Forum Moderators: open
The benefit to us is that people will click on the in text links and we will profit (which is where we make our most money anyway) when it is hosted on another site. I don't mind them running their own banner and skyscraper ads because those make such little money for us anyway (and they are an affiliate of our text ad network so we will benefit again if people click on those ads. Another benefit to us is that we will get a link in the upper right corner with a box of our latest articles.
My fear, and only thing stopping me from doing this is Goggle's duplicate content filter. I don't want to be kicked out of the network for having duplicate content. Will I be. Content syndication is common especially with AP (Associated Press) Articles. AP articles appear on some PR 9 and 8 sites, like CNN. Why don't they get penalized for duplicate content? This also happens with product descriptions. Manufacturers provide retailers with a premade descriptions of their products and everyone uses them instead of making their own and it doesn't seem that they get slapped with the dup. content penalty.
How do you handle this, if the article text is the same but the headers and footers and navigation are different (making it clear that its a syndication) does Google not consider it duplicate content? I mean syndication is a perfectly valid and ethical business - I shouldn't be penalized for it.
What solutions are there. I was thinking doing no index on the pages which contain the syndicated content, but then I don't get the PR benefit, and the purchaser of the syndicated content doesn't get in the search engines. I also wouldn't get the link PR benefit.
Another solution I was thinking of was hosting it on my site, so basically it would look like their content but it would be my server - which I think would dodge the duplicate content filter (because I already have a few versions of each article on the site (normal and print) but I don't know how happy the buyer would be with that plus I wouldn't get the PR boost.
Any suggestions? GoogleGuy how does CNN and retailers not get slapped with the duplicated content penalty. Is it that as long as the navigation changes (which it will in this case) it's okay? I really need help on this because it's a great business opportunity for us. We can start syndicating to retailers which would be thousands and thousands in revenue but I can't do it if I'll get kicked out of Google for duplicate content. If you want to see my site and the site which wants to syndicate the content, sticky mail me.
Thanks,
Robin Liss
As long as you dont use all your content on many other sites, then i think you will be fine.
JOAT :)
[webmasterworld.com...]
There was one thread where a member syndicated his content and ended up toast for it. It may be different circumstances, but hunt around a bit, there are probably different scenarios.
You might also consider -- if possible -- placing the content in a javascript file. Give each site a few lines of html that calls the js file and also be sure to include a straight html link back to your site. SE bots won't read the js file so won't see duplicate content.
Jim
I'm not GOogleBuy, but I can tell you that CNN mixes and matches content from various sources, and that the news site also creates its unique content. So it's fine for them.
// Is it that as long as the navigation changes (which it will in this case) it's okay?
No, if all your articles have over 1000 words, changing the navigation won't help the proportion of the duplicated content.
IMHO, it doesn't matter if the other parties copy one page; however, if they syndicate or duplicate all your pages w/o the additional of their own content, then it will be a problem for your partners. I believe the site that gets less inbound links will be toasted. And in the long run, you also get penalized since the origin of the content kinda blurs.
Product descriptions won't be a problem to most sites as well, as I believe. The reason is also that the descriptions come from so many different sources. Retailers do have sorta unique content to Google eyes, but not too unqiue to human brain. It would be unwise for Google to penalize for every tiny thing a site copies from another.
-----------------------------------------
jackofalltrades,
If you want to get penalty for duplication, try copying 90% of your content to another domain. Bang. You will see 'instant result' - Google usually recognizes this duplication and penalizes the site with fewer inbound links within 3 months. That's the conclusion my experiemnt anyway. I've done this before to my sites.... for fun.
Ive seen several large sites that have 100% duplicate content - in unique subdomains (several of them) - sold by the original company for a substantial amount (tens of thousands per year). People get away with it. Whats more I reported this using the spam report and the results for that particular term were changed.
They were reduced to each company only reusing this content once each. Still left 3 sites in the top ten with exactly (100%) the same content, instead of 5 as it was before.
I agree with you though - your content should be largely original as should anyone elses site.
Yes, there is some scope for sydicating articles - but the extent as to which it is done should be carefully watched.
Robin,
You should not allow anyone to form the majority of their site from your content (it should comprise of no more than say, 30%ish? - guess btw). Then you will be fine.
JOAT :)
I just assume it would be taken on a site by sute basis on a larger scale and a page by page basis on an internal site scale.
It would seem to be the logical way to do it - avoid dup content within sites and in different sites.
But of course, as with all things Google - noone really knows for sure! ;)
JOAT
an example would be ZDNet and CNET (before they merge). I know Netscape - the website - co-brands CNET content. But I think it's under CNET sub-domain. So, I think it's fine if you duplicate content across domain. I have seen so many sites (big or small) that duplicate content across sub-domains, and they are all doing fine on Google.
In our own syndication program, i have my editors write another copy that is just for our partners. So, if Google changes policy or whatnot, at least you are not the one who's going to be hit first.
Of course, this maybe fesible if your article is around 500. My articles are about 400. So I'm fine.
I just thought I'd throw my in experience in regards to this...
I began syndicating my content around 2 years ago and I guess I have between 80 - 100 articles I allow people to reproduce. It's done two ways:
a) People can copy and paste it from my site as long as they include the resource box which contains a copyright statement.
b) I have a script that feeds an article to participating sites once a week, which is just an article that I grab from the site.
My site has a PR of 6, has done for some time and many of the articles have a PR of 5. Now, I don't know whether I would have a PR of 7 if I ceased this practice - but I don't think it's hurting me and I definitely don't see it as an unethical practice - but that's not for me to decide I guess, but the powers that be at Google. Perhaps it may depend on the quality of information that's reproduced i.e. information vs. infomercial?
Some of the sites that use my content may have as many as a dozen of my articles, but usually they'll also have a stack of other articles too.
I've seen the articles have the same PR on the site where they are reproduced as they have on my site, higher PR and lower PR - so it really varies.
Just the text and the links back to my site (to related articles) are reproduced, no other advertising as such. The articles range from 500 to 2000 words.
There are such different opinions that it's hard to know for certain. I certainly don't.
I offer subsets of my Web site's content to other sites in the same field, some of which target the same keywords I do. I have about 5000 pages of content. Only one site syndicates the whole thing, but a few others syndicate subsets of up to 1000 pages. Some of these sites could conceivably end up with higher page ranks that mine. (I'm PR7), and end up erasing me from Google.
I've thought of a few options: Having a policy of "google will not be allowed to crawl your version of our content" will probably be a tough sell. Having the backlink I describe above is an easier sell, but might not work, and a third option of enforcing our content to be on a second or third level directory on our clients' Web sites, which would in theory "demote" them a bit, seems pretty "flaky" to me.
Any thoughts?
It seems that people are saying that if there are two sites with a similar content whcih don't look like clear mirrors - that look like syndication, Google just lists the one with the higher PR. Is this true? GoogleGuy can you please coment on this? I'm really scared to do this but I don't want to miss out on such a legit, non evasive to the user (thats something google loves) way of making money - which I need to run my site. GoogleGuy please comment.
I don't think so RobinL. I just happened to be doing a search this am on "iran iraq war" (without quotes). Check page 2 of the SERPs. The snippets for those at the top of the page are all from the same article. It's syndicated content and multiple sites are listed. I've seen numerous instances of this when searching, this one just happened to remind me of this thread.
I sometimes think we might all be getting a bit too paranoid about Google (though we do have reason to live in fear). After all, in the real world syndication is a valid business practice. Wire service reports are reprinted in newspapers throughout the country; broadcast networks share programming with their affiliates; magazines repackage their article inventory to target different markets.
Syndicated content serves a valid purpose. Would Google unilaterally declare such a practice "illegal"? Many smaller sites with high ambitions depend on such content to flesh out their offerings. And many of the large media companies offer web reprint services. Just do a search for "reprinted with permission" and see what pops up.
Of course, you've gotta' be careful, it's a dangerous world out there in Googleland.
Jim
Ted
That could be. But wouldn't that mean that no new companies could start a similar service without being penalized by Google? I have to doubt that Google is in the business of -- or would want to appear to be -- stifling legitimate business enterprises (unless, of course, they try to abuse the SE).
Just my 2 cents plain,
Jim
