By clicking “Accept All”, you agree to the storing of cookies on your device to enhance site navigation, analyse site usage, and assist in our marketing efforts
These cookies enable our website and App to remember things such as your region or country, language, accessibility options and your preferences and settings.
Analytic cookies help website owners to understand how visitors interact with websites by collecting and reporting information anonymously.
Marketing cookies are used to track visitors across websites. The intention is to display ads that are relevant and engaging for the individual user and thereby more valuable for publishers and third party advertisers.
Come back in 6 weeks time and tell us then that your quick fix solution is still working.
Just to add my twopenneth worth. I write content for such sites as the OPs. My content is 100% unique, blah blah others sales pitch
You just have to provide unique, interesting and well written content that is relevant and that people actually want to read.
However Google are far from stupid and once the site comes to their notice, which it will in time, they will not only take it from its top spot in the Google rankings but they will penalise it for a period of their choosing. So that no matter what you do to your site, it will stay at the bottom of the search results for quite a while afterwards.
Why do you need to spin articles?
for the time involved spinning an article you can outsource article creation for peanuts if you know where to look.
Why do you need to spin articles?
A well written article published in the right place often ranks well and generates visitors to a site. I'm sure article spinning works for some people but it just isn't necessary, there are far more effective ways to get converting traffic to a website.
What about the time to set it up?
This still doesn't answer the question: WHY do you need to spin articles? I'm assuming it's to generate links (judging by previous posts which indicate the content will be invisible) but surely the aim is to generate visitors to a site. A single well ranked article on your own site will do that, no need to spin anything.It is just so you can use the same article, without duplicate content. If you take a well written article, take your time using spin syntax then you then get 100, 200 articles that you can use that pass copyscape.
This still doesn't answer the question: WHY do you need to spin articles? I'm assuming it's to generate links (judging by previous posts which indicate the content will be invisible) but surely the aim is to generate visitors to a site. A single well ranked article on your own site will do that, no need to spin anything.
Interesting. So you don't go through the original article and add the spun words then?..... [and|or|how|when|who]
That's what I thought (posting on article sites) but then:They're using these on other web properties, not on their own site. Well at least i hope not.
I'd argue here that if you are trying to get 100 spun articles on 100 different sites you own are not working efficiently. Wouldn't it be better to have 1 site and get all the traffic instead of spreading yourself thinly. If the 100 sites aren't related then the spun articles are going to have minimal effect (since they have a common theme).Yeah but that's 1 site / article at a time.. what about when you have 20, 50 sites, 100 sites etc?
That's what I thought (posting on article sites) but then:
I'd argue here that if you are trying to get 100 spun articles on 100 different sites you own are not working efficiently. Wouldn't it be better to have 1 site and get all the traffic instead of spreading yourself thinly. If the 100 sites aren't related then the spun articles are going to have minimal effect (since they have a common theme).
I'm pleased you've found something that works better than real writers. I really am. My cynicism says it will fail, but of course you won't come back to let us know about that will you?
With an attitude like yours however, you will probably go far in business, just don't let anyone question your methods or motives and take as many short cuts as you can.... and don't hold back from telling people what you really think of them, I can see your politeness may hold you back.![]()
Okay, I'll rank perfumes.org.uk for "perfumes" and I'll only use spun content to do it. Will that satisfy you? Not exactly a very easy term to rank for...
What effect do you mean? An increase in ranking or more traffic?I tend to spread my work out, and 100 spun articles on 100 different sites could be linking to 1 website or 100 websites depending how much I spread myself out . 100 blog posts on topic do have effect.
What effect do you mean? An increase in ranking or more traffic?
I'm not saying don't spin articles, it's just that the inference in the thread is that this is a really effective way of doing something without ever defining what the outcome is. Because article sites are constantly being downgraded (because of all the spinning and general detritus) more article need to be spun to keep the status quo. On the other hand a well constructed marketing campain (including SEO) will have a longer lasting and more permanent result for most of websites.
If you are trying to get a really competitive keyword ranked then spinning can be part of your strategy but for most people it's just not necessary. Niche sites can easily rank well for all sorts of long tail (converting) keywords without any of these tactics.
Many people reading this thread will jump on the spinning bandwagon and expect lots of instant results but it just don't work that way. If everybody adopted article spinning as a link building tool then the results will cancel each other out.
This is exactly what happened to directory submissions, blog commenting, social bookmarking and so on. The search engines eventually catch up and all you efforts come to naught. I have no doubt it is working for you at the moment but I'm not convinced it's a great long term strategy.
I laugh when people think they get their post or content on some high traffic portal.
Yeah, that whole SEO thing and trying to get your site to the top of the rankings is a mugs game. Maybe you should try it as it might get your site some more traffic.
Being such an expert on the whole SEO game though you would know about using Meta Titles on all of your pages
Again, you clearly have no idea what you are talking about before posting. You are telling people who use it with positive results that it doesn't work.
Yeah, I'll do that, but I fancy a few more finalist awards first though...
I think people are glossing over the questions and mixing up the ansers that have been raised in different parts of the thread
1. Should you spin articles at all?
2. If you do think you should spin, what quality level is needed?
3. Is the tool up to the job as defined in part 2
4. If the tool is partially up to the job, how much extra intervention is needed (hence my dying of boredom comment when referencing 1000 spun articles)
5. Once you have a pile of articles - spun or not, where are they best placed?
why not just write 4 pages of great unique content. We dont want the internet filled up with this crap, we dont want to read crrap, even if you get a visitor, if the content is crap, they will go elsewhere
This is so true. The first rule of SEO. If the content sucks people leave.
You can get people coming to your site but if what they find their is rubbish they dont stay and you don't sell a thing. There is nothing like good quality unique articles with a balanced density of keywords.
I'm assuming OP that you are being paid for such good promotion of this tool?
If you want to spin articles then that's fine and dandy for you, but as you posted on an open forum I thought I would give my opinion on it. You may think it's wrong as is your entitlement, but nevertheless I assert the right to have opinions and I can at least voice them in a way that is polite.
Having looked at your first post and the link to the medical site, the test articles you did all sound very 'samey'. The wording may have changed but the style is exactly the same. It's not witty or enthusiastic and would not, as a visitor, grab my interest at all.
However if you are merely playing for high SEO then perhaps you have a point. Perhaps that is your main objective? But what about keeping the visitor once they are there? For instance how long does the average visitor stay on your site? Seconds? Do they click on other links in the site?
You seem to be very convinced of this tool. However I wonder if this would suit all site owners. Some want articles that can connect with their visitor, interest them, keep them browsing through the site and make them laugh. I don't think there is a tool for that.
'Tis just my opinion however, take it or leave it. I've a feeling you'll do the latter Johnny
Another person misses what is being said![]()
The spun content is there to carry links on sites other than your own.
The money site has good quality content. The lesser quality content goes to sites that make their money via contextual advertising, picking up long tail traffic and getting clicks etc.
Nonsense. I havent missed the point at all. All content if it links back to your site is a reflection of your brand. If that content is sub standard- doesn't make sense, or is poor copy that will reflect on your brand. And even if the keywords get the person to the site who is likely to click further to the site when faced with rubbish??
louandel
Nonsense. I havent missed the point at all. All content if it links back to your site is a reflection of your brand. If that content is sub standard- doesn't make sense, or is poor copy that will reflect on your brand. And even if the keywords get the person to the site who is likely to click further to the site when faced with rubbish??
louandel
The spun content doesn't rank, it simply exists and nobody ever sees it. All it does is satisfy Google's 'inadequate' algorithm. It's a sad state of affairs brought about by man's inhumanity to man
d
Sadly that is the truth, and we have been saying it for years. Google wants top quality content, but if you build a top quality content site it ignores you UNLESS you get links into that site. So to satisfy the algorithm that wants to deliver top quality content, site owners need to populate the web with sub standard content. It is a situation brought about by Google themselves.
I agree but it's a mute point as to whether it's Google's fault. They have said if people link to content it indicates quality so people have abused that. I'm still waiting for a better way of automatically measuring quality and popularity that gets round the inevitable abuse that will happen.
Yes Google should have (and did) realise their algo was open to abuse but I'm not sure it follows that the mess we have is their fault. It's a philosophical argument
d