Duplicate content

[schnibitz]

Okay, you know how Google will check your site for duplicate content right? If there is another site out there that had the content first, yours will be marked as a duplicate, and thus will not count in its search results (if I understand correctly). Well are there any sites or places on the net that have content that google does not check?

Thanks!

[James Schramko]

ones marked for no follow no index.

You can check your content at www.copyscape.com

Why would you want to use duplicate content anyway?

[TorontoCarol]

I have always had a question about duplicate content. If I have submitted articles to an article directory and they are being circulated around the net and I have the originals on my site, do I get penalized for the content?

[Lynn Terry]

You should publish those articles on your site first, make sure they get indexed in the major search engines, and then submit them elsewhere - if you're going to use them in both places.

[mccfraser]

Hi

How long should you wait for the articles on your site to be indexed in the major search engines before you start submitting them to the article sites?

Thanks,
John

[TorontoCarol]

Thanks Lynn, I did post them on my site first, but as for waiting until they were indexed, I don't know

[chriswight]

Duplicate content really isn't as big an issue as people think. Syndicating articles from directories isn't what's being frowned upon as much as having the exact same website mirrored in multiple places.

Look at Yahoo News or Google News or even CNN.com, they're all syndicating the same stories from the AP newswire and Reuters, but still rank well for terms contained in those articles.

That's not to say that publishing the same articles as everyone else is great for your site, but it doesn't really hurt either.

[Lynn Terry]

I always go to Google and search for my article on my site just to be sure. To give you an example, a few days ago I posted an entry on my blog titled "PPC Accelerator On Sale" (my blog is ClickNewz.com).

If I wanted to check, I would go to Google and search: "PPC Accelerator On Sale" in quotes. I did that and found 3 results, but none of them were the individual page that post is on - just the main page or other pages where the link to it is mentioned. So I'd wait (its not really an article anyway).

I go back a little further and look at a page titled "The 7 Symptoms of Guru-Envy". I put that into Google Search (quotes and all) and it shows up right at the top:

http://www.google.com/search?&q=%22The+ ... %2dEnvy%22

If it didnt, and there were a lot of results to wade through, I might add "clicknewz.com" to the search query, like this:

http://www.google.com/search?&q=%22The+ ... cknewz.com

Does that help?

[TorontoCarol]

Thank you Lynn, that was very clear.

[marketraisecorp]

The basic funda of plr site is to post borrowed articles on the website without giving anyone credit and also withhelding the identity of the original poster.In short, its spam unless you are willing to modify them somewhat, you aren't really doing yourself alot of favor by using them on your site. Google is definitely frowning upon those who are using duplicate content.Logically speaking, altering rights should grant the buyer master resale rights as well. But most of the PLR content offers have restrictions to the effect that you can't resell the same without substantial alteration of the products. By "substantial alteration," the seller usually pegs a change of more than 20%.They also state you can not resell or give them away.Now there are sites out there and people are selling the same plr content at cheap prices!It will get to a point that only newbies and fools will purchase such stuff.The only real plr is going to be your own.Someone is selling a software program that he states will take any article and rewrite it differently, no matter how many people submit the same article to the software.

[Lynn Terry]

I disagree - there are a lot of different ways you can use Private Label Rights (PLR). Its not at all similar to Reprint Rights, such as you see with basic articles you can reprint WITH the resource box. Being able to reprint PLR content/articles/etc withOUT the resource box or reference to the original author is not the only way to use PLR - and is certainly not even the recommended use.

I have a review on PLR Voodoo here, which is a great guide on the topic:
http://www.clicknewz.com/1067/make-money-with-plr/

And a breakdown of the different types of rights here:
http://www.clicknewz.com/1062/understan ... le-rights/

Private Label Rights are very similar to Public Domain...

[redspace]

we all worried about duplicate content but we need to understand that search engine algorithms is about number and functions. so that must a specific numbers that SE regarded as the limit for duplicate content. possibly 25 same article pages is the limit. maybe duplicate content means those pages PR will stay stagnant. i don't think page will be penalized just that it might not increase the PR. so maybe 1000 duplicate link with no link juice coming to your site.

[ciarac]

Yes, surely there are but then the next question is, is this site willing to let you use their content?
Doubtful.

[Wendy Maki]

Duplicate content really isn't as big an issue as people think. Syndicating articles from directories isn't what's being frowned upon as much as having the exact same website mirrored in multiple places.

Look at Yahoo News or Google News or even CNN.com, they're all syndicating the same stories from the AP newswire and Reuters, but still rank well for terms contained in those articles.

That's not to say that publishing the same articles as everyone else is great for your site, but it doesn't really hurt either.

Well said.
I'd add that what else is being frowned upon are the thousands upon thousands of low quality sites that are nothing more than content scraped by robots just to get a bit of Adsense coin. THOSE are the ones that need to worry about duplicate content. Google and the rest are kept so busy trying to keep those down to a trickle, they aren't going to be too worried about a great article that shows up on a few hundred decently put together sites.

The way I look at it is this:
Republishing is a time honored tradition. Think Reader's Digest ... the ultimate republisher.
The fact is that quality republishers add VALUE by aggregating interesting content in one place. That is the standard to apply when wondering about duplicate content.

Viral marketing is all about replicating content.
Even Google itself replicates content, copying earlier versions of sites in their results.

The best thing is to use common sense. If it's garbage, why bother publishing it or republishing it!
If it's great, spread it around (if allowed).

Happy duplicating!

Wendy.

[Michael b]

I really think duplicate content isn't that big of a deal. Think about it.

We submit articles that are going to get picked up and put on other's websites, that link back to us.

If duplicate content was really a big issue I'd only ever see one link for any given article I write.

I believe what google would flag however is if you suddenly had 10,000 of the same article on every sites home page.

So until I see some visual proof that duplicate content is a problem I'm not going to worry much about it.