| 3:00 pm on May 17, 2005 (gmt 0)|
The real traffic isnt in major terms, it is in semi medium to weak terms enmasse. This is where the scrapers are dominating the serps across literally thousands of verticals I watch. Thank word tracker for that lol.
It is a mass thing, most scraper/html spam producers do it in such mass that as a single site you would barely notice but when they own several hundred if not thousands of websites all with hundreds of thousands of pages it adds up fast.
G removes them sometimes eventually or eventually they are driven down in rankings but to only be replaced by there next batch and on and on the cycle continues.
As long as there is a web to crawl this problem will be here now. I have seen firsthand some very serious setups with a few guys running some hardcore html spam houses numbering in the thousands of domains now. It is 100% automated im sure as I can tell from the code.
People are not going to spend this kind of green on thousands of domains and build a custom backend unless it is extremely lucrative so it must be producing some crazy results for them or they just like wasting a few hundred thousand bucks hehe.
| 3:55 pm on May 17, 2005 (gmt 0)|
I must admit I haven't come across scraper sites in any big way.
However for keywords I'm targeting I am up against spam like sites, in so much as they offer little real content on a subject but manage to outperform pages seemingly due to the way search engines rate pages (be it due to excessive keyword use or mass interlinking within a network).
| 4:03 pm on May 17, 2005 (gmt 0)|
It's true that the easiest way to find examples is to use an exact phrase taken from one of your own pages. It drives any webmaster crazy to see this, but it's not exactly a representative web search.
Also, my perception is that Google has improved things somewhat in the past month or so. I rarely come across them by chance now, no matter how many keywords I throw into a search.
| 4:41 pm on May 17, 2005 (gmt 0)|
The term "scraper site", while accurate, exists only in the world of the webmaster. Most normal web users wouldn't recognize one if they saw it and they couldn't care less that they exist.
The "problem" of scaper sites affects other webmasters, not surfers. That doesn't make it any less real of course. Most webmasters take offense at seeing their work copied by a scaper site, as do I. But the fact is, it's our problem (as webmasters) and it affects the web at large very little, if at all.
| 4:59 pm on May 17, 2005 (gmt 0)|
Mostly I run into scraper directories as they seem to be popping up all over.
Guess it depends what you're looking for, but scrapers and affiliates almost always come up before real content these days.
| 5:28 pm on May 17, 2005 (gmt 0)|
i dont think they will last long.. give it 6 months to a year and they will be gone
| 5:37 pm on May 17, 2005 (gmt 0)|
As the WSJ article referenced in a recent thread indicates, average people can recognize scraper sites, they do care, and they want that garbage off of the Internet.
| 5:57 pm on May 17, 2005 (gmt 0)|
|The term "scraper site", while accurate, exists only in the world of the webmaster. Most normal web users wouldn't recognize one if they saw it and they couldn't care less that they exist. |
The term "scraper site" may exist only in the world of the Webmaster, but normal users are definitely aware of the sites and and their impact on search results. (My son's girlfriend being a case in point: When she looked for the Web site of the corporation where she'll be interning, she had to dig through a list of scraper results to find it. My son's question to me: "Do you have any idea what's up with Google these days?")
| 9:20 pm on May 17, 2005 (gmt 0)|
I think terms like scraper are known to webmasters only. The general public is unaware of the
_term_ but do see the results. They might have other names like copycat, wannabe, junk .. -Larry
| 9:53 pm on May 17, 2005 (gmt 0)|
I'm beginning to see those fake sites with ad thingies by google as a back button signal. I leave many sites based solely on the ad thingies now, I figure they are crap.
| 5:39 am on May 18, 2005 (gmt 0)|
typicalsurfer has an interesting message. i can imagine how seeing "ad thingies by Google" on multiple scraper/garbage sites every day can make surfers click the back button before ever reading page content. something to think about Google...
| 6:31 am on May 18, 2005 (gmt 0)|
And for publishers to also think about.
| 6:41 am on May 18, 2005 (gmt 0)|
May I ask what a scraper site is?
| 9:21 am on May 18, 2005 (gmt 0)|
If you are into the practice of fishing for "excellent" search engines keywords to use for SEO of your site, and you are using tools such as WordTracker to do so, you'll probably be seeing a LOT of scraper sites at the top of SERPs.
People complaining of the 'MANY' scraper sites they see at the top of SERPs are those who are spending large part of their time fishing for such "excellent" keywords to optimize their content around (or to build new content around it). That's why many people here are complaining from the presense of many scraper sites at the top of SERPs, because many here are doing SEO and are doing it using methods similar to the ones used by WordTracker (keywords that have high searches, and only few sites cater for, those are the "excellent" keywords). WordTracker does this by enclosing keywords in quotation marks, which it claims is the right thing to do, when actually it is not the most accurate way, but they do it because it is more practical (I'll not go into details of why is this so).
Those who never do such "excellent" keyword fishing very rarely bump into scrapers sites, let alone find them at the top of SERPs.
Conclusion: (many would DISAGREE with me) Scraper sites, and scraper sites appearing at top of SERPs is not a wide phenomena, its persentage compared to the total searches is probably VERY low, but we tend to see it here so much because we are so into SEO and use methods similar to those of WordTracker to fish for best keywords to use.
| 9:25 am on May 18, 2005 (gmt 0)|
Not to mention that a lot of people here feel it is ‘scummy’ for the scrapers to take the content, (or part there of), of others hard work to make a profit on using adsense, et. al.
<edit>It is a difference of cultures no doubt</edit>
| 3:02 pm on May 18, 2005 (gmt 0)|
No, it's not a difference of cultures. Scraper sites are copyright-infringing thieves, generally ;)
| 4:36 am on May 19, 2005 (gmt 0)|
I can think of a few big sites who take your copy, store it on thier servers, use it to provide a service, display it on thier site, surround it with advertising, and make a very nice profit from it.
| 1:36 pm on May 19, 2005 (gmt 0)|
lol. Too true graywolf.
| 2:11 pm on May 19, 2005 (gmt 0)|
|People complaining of the 'MANY' scraper sites they see at the top of SERPs are those who are spending large part of their time fishing for such "excellent" keywords to optimize their content around (or to build new content around it). |
How odd. I never fish for excellent keywords or optimize my content for AdSense, and I see quite a few scraper sites. My college-age son and his older sister, neither of whom is in the Web business, have also commented on scraper sites (without using that term) in Google search results. Are you suggesting that we're only imagining what we see?
| 5:23 pm on May 19, 2005 (gmt 0)|
I was looking for some niche software the other day, and about 1/3 of the results in the SERPs were scrapers. (And about four were fast redirects to a porn site that tried to install software on my computer....) Fun times, indeed.
| 5:33 pm on May 19, 2005 (gmt 0)|
I do see scraper sites as well. Not all that often but usually 1 or 2 in the top ten, but that is one or two too many. I am also a content junky, with little skill for optimization. I never go fishing for keywords.