Will syndicating my articles trip a duplicate filter/penalty

[tama]

I would like to allow people to publish my site's articles, so long as the linking information stays the same.

If copies of my articles end up getting posted around the internet, will this trip the duplicate filter?

I've heard recently that Google keeps the oldest version but is that accurate. In the past (pre-Florida) I had pages dropped that I created and another site outright cut-and-pasted onto their domain.

[robotsdobetter]

Yes, this will set off the duplicate filter, the oldest duplicate version most likely will out rank the other web pages, but this can get you kicked out IF you have to MUCH duplicate content.

[Clint]

Does this also hold true for those that link to you? If they are all using the same text:

domainname.com - same text here at all sites that link to you.

Will that hurt anything on my end?
Thanks.

[robotsdobetter]

Clint,
If they have other text on the same page it should not be seen as duplicate content, but even if they do it won't hurt you in anyway.

[tama]

Yes, this will set off the duplicate filter, the oldest duplicate version most likely will out rank the other web pages, but this can get you kicked out IF you have to MUCH duplicate content.

-------------------------------------------------

If that's true, then that is a Google flaw in my opinion. I can understand Google not wanting to index tons of duplicate content, but dropping pages from the original site is just bogus to me. If I'm a reputable website that syndicates content and 100,000 sites reprint my articles, my site/page should be seen as an authority, and it should not be dropped at all.

[wruppert]

The point of the web is to have people link to your content, not copy it. Google is acting correctly.

[Clint]

robotsdobetter:

Clint,
If they have other text on the same page it should not be seen as duplicate content, but even if they do it won't hurt you in anyway.

Thanks. Did you mean to say....."but even if they don't it won't hurt you in any way."?

[arthurdaley]

What about the thousands of sites displaying many Reuters news articles every day e.g. Yahoo, Lycos, NY Times etc? It would be ridiculous to penalise these sites, unless its just the individual pages that get penalised as opposed to a site-wide ban.

[cyberfyber]

<<<What about the thousands of sites displaying many Reuters news articles every day e.g. Yahoo, Lycos, NY Times etc? It would be ridiculous to penalise these sites, unless its just the individual pages that get penalised as opposed to a site-wide ban>>>

This is exactly what I'm seeing on my end. I post press-releases on their own separate pages from organizations in my area. Have done so for a long time now.

Those individual pages do seem to suffer now, whereas the rest of my site will still do well...okay, ok, aside from the problems Bourbon's brought to my front door.

[vincevincevince]

Google has to only show one copy. No user wants to see two copies of the same thing. And it decides the most important copy is the best ranked one. I think that's pretty simple!

[theBear]

"And it decides the most important copy is the best ranked one. I think that's pretty simple!"

Precisely correct, but absolutely wrong.

[cyberfyber]

<<Google has to only show one copy.>>

I'd agree

<<No user wants to see two copies of the same thing.>>

Unless of course they don't have easy access to the original because of the SEs crappy SERPs or because the originating organization simply isn't that well known or rather, as popular as my own site might be. Which is why organizations come to me to post their stuff. I don't do it for my own benefit but for theirs.

<<I think that's pretty simple!>>

not as simple as you might have yourself believe.

[arubicus]

"The point of the web is to have people link to your content, not copy it. Google is acting correctly."

Since when?

Look, there is great value with the sharing/syndication of conent and articles(as you put it "copying it") from stock quotes, weather, news, rss feeds, open source tools/scripts, AWS, heck Wordtracker lets people tap into their database... It is good for advertising for you and gives exposure to your brand (so you don't have to rely on stupid search engines). You let them use the information as payment they link to you. It is an easy cost effective way to advertise you business.

(You can syndicate complete articles or just a list of articles where they click to your site to read.)

[robotsdobetter]

Thanks. Did you mean to say....."but even if they don't it won't hurt you in any way."?

Yes, that's what I was saying, sorry.

[Clint]

Thanks. ;)