops off the face of the earth, or make sure it keeps making money"

in short, he said its like throwing S**t to the wall, eventually it slides off the wall. I said exactly, why not do something properly the first time round... he was more consumed in making money the way he was.. fine, that's his prerogative. I have proven time and time again, duplicate content is a lazy asses way to make money, its' not stable., my article directory for instance was receiving 2,000 to 4,000 unique visitors per day to 14,600 or so articles, my article directory was climbing to just under 10,000 alexa rank, then all of a sudden, boom, google update, and slowly those pages started to disappear.

Although wpmage is ok, its not a stable method of making money. but soon it will be after the advice i have given him over the course of the week recently.

At the end of the day, ppl are free to do as they wish... i on the other hand, like to do things properly. but i guess it takes a while for a person to realise what was said years ago, was something they should of listened to, today. just think of all the sites that would of doubled in revenue, rather than just becoming a domain name with content that makes crap all.

Yes, if you look closely, tell me which site on the top 10 don't have links?

My point is not duplicate content, is links. I first tough that Google will "absolutely" not show duplicated content for main keywords (Still the example shows long tail), but after I see the example, I changed my statement to:

Google prefer unique content!

I am opening to any suggestion and proof, only proof will change my view

You said it, we prefer unique, what you think Google would like?

Google loves unique content and will always do, and the reason duplicated content shows on SERP, because:

1. Google can't find more unique result, show duplicate is better than nothing.

2. Links is the heart of Google ranking, that's why all duplicated pages shown. I know James claimed he can do it without links, I invite him to the challenge, so are you, Brandi.

The challenge will be fun and knowledgeable, many Warriors would love to see the result and learn from this challenge, so am I.

100% agreed, no argument here.

The answer is obvious - volume, quantity!

You said yourself on previous post, WP Mage don't need links, but I see they do! In their OTO page, they mention about an automated backlink building system!

WP Mage just proves my statement - Google prefer links over content.

I've yet seen (not that they don't exists) an autoblog system making tons of money with a single site, but do see many auto blogs add up to very lucrative income!

We, SEO marketer can build one authority site and get as much as 7 figures income yearly, I doubt auto blog that.

I use article marketing, auto blogs (as feeder sites) and authority sites to generate income, and all works well!

There is no one system better than the other, I use all of them

Just join the challenge, we'll see what happens.

Some folks are talking of trying to RANK the dupe content ... which was not the OP's query... while others are discussing whether the dupe content will result in some sort of penalty by google ...

I for one could care less about "ranking" dupe content ... I just want the backlinks from it. Meaning I want ot put my content - dupe/ semi-dupe/ spun / exact copy et al ... on web porperties and have it indexed and the links count - as they all point to the original content :-)

So the interesting thing to me in this thread is - the fine print by Loz.

So Loz ... Im not disagreeing, Im wanting to know how I could TEST whether google "counted" / "gave me credit for", the backlinks in the duplicate content in the supplemental index - as you mention above. Yes Ive seen my dupe content on sites all over the web that is in that "Supplemental Index" results.

Is there a way we can know for sure which pieces of the dupe content google is and isnt counting?

Ive done a little testing - but Im not sure of the results?

http://content.screencast.com/users/...11-28_1945.png