Duplicate Content Filters to Destroy Article Marketing?
In a Word, No
By
Mike Banks Valentine,
Search Engine Optimization Specialist,
Long Beach, California, U.S.A.
http://RealitySEO.com
Get the List of 4,400+ Translation Agencies Now! No Recurring Membership Fees!
Copyright
© February 18, 2006 by Mike Banks Valentine
Rumors
are circulating that recent search engine updates
are
threatening to penalize web sites carrying articles
by niche
industry experts due to wide distribution and use
of those
articles on multiple sites. Not so.
Duplicate
content filtering confuses everyone. It is
absolutely not new and has been in effect for years,
but is
constantly refined in search engine algorithms to
filter out
abuses. Any suggestion that article marketing is targeted
by
the search engines as duplicate content is an understandable
misunderstanding. Duplicate content filters look for
abuses,
not legitimate multiple uses in appropriate forums.
Duplicate
content filters were first employed when people
began setting up precisely mirrored domains without
variation
on multiple domain names to increase visibility. That
ridiculous method worked to increase ranking until
the search
engines began de-listing one of the duplicate sites
of those
employing this technique. Usually it was the older
domain
that stayed in the index and the newer mirrored site
was
de-listed.
About
the same time, unethical thieves began outright
stealing entire sites and placing them on new domains
to rank
equally as well as the original owner for competitive
phrases. Once the traffic was there, they sent them
to their
own product or affiliate pages. That worked for awhile,
but
the duplicate content filters nixed that as well and
protected the orginal site in rankings.
Then
sites began putting up "landing pages" and
"doorway
pages" for SEO purposes with minor keyword variations
in
headlines and body text on multiple pages on one site
with
very closely related text with minor keyword swaps
to rank
well for blue widgets, red widgets, purple widgets.
No text
varied but the color or brand or, in the case of travel
sites, city and resort names. So search engines extended
the
duplicate content filter to include that ruse and
filter it
out.
Continually
refining these duplicate content filters is an
ongoing effort meant only to beat search engine sp*mmers.
Search engines don't set about penalizing legitimate
uses of
duplicate content - such as press releases distribution
and
reproduced articles by experts on specialized topics
used
widely on niche sites and blogs.
There
are dozens of legitimate reasons to have the same
article on multiple specialty sites and even some
good
reasons within a single domain. Blogging software
actually
creates a duplicate page for every post which is deposited
in
an archive. That blog contains duplicate content until
each
post rolls off the bottom of the main page. AP and
Reuters
news stories run on hundreds of news sites. Experts,
pundits
and commentators within niche industries legitimately
syndicate their content to appear widely across dozens
of
niche sites within their industry.
Many
sites now put up duplicate "printer friendly"
versions
of pages without penalty, but it's always a good idea
on the
same domain name to post robots metatags telling them
not to
index duplicate pages. Printing pages or variations
on landing
pages used for pay-per-click (PPC) advertising should
each be
tagged by < meta name="robots" content="noindex,nofollow">
so you needn't worry about being penalized.
Articles
distributed for use by other sites appear on many
sites with surrounding themed content, varied site
navigation and differing internal links. Articles
rank well
if they match the theme of the site they are used
on. The
best ranked sites usually rank better for that article.
There
is currently no penalty for using articles which appear
on
several sites. If this were the case, hundreds of
major
industry portals would be severely penalized.
If
you search for article titles in quotes, you'll see
them
repeated everywhere across the web. Try a search for
"Blogging Chocolate Purses" and see the
extensive use of that
article. I first posted it on my blog and my blog
post ranks
just below a major search engine portal for that article
title. No penalty there, Pandia.com is just better
ranked
overall than my blog and they are legitimately using
that
article with my permission.
Article
marketing is something I recommend to ALL SEO clients
to gain valuable one-way inbound links. How much better
is an
article - with 700 to 1200 words displaying your expertise
than a so-called "reciprocal link" gained
by begging for it
by sp*mming, er I mean, sending mass unsolicited emails
to
unrelated sites? (I'm stunned that anyone still uses
that
technique as it seems to me to be the equivalent of
begging
for links on street corners.)
It
is inconceivable that experts writing on specialized
topics will ever be penalized by search engines because
many
niche sites reproduce their expert advice & commentary
in
newsletters, web sites and blogs. Search engines would
face
an insurmountable problem in flitering legitimate
expertise
and commentary simply because it is popular and made
available for use on multiple industry blogs and niche
sites
Your
articles are no less valuable to the web community
because they are syndicated and that appreciation
is
displayed clearly when they are used extensively across
multiple web sites. Write on article marketers.
Mike
Banks Valentine blogs on Search Engine developments
from http://RealitySEO.com
and can be contacted for ethical SEO work at: http://www.seoptimism.com/SEO_Contact.htm
He runs web content distribution site at: http://Publish101.com
Buy
databases of ideas!
Read
more articles on working as a freelancer - Free!
Read
articles for translators - Free!
E-mail
this article to your colleague!
Need
more translation jobs? Click here!
Translation
agencies are welcome to register here - Free!
Freelance
translators are welcome to register here - Free!
Subscribe
to TranslationDirectory.com newsletter - Free!
Take
part in TranslationDirectory.com poll - your voice
counts!
|