Hi guys,

I just wanted to know if I'm right about this software.

Articles Spinner are used to change some work of your own articles through your blog so it optimize your website on the search engine?

thanks!

Spinning articles is all about getting around Google's "Duplicate Content Penalty," which—funnily enough—doesn't even exist.

Here was the thought process:

People thought that Google didn't like duplicate content. That's reasonable – if you owned a search engine, you probably wouldn't want duplicate pages littering the rankings. So crafty internet marketers started "spinning" their content. The process involves taking an article and replacing words/sentences/paragraphs with synonyms.

So the end result is an article that's 100% unique but says the exact same thing as the original article (kinda).

Then you could use the same article multiple times. Infinite times, essentially. This was extremely popular pre Google's Mayday and Panda updates, which killed off Article Directory submissions for easy backlinks.

But Google's came out and said the duplicate content penalty doesn't even exist (Official Google Webmaster Central Blog: Demystifying the "duplicate content penalty").

And spun articles are absolute shit. Not even readable – even if you spend hours crafting a "high-quality" spin. And like I mentioned, after the Panda algorithm update, spun articles are useless for virtually everything.

MikeC said:

Spinning articles is all about getting around Google's "Duplicate Content Penalty," which—funnily enough—doesn't even exist.

Here was the thought process:

People thought that Google didn't like duplicate content. That's reasonable – if you owned a search engine, you probably wouldn't want duplicate pages littering the rankings. So crafty internet marketers started "spinning" their content. The process involves taking an article and replacing words/sentences/paragraphs with synonyms.

So the end result is an article that's 100% unique but says the exact same thing as the original article (kinda).

Then you could use the same article multiple times. Infinite times, essentially. This was extremely popular pre Google's Mayday and Panda updates, which killed off Article Directory submissions for easy backlinks.

But Google's came out and said the duplicate content penalty doesn't even exist (Official Google Webmaster Central Blog: Demystifying the "duplicate content penalty").

And spun articles are absolute shit. Not even readable – even if you spend hours crafting a "high-quality" spin. And like I mentioned, after the Panda algorithm update, spun articles are useless for virtually everything.

Click to expand...

How many sites have you ranked 1st in Google? I'm going to guess 0.

dispin said:

How many sites have you ranked 1st in Google? I'm going to guess 0.

Click to expand...

Care to elaborate?

The only people benefitting from spinning articles are people selling spinning software and supplying services which involve using it.

Nobody else.

There's a very widespread misunderstanding about the difference between "duplicate content" and "syndicated content".

This article from a professional article marketer and SEO expert explains it in simple terms: Article Marketers - Lay the Duplicate Content Myth To Rest Once and For All | Internet Marketing and Publishing

People claim to have achieved top rankings in Google "by spinning their content", typically unaware that they could have achieved it in exactly the same way by not spinning, but by syndicating their work instead.

The value of any given backlink on any given page of the web isn't somehow, magically, changed in linkjuice value by the fact that the content to which it's attached hasn't previously been published. (That really would be something bizarre, wouldn't it? Even the people selling spinning software - though they do habitually make some very remarkable claims - aren't asking anyone to believe that one!). Nor, of course, is it changed by being indexed in Google's main index rather than in the supplemental index.

Few people can actually read a "spun" article all the way through anyway.

It's become an issue perpetuated by (a) people with a vested interest in it, and (b) people who think of "article marketing" as simply a type of SEO rather than appreciating that it's actually a traffic-generation method in its own right, and a non-SEO dependent one. :smxB:

Spinning is simply a "solution" to a (mis)perceived probem that doesn't actually exist. But hey ... it keeps a lot of "service providers" earning something.

MikeC said:

Spinning articles is all about getting around Google's "Duplicate Content Penalty," which—funnily enough—doesn't even exist.

And spun articles are absolute shit. Not even readable – even if you spend hours crafting a "high-quality" spin. And like I mentioned, after the Panda algorithm update, spun articles are useless for virtually everything.

Click to expand...

Both of these statements are incorrect.

lexy said:

The only people benefitting from spinning articles are people selling spinning software and supplying services which involve using it.

Nobody else.

Click to expand...

That is incorrect.

Spinning an article correctly, gives you additional content that can be used in a number of ways. This content can be used to generate backlinks, feed Web 2.0 properties, supply feeder sites, and guest posts. Spinning an article without checking the spun result, will give you poor quality content. While there has never been a penalty for duplicate content, duplicate content doesn't count in making your site more attractive to the search engines, or increasing your reputation as an authority.

healthstatus said:

Spinning an article correctly, gives you additional content that can be used in a number of ways. This content can be used to generate backlinks, feed Web 2.0 properties, supply feeder sites, and guest posts.

Click to expand...

The "secret" (slight exaggeration, as it's common knowledge among those of us successfully doing this for a living) is that unspun content can also be used for all those purposes.

I don't mean it impolitely, but you're actually illustrating my point above: people attribute benefits to spinning which are equally available without spinning. It's the attribution of causation that's mistaken.

My entire business is article marketing. Like others building our businesses and making our full-time livings this way, we're doing so by article syndication. All the things you mention, that you can do with spun content, you can also do with unspun content. I spent some of my first year doing article-spinning and mass-submission, before I learned better, and (like many others) suddenly started doing very much better when I dropped the spinning.

Spinning the content doesn't somehow improve the value of the backlink attached to it. :smxB:

And it doesn't normally do much for the quality of the article, either, unless you spin at word, sentence and paragraph level, taking great care - which is both hugely time-consuming and entirely unnecessary.

If it'll help you, I can give you a long list of article and forum threads to read on this subject, which may be rather an eye-opener. If you'll excuse me, I don't want to post a list of them, because I'm new here, unsure of the etiquette, and don't want to appear to be trying to divert this forum's visitors elsewhere! But I'm happy to send you a list by p.m. if you wish, and to refer you to further, better information about this very widely misunderstood subject. :smxB:

healthstatus said:

duplicate content doesn't count in making your site more attractive to the search engines, or increasing your reputation as an authority.

Click to expand...

"Unspun" articles are not "duplicate content". They're "syndicated content".

"Duplicate content" is multiple copies of the same text-file within one domain. (It's clarified in the link I gave in my post above - please excuse the observation that I really think it will help you a lot to read that: there's a quotation from Google's WebMaster Central Blog inside it, and you won't find a more authoritative source than that, on this subject).

lexy said:

"Unspun" articles are not "duplicate content". They're "syndicated content".

"Duplicate content" is multiple copies of the same text-file within one domain. (It's clarified in the link I gave in my post above - please excuse the observation that I really think it will help you a lot to read that: there's a quotation from Google's WebMaster Central Blog inside it, and you won't find a more authoritative source than that, on this subject).

Click to expand...

My entire is business is making money. I have over 2500 keywords for one website that I rank 1 to 1.5 in average position, and they are competitive keywords like: ideal weight

If I put the same article 4 times on my site and one time on your site, one and only one will rank, nobody is penalized, Google just wants to show the same content one time. I WILL gain author authority for having my content on two websites if I use the meta tags properly to credit myself as the author, it is unknown (to everyone but Google) but unlikely that a backlink from that duplicate content counts for much, and highly unlikely that it counts if duplicated on 100 websites (this is one point where we disagree). To me syndicated content is taking an article or series of articles (say 5 a week) and put them out via RSS feed for other websites to pick up and add into their content stream. Again, this helps your author authority, but doesn't do much for you in rankings. If you create 100 articles, either properly written or properly spun (both are time consuming), and put them out into the Internet, you not only gain author authority (if you choose to indicate you are the author), you gain website authority with backlinks from those articles.

I can spend an hour writing a fresh article, then spend another hour spinning and have 300-400 very good, very readable variations of the original article. What do you charge to write 300 articles on the same topic, and how long will it take you? Spinning if done correctly is not evil, it doesn't only benefit the spinning services. You should be able to see from the two major Google updates in 2011the significant changes in rankings that sites suffered that wrote articles once and put them all over the web, versus those that provided fresh, unique content. I believe that linkjuice does change from site to site, page to page and author to author.

healthstatus said:

To me syndicated content is taking an article or series of articles (say 5 a week) and put them out via RSS feed for other websites to pick up and add into their content stream.

Click to expand...

Please excuse the observation that this is a very limited perspective of what "article syndication" entails. (I agree that that can be one aspect of it, though).

healthstatus said:

Again, this helps your author authority, but doesn't do much for you in rankings.

Click to expand...

Many professional article marketers are unconcerned with their rankings. Google is only one source of traffic. There are many other better targeted ones. There are many other more secure and reliable ones. As so many internet marketers discovered (some of them to their very great cost) during 2011, a business which is dependent on search engines for its primary traffic can be only one algorithm-change away from a major accident.

I can get thousands of targeted visitors from one article, without having to do the targeting myself, and without needing Google in the equation at all, provided the article is well enough syndicated (for example in ezines large subscriber-bases).

I can gain enormous authorial authority and credibility from that.

Spinning or otherwise modifying the articles doesn't improve that process at all.

Nor does it improve the linkjuice value of their backlinks, when they're re-published (with my resource-box) on relevant authority-sites in their niche - as many are. Those are, of course, enormously valuable backlinks in SEO terms, whether the multiple copies of the article are indexed for their keywords in the main index, or in the supplemental index. Their value to me is identical, and it isn't improved by varying/spinning the content - that's just extra work for no extra reward, as I discovered with great relief when I wised up and stopped doing it.

healthstatus said:

I can spend an hour writing a fresh article, then spend another hour spinning and have 300-400 very good, very readable variations of the original article.

Click to expand...

Alternatively, you can not spend an hour spinning but submit your article anywhere you wish, unchanged, unedited, unamended and unspun. It may feel to you like "duplicate content", but it isn't to Google, and Google says so openly.

healthstatus said:

What do you charge to write 300 articles on the same topic, and how long will it take you?

Click to expand...

I don't write for others. Only for myself. (Did you imagine that I was trying to promote an article-writing service or something?! Nothing of the kind, I assure you. My only motivation for posting was to correct misinformation and explain to those asking that "duplicate content" and "syndicated content" are two entirely different things).

You're talking about "300 spun articles" on the assumption that that's somehow "better" than just having 300 copies of the same article, and that's a mistaken assumption.

Here's a solution - TEST IT.

Maybe I'll put together another case study on this subject. Could pick an ultra easy keyword. Create 2 sites. Build backlinks to the first site using spun articles, backlinks using the same article for the second site and monitor the rankings.