Can duplicate content HURT you?

by Brendan Mace 56 replies
hey guys,

I've started a couple websites. Put up a couple of 'unique pages.' Since I do have a copy of Wp Robot, I am wondering whether it is worthwhile to set it up.

If duplicate content cannot hurt your rankings, then it would make sense to set up. After all, if there's no chance to hurt you, but a slight chance to get some extra views + pages .... why not?

However, if duplicate content can impact the results of your 'unique pages,' then I would prefer to avoid an autoblog.

So my decision really boils down to whether duplicate content can have a negative effect. There are some people on this forum that suggest they are losing traffic due to duplicate content. That does not necessarily mean that duplicate content is penalized. It could simply be devalued. In other words, you get a smaller amount of credit for a syndicated post. The ONLY thing that would stop me from using an autoblog is if it could hurt my rankings.

ie. become unindexed.... lose credibility with the SE's, etc.

What do you think? Can duplicate content hurt you?
#search engine optimization #content #duplicate #hurt
  • Profile picture of the author clickwork
    It all depends on scale as much as anything else -- focus you time and efforts on doing what Google is actually looking for: creating quality content. That would be my advice anyway.

    However, to answer your question, on a smaller scale duplicate content isn't likely to have a negative impact on your performance in the SERPs (in theory). Look at the range of duplicate article submissions in the link profile behind any SEO'd site...
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3510370].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author Brendan Mace
      Originally Posted by clickwork View Post

      It all depends on scale as much as anything else -- focus you time and efforts on doing what Google is actually looking for: creating quality content. That would be my advice anyway.

      However, to answer your question, on a smaller scale duplicate content isn't likely to have a negative impact on your performance in the SERPs (in theory). Look at the range of duplicate article submissions in the link profile behind any SEO'd site...
      sweet. So duplicate content on a scale of a post a day shouldn't hurt my site?
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3510448].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author clickwork
    Final caveat, if you're are going to post duplicate content on-site then the sites will effectively be competing against each other for position...
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3510372].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author royljestr
    It won't hurt your site. But as I said in your OTHER thread spinning it is a good idea. Or how about not even using articles?? I have a site that is ranking great and I only use WP Robot to pull in youtube videos.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3510788].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author PatriciaJ
      Originally Posted by royljestr View Post

      It won't hurt your site. But as I said in your OTHER thread spinning it is a good idea. Or how about not even using articles?? I have a site that is ranking great and I only use WP Robot to pull in youtube videos.
      Spinning it is NOT a good idea. The content pulled in by WP Robot is authored by others and should not be altered, nor should the links be removed. But there is nothing wrong with adding to pages where you have syndicated not duplicate content.

      I've been using WP Robot on a number of my sites for over a year and none of my sites have suffered for it. But I have it set to post to draft so I can vet what is going onto my sites. I go round the sites at least once a month and schedule posts for several weeks.

      A lot of the articles are poorly written or very self promotional so I delete them and only use the decent ones - hopefully that will improve with recent Google events. Sometimes I add an introductory paragraph or comment with my opinion to an article, or I may add some images. Press releases and Youtube videos need vetting too. With WP Robot you can build pages with several of the options which makes them more interesting and useful for visitors. Or you can use the features to add to your own unique posts.

      So if you are worried about your blog suffering from autoblogging you can still use timesaving WP Robot in a positive way.

      P.S. I also have guest bloggers on some of the niche sites who are kind enough to post good unique content.
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3512511].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author 72K.org
    Now that Google has RECENTLY started to penalize alot of the duplicate content sites (such as autoblogs and such), you will have a harder time than before. Unfortunately this is very new, and not many people are aware of it, so in this case YES it can hurt you, and if you really want to do things right you should get a spinner. What do I mean by a spinner? It's a software to create unique articles - for example with wordpress, there is a plugin called Wordpress Unique. Check it out! Be careful ..

    Cheers
    Signature
    "90+ percent of winning in anything you try to do in America today, you gotta be excited"
    -Art Williams
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3510805].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Shirlyn
    It is of no use and through which one website cannot get good PR and reputation over search engine.
    Signature
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3512324].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Przemek Bloniarz
    I've been using duplicate content and recently, when Google has changed algorithm, some of my sites dropped..
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3512337].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author Alexa Smith
      Banned
      Duplicate content can, under some circumstances, hurt your site. (Not just "be ignored" or "be discounted"). If Google thinks you're using it deliberately in an attempt to fool their search engine, and so on.

      All of this is clearly explained on their site.

      But understand clearly what duplicate content is.

      The stuff described above is NOT duplicate content. :rolleyes:

      There's no point in having a debate about "Can duplicate content hurt you" if you don't understand clearly the difference between "duplicate content" and "syndicated content".

      This short thread explains, but read it slowly and carefully.
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3512353].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author Craig McPherson
        Originally Posted by Alexa Smith View Post

        What Alexa said and has said so in many, many posts before about dup content.
        I really admire your patience when this subject comes up Alexa.
        After all the times you have tried to educate people, you still maintain your calmness.

        Thanks for being a fantastic source of knowledge here.
        Have an outstanding day Alexa

        Craig
        Signature
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3521983].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author williampaul
      Originally Posted by Przemek Bloniarz View Post

      I've been using duplicate content and recently, when Google has changed algorithm, some of my sites dropped..
      Yes, I have the same thing too.. so better for you to create a unique and high quality content, the promote it..
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3516098].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author Reach Fame
      I honestly wanted to do duplicate content before but i realized that there is a lot at stake here...your business...I understand that staying honest in this business is the best for you and your customers.

      The more honest you are about seo practices, the better reward you will get from google...

      Just consider keeping up a wordpress blog and loading it with updated fresh content all the time. You should be alright.
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3519775].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author akira07
    I have 20+ Amazon website which using spin + restructured articles and the position is safe. I add 1-2 original paragraph only to the whole page.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3512370].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Mathias Vildbrad
    Lately 2-3 of my sites have started to drop since Google did a change in their algorithm, so be carefull when implementing WP Robot It might hurt you site just as it did with mine.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3512429].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author indiatext
    if you simply copy past the content of someone else on google it will harm your seo efforts for sure, but you add some more content to it then it should go well.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3512455].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author akira07
    Not only about using spinner, but the spinned article should be more than 30% original
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3512465].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author akira07
    I think it's still work, as long you can assure that the spinned article is still readable to human. And i think that is the most hard part. However, rewriting is better than spinning
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3512497].message }}
  • Publish it on your web page and get it indexed there first. Then distribute it elsehwhere
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3512534].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author celente
    but if you spin... is it really a quality article?. That is why I never spin. you are just putting out verbatim in cyberspace....more than there already is now.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3512680].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author jurojin
    Duplicate content will hurt your rankings if you use WpRobot to auto post duplicate articles.The only type of duplicate content that doesn't get penalized and can be used with WpRobot is Amazon products on my opinion.
    What you do is add a short description of product (you set this up in wprobot) and you make each site niche targeted (lego toys, digital camera, etc).
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3512991].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author CDarklock
    Yeah, duplicate content can hurt you. I mean, last weekend, I had this friend who was surfing through one of those bad internet neighbourhoods? And a gang of spun articles came out and started harassing him, walking really close to him, all asking for money and stuff. Calling him "homes" and "boy" and things like that, you know. Then one of them pulled out a direct affiliate link and outright demanded he hand over at least 30 seconds of quality page views to the ad network, almost like one of those old "pay to surf" programs, you know? And then they wrapped him up in an old 468 by 60 ad banner and stuffed him in an abandoned USENET group somewhere in the rec.* heirarchy. He contacted the internet police, and they took his statement, but they said there's really nothing they can do about it.

    So yeah, I don't mess with duplicate content. It's just crazy, man.
    Signature
    "The Golden Town is the Golden Town no longer. They have sold their pillars for brass and their temples for money, they have made coins out of their golden doors. It is become a dark town full of trouble, there is no ease in its streets, beauty has left it and the old songs are gone." - Lord Dunsany, The Messengers
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3513057].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author Richard Van
      Originally Posted by CDarklock View Post

      Yeah, duplicate content can hurt you. I mean, last weekend, I had this friend who was surfing through one of those bad internet neighbourhoods? And a gang of spun articles came out and started harassing him, walking really close to him, all asking for money and stuff. Calling him "homes" and "boy" and things like that, you know. Then one of them pulled out a direct affiliate link and outright demanded he hand over at least 30 seconds of quality page views to the ad network, almost like one of those old "pay to surf" programs, you know? And then they wrapped him up in an old 468 by 60 ad banner and stuffed him in an abandoned USENET group somewhere in the rec.* heirarchy. He contacted the internet police, and they took his statement, but they said there's really nothing they can do about it.

      So yeah, I don't mess with duplicate content. It's just crazy, man.
      I feel his pain Caliban.

      They're lurking everywhere, my cousin was approached by four spun articles yesterday offering him crack.

      My cousin had to run off, he was lucky too, kingpin duplicate Derek was on his way.

      Tell your friend I understand how he feels.

      I hope he gets out of that ad banner soon too.
      Signature

      Wibble, bark, my old man's a mushroom etc...

      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3513079].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author Brandon Tanner
      Originally Posted by CDarklock View Post

      Yeah, duplicate content can hurt you. I mean, last weekend, I had this friend who was surfing through one of those bad internet neighbourhoods? And a gang of spun articles came out and started harassing him, walking really close to him, all asking for money and stuff. Calling him "homes" and "boy" and things like that, you know. Then one of them pulled out a direct affiliate link and outright demanded he hand over at least 30 seconds of quality page views to the ad network, almost like one of those old "pay to surf" programs, you know? And then they wrapped him up in an old 468 by 60 ad banner and stuffed him in an abandoned USENET group somewhere in the rec.* heirarchy. He contacted the internet police, and they took his statement, but they said there's really nothing they can do about it.

      So yeah, I don't mess with duplicate content. It's just crazy, man.
      lol... classic.
      Signature

      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3513097].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author Brendan Mace
      Originally Posted by CDarklock View Post

      Yeah, duplicate content can hurt you. I mean, last weekend, I had this friend who was surfing through one of those bad internet neighbourhoods? And a gang of spun articles came out and started harassing him, walking really close to him, all asking for money and stuff. Calling him "homes" and "boy" and things like that, you know. Then one of them pulled out a direct affiliate link and outright demanded he hand over at least 30 seconds of quality page views to the ad network, almost like one of those old "pay to surf" programs, you know? And then they wrapped him up in an old 468 by 60 ad banner and stuffed him in an abandoned USENET group somewhere in the rec.* heirarchy. He contacted the internet police, and they took his statement, but they said there's really nothing they can do about it.

      So yeah, I don't mess with duplicate content. It's just crazy, man.
      Btw... this post is hilarious. I really hope I can avoid the internet police
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3516918].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author skidog30
    Too funny. CDarklock, maybe your friend needs to pay for cyber protection from Al Gore, since he invented the internet.
    Signature
    Avoid "Fly By Night Opportunities" {Check This Out!}
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3513748].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author jonnyhardbaked
    For me duplicate content will surely hurt your site. you will also lose credibility. Whatever you do to that particular content, the concept still remains. The only difference is that the concept of the original content was said in different way, but the main point is the same
    Signature

    Acquire an unlimited access to over 2,000 eBooks with unlimited Downloads and resale rights for only $55! Join me now!

    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3514631].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author Alexa Smith
      Banned
      Originally Posted by jonnyhardbaked View Post

      For me duplicate content will surely hurt your site.
      And for me, it will hurt yours. There's reciprocation for you.

      Meanwhile, with the obvious exception of Caliban's characteristically shrewd post above, most of the stuff described in this thread is NOT duplicate content. :rolleyes:

      There's no point in trying to have a debate about "Can duplicate content hurt you?" if you don't understandthe difference between "duplicate content" and "syndicated content".

      This short thread explains, but read it slowly and carefully.

      Oops ... wait a minute ... I already said some of that stuff in post #9 above. Apologies for the syndication of earlier posts.
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3515392].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author Brendan Mace
        Originally Posted by Alexa Smith View Post

        And for me, it will hurt yours. There's reciprocation for you.

        Meanwhile, with the obvious exception of Caliban's characteristically shrewd post above, most of the stuff described in this thread is NOT duplicate content. :rolleyes:

        There's no point in trying to have a debate about "Can duplicate content hurt you?" if you don't understandthe difference between "duplicate content" and "syndicated content".

        This short thread explains, but read it slowly and carefully.

        Oops ... wait a minute ... I already said some of that stuff in post #9 above. Apologies for the syndication of earlier posts.
        mhmm. Yeah, I meant can syndicated content hurt you.

        peeps seem to be divided
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3516442].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author Alexa Smith
          Banned
          Originally Posted by co2 View Post

          peeps seem to be divided
          Yes indeed.

          They're divided into two groups: a very small group of people like Peter Gibson (post #37 above) who (always) knows what he's talking about, and a much larger group of people who - sadly - apparently have absolutely no idea at all what they're talking about (and that's the majority of the thread).

          With apologies for the highly disparaging tone, it's really a long time since I've seen so much plain factual misinformation, so many mistaken beliefs and so much misguided nonsense in a thread here.
          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3517320].message }}
      • Duplicate content doesn't hurt that much... it stings a little bit but some local anesthetic should ease the pain.

        On-topic: Duplicated content can affect your rankings but syndicated content won't.

        If "syndicated" content could harm your rankings then wouldn't your competitor copy all of your content and paste it onto another website in order to leapfrog into your position on the SERPS?

        Google make the rules - for clarification ask them :p
        Signature
        Reserved for TheAnnoyingOrange
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3516509].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author Brendan Mace
          Originally Posted by TheAnnoyingOrange View Post

          Duplicate content doesn't hurt that much... it stings a little bit but some local anesthetic should ease the pain.

          On-topic: Duplicated content can affect your rankings but syndicated content won't.

          If "syndicated" content could harm your rankings then wouldn't your competitor copy all of your content and paste it onto another website in order to leapfrog into your position on the SERPS?

          Google make the rules - for clarification ask them :p
          yeah, it definitely doesn't hurt the original copy. My question has been a little vague, but what I mean is can you add copied content from another site... ie autoblogg. and not receive a penalty.

          For example, if I built up a website with a collection of articles from article directories, will this affect my sites credibility. even if the articles are relevant to my niche
          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3516526].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author gordonfong
    Goolge had announced duplicate and low quality content can't get a good rank.. so you want a better rank, you should write yourself.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3516355].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author julie9999
    Duplicate content is not good. It creates bad reputation towards all search engine specially google.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3516479].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author Brendan Mace
      Originally Posted by julie9999 View Post

      Duplicate content is not good. It creates bad reputation towards all search engine specially google.
      It seems like some people say that syndicated content hurts, and others say there is no problem... Does it depend on how you implement it?
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3516499].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Michael Ten
    ummmm yuh yuh yuh yuh yuh yuh yuh yuh yeah.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3516940].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author greatseoservice
    With the new google duplicated content is very low seen at. I`ve seen sites going down in searches if the site content wasn`t more then 30% unique.
    Article marketing became harder, Ezine is going down and autoblogs are already down.
    Dont start an autoblog, they are very hard to rank-tried it!
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3517128].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author peter gibson
    Don't think I've seen such a load of bullocks advice on the "duplicate content" topic since way back in the day.

    SYNDICATING your content is not only harmless, it's extremely helpful. Syndicated content is the reason we have rainbows and bunny rabbits. It is what will stop the aliens from taking over Los Angeles. It will win an Oscar next year. With syndication and some duct tape, you can build a rocket ship and slow global warming. Syndication caused my sister to lose 35 kg in 3 days.

    Yes, I'm taking the pi$$ but I'm also thinking maybe that's what some folks need to hear, because otherwise they these threads will continue being bombarded with this kind of stuff...

    Duplicate content is not good. It creates bad reputation towards all search engine specially google.
    Goolge had announced duplicate and low quality content can't get a good rank.. so you want a better rank, you should write yourself.
    For me duplicate content will surely hurt your site. you will also lose credibility. Whatever you do to that particular content, the concept still remains. The only difference is that the concept of the original content was said in different way, but the main point is the same
    Anyone telling you (^^^) syndicated content is bad or harmful is either inexperienced in the technique of promoting content, or they have a stake in getting you to buy some useless spinner software. OR, perhaps they believe in the myth that your content needs to exist only once, in one URL, ever, because, err... ummm... because it just makes sense. Or better yet, they have horrid SEO experience and they're blaming syndication for their sh!te ranks because it's too damned hard to figure out all that other pesky stuff.

    Syndication is what you want your material to accomplish. You WANT other sites picking up your words, your brand, and the name behind it. You want the word to spread and you want the folks linking back to your articles and posts. In order to do that you promote your material by syndicating it yourself, via article directories, and via other means. That - my superstitious friends - is how you make the big bucks. Writing unique content once and leaving it sit on a site getting maybe 25 visits a day? Well, basically that's how you kill any dreams of buying that Tuscan home in Southern Italy next year.

    I would add however, at this point spinning content is to be done at your own risk. From what I and other marketers/observers have seen, it's the directories that housed such spun horsesh!t that have taken the big whopping ding from almighty google. It is the vast amounts of LOW QUALITY content which caused google to write the "farmer" algo. See, this all started because people complained to google that the results from their search queries were getting pretty bloody lame. Why? Because they were consistently landing on sites with content spun so badly, so many times that you'd need a decoder ring to figure out it's even English. So google laid down the hammer on the sites where that spun nonsense existed in bulk.

    Yes, the update is also weighed to favor the original copy of said content, but NOT at the expense of syndicated copies. I said it before, the quality of content is what caused google's reaction, not the AVAILABILITY of it. So if you're writing stuff, put it on your site first, wait for it to get indexed, and then for the love of rainbows, bunny rabbits, and my sisters current weight loss goals, SYNDICATE it.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3517184].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author Unity96387
      So if I am a part of one of these blog memberships where everyone gets the same sites and pages, then these sites are made up of syndicated content and not duplicate content, right?

      answer this here:

      If I change the keywords on the pages so that my pages are called up for different keywords than the pages of the sites of the other members who leave the pages the way they got them then that should work in giving me the uniqueness I need to get different traffic than the other members do who did not change anything on their pages?

      answer this here:


      The new google farmer penalty does not affect these type of blog membership sites?


      answer this here:


      Thanks for clearing up something that I have not been able to find answers for but on this thread I think I will get the right answer providing people who know what they are talking about answer.
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3517224].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Trapped
    You guys are missing some point, the guy wants to install wp robot on his OWN site, and not to syndicate his own content.

    Now if he was to syndicate then I would agree with Peter Gibson, that it is extremely helpful. But I have to say that thats not the case, and publishing a syndicated content on your own website as per the latest algorithm farm change your site WILL be filtered, it MIGHT be penalized and one thing for sure, you will NEVER outrank or attempt to rank with a syndicated content (thats what the new algorithm was about, to clean up the SERPs from websites ranking with poor content or having 10 results in first page and all are of the same syndicated content = bad search experience).

    If you feel like arguing over syndicate, duplicate or whatever you wish, do so. Other ways you can invest that time and figure out what would your visitors (and search engines) prefer, a new, unique, useful and detailed articles (advise) or some rubbish thing that they might have read again..and again..and again...

    p.s. a content, syndicated or found on different places of the same site, is still duplicate.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3517371].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author Rsberg
      Originally Posted by Trapped View Post

      But I have to say that thats not the case, and publishing a syndicated content on your own website as per the latest algorithm farm change your site WILL be filtered, it MIGHT be penalized and one thing for sure, you will NEVER outrank or attempt to rank with a syndicated content (thats what the new algorithm was about, to clean up the SERPs from websites ranking with poor content or having 10 results in first page and all are of the same syndicated content = bad search experience).

      I know several people here who would completely disagree with you, myself included!

      I have several blogs with syndicated content from other sites on them and I out rank several of the original sources, rank well and get my fair share of traffic (and then some).

      I think before you make bold statements like that you should at very least make sure you know you are right...
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3519079].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author Brendan Mace
        Originally Posted by Rsberg View Post

        I know several people here who would completely disagree with you, myself included!

        I have several blogs with syndicated content from other sites on them and I out rank several of the original sources, rank well and get my fair share of traffic (and then some).

        I think before you make bold statements like that you should at very least make sure you know you are right...
        The last two posts sum it up completely. Some people think the algorithm update discounts sites built up with unoriginal content. And there is some evidence to support that logic because several warriors have suggested that their autoblogs have been filtered out of google.

        That being said, Rsberg you've commented on a ton of these autoblog posts, and always seems to know what you are talking about.

        Rsberg and the other expert autobloggers must be doing something different to remain in the good graces of google.

        Why do some autobloggers maintain excellent rankings with syndicated content, and some sites that scrape content have been filtered completely.
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3519761].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author Rsberg
          Originally Posted by co2 View Post

          Why do some autobloggers maintain excellent rankings with syndicated content, and some sites that scrape content have been filtered completely.
          From what I've learned through experience and by talking to others (those that don't have probelms and those that do) it seems to boil down to building quality sites. I don't mean to simplify it because it's not as easy as it sounds but in reality the end result seems to be that those who are seeing drops in rankings (or even worse) are those that are building sites that offer no value to the reader.

          As an example:

          My sites consist mostly of syndicated content but I add my own unique content as well and use my content to tie the syndicated content together and give my opinions and thoughts about the subject as a whole. I group it from several different sources (article directories, YouTube, Amazon, Yahoo Answers...etc) and when I add my own thoughts to the mix I think it offers a perspective to the reader they may not have seen elsewhere. It also allows me to add additional information that may not be presented by the syndicated content.

          If I post a syndicated article about how baseball bats aren't built as well today as they were 20 years ago and then add a video that contradicts the article along with a Yahoo Answers question that relates and then add in my own two cents on the subject based on my own opinion (or even go deeper and research it a bit) then I have presented a post that is mostly made of automated content but is presented in a fashion that provides value to the reader. Then I add a related Amazon product (or some other form of monetization) and bingo...syndicated content (that most confuse for "duplicate") that is well organized from several sources and offers value to the reader by adding in my own thoughts and presenting all of the content in a way they probably haven't seen before while still managing to market a product or service.

          If this is done properly it can be a win win for all concerned, including the original source of the syndicated content.
          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3521515].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author Trapped
        Originally Posted by Rsberg View Post

        I know several people here who would completely disagree with you, myself included!

        I have several blogs with syndicated content from other sites on them and I out rank several of the original sources, rank well and get my fair share of traffic (and then some).

        I think before you make bold statements like that you should at very least make sure you know you are right...
        I am sorry, you are completely right. Guys, just listen to him...but I am not sure how long will that type of strategy will really last.

        I am out of this conversation!
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3524388].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author Rsberg
          Originally Posted by Trapped View Post

          I am sorry, you are completely right. Guys, just listen to him...but I am not sure how long will that type of strategy will really last.

          I am out of this conversation!
          If you want to try to make a point by referencing something at least make sure the item you are pointing to is on point...

          The link you posted is to a “Black Hat SEO Case Study” and the quote below is from it:

          When people steal/borrow/syndicate content without any editorial value add or original content, and then wrap it in ads that is generally considered spam.”

          Obviously you didn’t pay much attention when I said this in a previous post:

          My sites consist mostly of syndicated content but I add my own unique content as well and use my content to tie the syndicated content together and give my opinions and thoughts about the subject as a whole. I group it from several different sources (article directories, YouTube, Amazon, Yahoo Answers...etc) and when I add my own thoughts to the mix I think it offers a perspective to the reader they may not have seen elsewhere. It also allows me to add additional information that may not be presented by the syndicated content.”

          I think doing this adds value and by the results I am getting from Google as far as the traffic my sites are getting from them I believe they think that too.

          You will never see any post from me…anywhere…that advises people to “wrap their content in ads”. I do advocate grouping related products/services with the content (both syndicated and unique) but that is completely different than “wrapping” which implies having a bunch of ads surrounding a small amount of content (meaning to have more ads than content).

          I’m all for a reasonable debate/discussion but if you’re going to present something as supporting evidence for your side or in rebuttal to something I said or implied then at least make sure what you are presenting is related...nothing I do is "Black Hat" and my sites certainly aren't "spammy".
          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3526395].message }}
          • Profile picture of the author Trapped
            Originally Posted by Rsberg View Post

            If you want to try to make a point by referencing something at least make sure the item you are pointing to is on point...
            Oh it is on point, and I do completely understand you trying to get out of the mug with such harsh lines and superiority claims.. however, back the OP thread states and then I am done with this thread.

            I've started a couple websites. Put up a couple of 'unique pages.' Since I do have a copy of Wp Robot, I am wondering whether it is worthwhile to set it up.
            The bolded part? Does it say something to you?

            Based on that line, I went ahead and advised not to go through that road if the thread openers intention is to take that website for the long run. Yes it is true, some of the similar websites that take/repost and syndicate are still lucky to be in the index of most search engines, others are falling of the index or pushed back to 30-60 page like nothing.

            However, my advise didn't sounded good to you, even tho it was based on the OP statement (wp robot = auto posting plugin) and claimed that such sites outrank the original author sites (in my book, thats endorsing such practice).

            Later on, you continue with "But I add editorial value to the copied content" etc..so you are admitting that you do not use a completely duplicate content but rather, you do add some of your extra editorial value (would not care how much that is, if its 10% or 20% of the entire page, still, there is some extra rather the simple duplicate content).

            Now back to the source where I linked, where the point was not of the pages being wrapped by ads (looks like you want to skim out the topic here) but rather how that company would use others content and still manage to rank...and then get burned (slightly) along the way, thing which, will most likely happen to others if you keep telling them "yes duplicate content is fine" without adding your extra small tip "but you should also add some editorial value to the same page".

            And aside that, tell me one person that is using this lazy method of using duplicate content through similar plugins that doesn't have their posts wrapped around with ads (since you mentioned this), unless its their own small network they are building for other purpose rather then making their pages rank high ... or they all do it for the joy of 'syndicating the good content' ?

            I do believe you are not one of those that try the short cut , however I still felt to give my advise to someone that has doubts, if it will or it won't hurt to use duplicate content.

            Anyway, it was a pleasure to exchange knowledge and talk with you, unfortunately I do not have that superiority feeling so I will just slowly apologize for giving an advise, not misleading a newbie and not getting him slam his head on the wall within a month or two and will back up from this thread.

            Best,
            Astrit
            {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3527439].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author peter gibson
      Originally Posted by Trapped View Post

      You guys are missing some point, the guy wants to install wp robot on his OWN site, and not to syndicate his own content.

      Now if he was to syndicate then I would agree with Peter Gibson, that it is extremely helpful. But I have to say that thats not the case, and publishing a syndicated content on your own website as per the latest algorithm farm change your site WILL be filtered, it MIGHT be penalized and one thing for sure, you will NEVER outrank or attempt to rank with a syndicated content (thats what the new algorithm was about, to clean up the SERPs from websites ranking with poor content or having 10 results in first page and all are of the same syndicated content = bad search experience).

      If you feel like arguing over syndicate, duplicate or whatever you wish, do so. Other ways you can invest that time and figure out what would your visitors (and search engines) prefer, a new, unique, useful and detailed articles (advise) or some rubbish thing that they might have read again..and again..and again...
      Really, I'm the last Warrior trying to buy into yet another massive argument over "Duplicate Content-Gate", but certain facts need to remain clear. So I will just add that IMO housing syndicated content on an individual site - even in the case of some autoblogs, has yet to show any signs of being affected by google "farmer". Some autoblogs have seen pretty substantial INCREASES in SERP position since the update. It's a consensus opinion from folks I run with that the rise in their ranks is due to the FALL in ranks of article directories.

      As I mentioned in my previous post, "farmer" was not about dismissing or penalizing "duplicate" content as you've eluded, it was about penalizing the sites that promote bad content in bulk, and adding weight to original copies of whatever material is being successfully syndicated. So while you may have a harder time ranking an article than it's owner, other site factors now have a larger part to play in how well that syndicated content will rank (below the original). Basically if the site you have my article on is otherwise junk, it's not gonna rank as well as a competitor who has my article and an otherwise better structured/quality site.

      Here's a brief example from my own experience:
      For around 36 months I've had one article ranking 7 times on the first page of Google. 2 entries were my sites, 3 were other sites that had copy and pasted my article from EZA, 1 was a goarticles version and 1 was the EZA entry that my competitors swiped. You wanna know what's gone from that top 10 SERP list today? EZA and goarticles. Up and vanished, like clockwork, the day "farmer" was implemented.

      However my sites are still at the top and can't go farther up, and of the 3 competitors ranking top 10 with my article, 2 have risen and one remains at the same ranking.

      If your theory is accurate the only thing still in the top 10 after the update should be my original content. Everything else should be in the "supplemental" index.
      I'm not an autoblog hater, but I wouldn't know the first thing about the process of building one, so often I question their validity based on my ignorance. But what I do know from a compilation of data collected by some pretty heavy hitters in my mastermind group is that the autoblogs (the quality ones anyway) are ranking better than they were before the update. If I'm not mistaken some warriors are also noticing this trend. Maybe a few will pipe in here to verify later on.

      Originally Posted by Trapped View Post

      p.s. a content, syndicated or found on different places of the same site, is still duplicate.
      Yep, and by saying that you get the Captain Obvious hat to wear all day. But as was explained add infinitum here at Warrior, even by Matt Cutts himself in a few blog posts I'm too tired to look up, syndicated content is NOT penalized and can't ever be regulated to any substantial degree - by the very nature, structure, and spirit of the internet. Syndication runs the internet, it populates blogs and sites, it makes the WWW go 'round.

      In offline media a popular article/author becomes so through successful syndication. In offline media great writers are made through syndication. It's basically the same set up in the online world. Links are what increase ranks, and the very act of linking back to a great article is a method of syndication. In fact, if not for folks online being able to "game the SERPS", syndication online and off would be essentially identical in practice, policy, and payoff.

      The meaning of duplicate content as implicated in this thread by a few here is simply misunderstood, and that is what needs clarity.
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3519821].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author Brendan Mace
        Originally Posted by peter gibson View Post

        Really, I'm the last Warrior trying to buy into yet another massive argument over "Duplicate Content-Gate", but certain facts need to remain clear. So I will just add that IMO housing syndicated content on an individual site - even in the case of some autoblogs, has yet to show any signs of being affected by google "farmer". Some autoblogs have seen pretty substantial INCREASES in SERP position since the update. It's a consensus opinion from folks I run with that the rise in their ranks is due to the FALL in ranks of article directories.

        As I mentioned in my previous post, "farmer" was not about dismissing or penalizing "duplicate" content as you've eluded, it was about penalizing the sites that promote bad content in bulk, and adding weight to original copies of whatever material is being successfully syndicated. So while you may have a harder time ranking an article than it's owner, other site factors now have a larger part to play in how well that syndicated content will rank (below the original). Basically if the site you have my article on is otherwise junk, it's not gonna rank as well as a competitor who has my article and an otherwise better structured/quality site.

        Here's a brief example from my own experience:
        For around 36 months I've had one article ranking 7 times on the first page of Google. 2 entries were my sites, 3 were other sites that had copy and pasted my article from EZA, 1 was a goarticles version and 1 was the EZA entry that my competitors swiped. You wanna know what's gone from that top 10 SERP list today? EZA and goarticles. Up and vanished, like clockwork, the day "farmer" was implemented.

        However my sites are still at the top and can't go farther up, and of the 3 competitors ranking top 10 with my article, 2 have risen and one remains at the same ranking.

        If your theory is accurate the only thing still in the top 10 after the update should be my original content. Everything else should be in the "supplemental" index.
        I'm not an autoblog hater, but I wouldn't know the first thing about the process of building one, so often I question their validity based on my ignorance. But what I do know from a compilation of data collected by some pretty heavy hitters in my mastermind group is that the autoblogs (the quality ones anyway) are ranking better than they were before the update. If I'm not mistaken some warriors are also noticing this trend. Maybe a few will pipe in here to verify later on.



        Yep, and by saying that you get the Captain Obvious hat to wear all day. But as was explained add infinitum here at Warrior, even by Matt Cutts himself in a few blog posts I'm too tired to look up, syndicated content is NOT penalized and can't ever be regulated to any substantial degree - by the very nature, structure, and spirit of the internet. Syndication runs the internet, it populates blogs and sites, it makes the WWW go 'round.

        In offline media a popular article/author becomes so through successful syndication. In offline media great writers are made through syndication. It's basically the same set up in the online world. Links are what increase ranks, and the very act of linking back to a great article is a method of syndication. In fact, if not for folks online being able to "game the SERPS", syndication online and off would be essentially identical in practice, policy, and payoff.

        The meaning of duplicate content as implicated in this thread by a few here is simply misunderstood, and that is what needs clarity.
        wow, great post! So essentially it boils down to providing quality. Does not matter (that much) whether your site provides syndicated or original content.

        Then, it seems like the sites being penalized have poor content somewhere? That would make a lot sense, because an unregulated autoblog would permit a lot of rubbish.

        Your post definitely supplies an explanation for why some autoblogs succeed and fail. Thank you kindly sir.
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3519856].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author webmaster44
    Try to prepare unique content yourself.... copied content definetly hurt your site,,, if not now in future it will hurt you....
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3520150].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author hilhilginger
    It is better to stay away from all duplicate contents for Google has slapped on websites that hosts duplicate contents. It will destroy your website's reputation in long run.
    Signature

    They have over 2300 Offers, Instant PayPal Payments and Free Training Articles.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3521808].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author Rsberg
      Originally Posted by hilhilginger View Post

      It is better to stay away from all duplicate contents for Google has slapped on websites that hosts duplicate contents. It will destroy your website's reputation in long run.
      I guess you didn't bother to actually read the thread did you :confused:

      This thread already has a lot of misguided advice and information, it doesn't need more to confuse those that don't know any better.

      I would suggest you (and anyone else reading this) actually take a few minutes and read some of the replies from members who have experience with this, know what they are talking about and have tried to answer the questions posted here based on those things rather than pure speculation.

      If you aren't sure who to pay attention to in this thread regarding factual information then look for posts by Perter Gibson and Alexa Smith, both are respected members here with a lot of experience and often offer valuable insight.
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3521922].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author arifsha
    I think If Your Link Back To Original source then duplicate content won't hurt your site
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3521985].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author arttse
      That's where a lot of people go wrong. Instead of linking back to the original source (just like google advises) they link back to a landing page or a different article on their website - and then they wonder why the syndicated page outranks them.

      Originally Posted by arifsha View Post

      I think If Your Link Back To Original source then duplicate content won't hurt your site
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3522048].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author junilerick
    I understand that the main, if not only, focus of SEO is to make money. So while suggesting to write original content can be costly in terms of time that can be spent else where, I think that actually learning new things and writing your own content can be a great learning experience. And in the fast paced world of SEO, consistent learning and a well rounded knowledge is what leads to ultimate success in the long term. Just my two cents.
    Signature

    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3522852].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author jack jastin
    In my opinion, Duplicate content always have its negative effect. It will definitely affect your ranking on Google and so, Traffic on your site as well. Always keep this thing in mind, Google always loves the uniqueness in your content.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3526474].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author dedobor
    Ive personally tested this as i am a person who likes to get information first hand and i saw my rank increase. still i prefer just getting an article written then outsource to be handspun for up to 1000 articles and use about 200 or so, much cheaper than buying that many original and still get the job done as far as uniqueness and readability in googles eyes. get a good spinner also with a track record, i outsource via odesk.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3526985].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Rsberg
    No point in pasting your post here....

    I will only say that no one (myself included) has a "superiority complex"...but I can understand "your trying to get out of the mug with such harsh lines"

    As far as your general tone toward this subject its quite obvious you are just another auto hater and regardless of what anyone would tell you that opinion wouldn't change. It wouldn't matter to you if 50, 100 or even 10,000 autobloggers posted here that they disagreed with you, gave evidence to support their views...etc etc...

    I would go as far as to say if Matt Cutts himself came in here and said that autoblogging was good for the internet and could offer value that you would still disagree with him, if for no other reason than not wanting to admit you might be wrong...at least on some level.

    Point is, no matter what you are told, regardless of who tells you...you would still see no possible good in autoblogging.

    Because of your inability to forget the past and see the possibilities that autoblogging offers today this back and forth is useless.

    Best of luck with your IM...regardless of which method it involves.
    Robert
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3529264].message }}

Trending Topics