Content Syndication Is Your Friend
December 31, 2009
Content duplication has been a buzz topic in SEO for a while now. You can read about it til you puke and never have to leave WebProNews.com. It's one of the modern webmaster's favorite things to fret over and has been for at least two years.
Google doesn't like duplicate content. We all get that now. There is still the lingering perception that there is some sort of duplicate content penalty despite repeated assurances from multiple Googlers to the contrary. Maybe there is no penalty; maybe there is some sort of mechanism at work that webmasters perceive as a penalty... it really matters very little. At the end of the day, if you aren't showing up for your own content but somebody else is... you probably aren't the happiest little webmaster.
As a result, syndication has been quite unfairly vilified. Traditionally speaking, having a site link to your content has always been perceived as a compliment of sorts (Google certainly thought it was a fair indicator of quality). That said, syndicating content... having your great content actually picked up by a larger, more influential site was even better in a lot of ways. The syndicated content was put right in front of a whole new user base without them having to click a thing. Generally you also got a nice link back to your site to boot. If you produced a great piece of content, why not have it show up everywhere you possibly could?
Penalty or not, it is clearly the case that the site where content originates may not always rank best for that content. Google wants to do their best to make sure they keep the content of their results pages as distinct from one another as they can. In short, Google doesn't want to have a result page where 4 of the 10 results are all essentially the exact same article.
Here's the thing though syndication is good. It can drive traffic to your site. It can establish your reputation and credibility within a niche and it can generate high quality inbound links. If you are upset because the larger, more recognized and more popular site's syndication of your content outranks your own then I'd have to say you might need to rethink that one a little bit. So what if it does? You are there because you want to be exposed to the larger site's community. You want the links, attention, reputation and all the good things that go along with that don't you? Of course you do. So if you do a search and find that the big site is number one on a good search query with your content, you don't get upset - you say 'yay'.
Why do you say yay? Because your super great content would never have that top position if not for the fact that Google found it on the larger more authoritative site. Sure, if it's that good you can probably get a decent ranking but it won't be as good. Beyond the ranking, even if your site is #2 and the big site is #3 for the same article, guess which one is likely to get clicked thru more; the link to your site, which is not all that well known? Or the link to a site that somebody has heard of?
If you aren't a household name or a recognized authority in whatever areas you are covering, the fastest way to build that reputation and credibility is to become associated with the brand that is. What's the best way to do that? Get your name, your company and your link on their domain. Because at the end of the day the likelihood of you just outranking them on your own for similar subject matter is probably going to be a tough order.
Abby Johnson talked to Eric Enge from Stone Temple Consulting at SES recently about the syndication vs. duplicate content problem. Eric has some great tips in the video for minimizing the negative aspects of duplication on a syndication model. Three specific items he talks about are syndicating excerpts, including a no-index tag, and writing 'alternative' versions of your content expressly for syndication. He also talks about how effective a syndication model can be. One site he'd worked with increased their traffic by over 50% using syndication almost exclusively.
Google is also working on some stuff to help us help them (isn't that just awesome of them?). Read up on their new cross domain canonical tag. It's new, none of the other search engines support it yet, and it remains to be seen how effective it will be, but it's a start. Whatever you do, don't throw the proverbial baby (syndication) out with the bathwater (duplicated content worries). There is a lot of upside to an effective syndication strategy.
Have You Read This?
> Duplicate Content Owners Catch A Break From Google
> Duplicate Content On Google, Bing, & Yahoo
> 10 Search Topics That Require Further Discussion
Fair Syndication Consortium Calls Foul On Google
December 2, 2009
In most pie charts that feature Google, the search giant dominates the circle, and a new one from the Fair Syndication Consortium follows that pattern. Unfortunately for Google's reputation, the chart's titled "How unlicensed use of U.S. newspaper content is monetized."
According to the Fair Syndication Consortium, newspaper articles are getting copied left and right, with about 112,000 having been more or less duplicated in full in the last 30 days. Some big corporations are sort of responsible for (or are at least contributing to) the illegal use, too.
AOL was assigned about 3 percent of the blame in terms of monetization. Next up, at 5 percent, was Audience Science. Then came the search industry's big three, with Microsoft placing third (also at 5 percent), Yahoo coming in second (at 19 percent), and Google topping the list (at 53 percent).
This finding is almost sure to spur on Rupert Murdoch and a few other media figures as they push for publishers to block Google. Even if there's not a direct line, it very much supports the concept that search companies steal money from news organizations.
Still, there are valid arguments to be made about free publicity, and Google's been clear that it's willing to cut off content producers upon request. There's also its recent concession on the First Click Free front to consider.
Have You Read This?
> Minds Of The Media Gather To Discuss The Future Of News
> 80% Of Consumers Would Not Pay For Content
> The Traffic News Corp. Would Lose Without Google
MySpace Introduces Twitter Synch
September 22, 2009
The system was created using open authentication technology OAuth which allows limited data to be shared between sites while protecting account credentials.
Syncing functionality includes:
- Status updates synced from MySpace to Twitter and vice versa
- Updates originating from MySpace will be noted as such on Twitter and vice versa
- Status syndication can be enabled for one-way or two-way
- When updates post to Twitter, readers have a link back to MySpace to make commenting easy
- Enables on-the-go status syncing (for Twitter and MySpace Mobile – WAP and apps)
- Open authentication technology (OAuth) protects account credentials and data shared between sites
More Details of Yahoo Microsoft Deal Emerge
August 5, 2009
A filing with the SEC has now unveiled further details into the Microsoft Yahoo deal. Among the items revealed is the fact that Microsoft will be getting some Yahoo employees. As part of the transition plan, the filing says:
Microsoft will hire not less than 400 Yahoo! employees (the “Transferred Employees”) and will offer the Transferred Employees market competitive compensation packages. In addition, Yahoo! and Microsoft will mutually agree on a retention plan to be paid for by Microsoft to assist in retaining the Transferred Employees and an additional 150 Yahoo! employees to be mutually agreed upon between Microsoft and Yahoo! to assist with providing the transition services.
The deal is of course supposed to last for ten years. For the first five, Yahoo will be able to receive 88% from Microsoft's search. Yahoo will also be entitled to its share (at the Revenue Share Rate) of the net revenues generated on Syndication Properties after the Syndication Partner’s share of net revenues is deducted, according to the filing.
After the fifth year, Microsoft will have the option to terminate Yahoo's sales exclusivity for premium search advertisers. If they do that, the Revenue Share Rate will increase to 93% for the remainder of the term.
If Yahoo chooses to retain its sales exclusivity, its revenue share would be 83% for the remainder of the term. If Microsoft does not exercise its option, the Revenue Share Rate will be 90% for the remainder of the term, the filing says.
Microsoft will also pay Yahoo $50 million a year for the first three years. This is for transition and implementation costs. You can read the entire filing here for all of the details.
