Another Duplicate Content Question

[morestar]

So here's the deal.

For instance, with my article directory. I have a few plugins that work in such a way as, when I or an author submits an article, and after I approve it, a link back to the article is posted on several of my social media accounts BUT each post, in it's entirety, is also posted on a few other social sites I've signed up for like my feedburner account.

The question I have is: in your opinion is this considered duplicate content in the sense of something I would have to be worried about?

Now I know there are always going to be other websites that pick up each article and post it on their sites as well and there isn't much I can do or would want to do about that - free advertising - but with respect to my accounts, it almost seems as if I'm re-posting the same articles, with links back to them on other sites like a spammer...

I know Google and the other search engines are OK, fine and dandy about social networking etc. but I need to know what your thoughts are regarding this possible problem with duplicate content.

Thank you for your responses...

[sofakingdabest1]

Find or create a program that can change "submits" into many grammatical different contents. 50 book reports on the same book.

[deepsand]

Find or create a program that can change "submits" into many grammatical different contents. 50 book reports on the same book.

Is this a joke?

[SemAdvance]

Well the apparent issues are

1. What does 100s of copies of the same article do for people??

2. What does 100s of copies of the same article do for search engines?

3. Social Networking links do not lend credibility to any website.

4. Editorial content links are the most important but it's likely that in duplicate content any link value would be filtered to worthless.

I do not see any real purpose served for SEO results, but if the method drives traffic that is something you need to consider.

[morestar]

Well the apparent issues are

1. What does 100s of copies of the same article do for people??

People find the same content in different ways across different networks via different searches. Another example is the benefits of a press release - our releases get picked up across hundreds of other networks and sites and the benefits are obvious no?

2. What does 100s of copies of the same article do for search engines?

We don't really need to do much for them do we?

3. Social Networking links do not lend credibility to any website.

To what extent are you talking credibility?

I do not see any real purpose served for SEO purpose, but if the method drives traffic that is something you need to consider.

The linking back from let's say my Twitter account are simply links but there are a few places that after an article is posted, the whole post gets picked up too...

Thus far I am still going to keep up with how I've set everything up but the more opinions and knowledge we can share on the issue the better it is for us in the end.

Thank you Sem, for your thoughts and opinions...

[ogletreeseo]

I have seen people do very well by submitting articles to lots of places. The link in the article is worth something even if it is repeated on many different websites. Each ones counts as a link. There is so much duplicate content out there that Google is not finding a bunch of the same article and devaluing those links. People give Google way too much credit. They don't catch much at all.

[mjtaylor]

I have seen people do very well by submitting articles to lots of places. The link in the article is worth something even if it is repeated on many different websites. Each ones counts as a link. There is so much duplicate content out there that Google is not finding a bunch of the same article and devaluing those links. People give Google way too much credit. They don't catch much at all.

In this case they don't catch much because they aren't trying - if they wanted to catch this it would be a slam dunk even if I am mixing my metaphors.

Google has stated very clearly that there is no problem or penalty for duplicate content. They will simply serve the page they feel is the best.

Morestar, you have nothing to worry about with duplicate content here, IMNSHO. I believe Webnauts would agree. Where is he, anyway?

[CET]

Those backlinks don't do much for SEO, but I don't see this being a duplicate content problem.

1. Those backlinks point to the original. Search engines want to credit the original creator of the content. You probably won't get much link juice for those backlinks, but they do support your site as being the content originator, and originators are never penalized for duplicate content.

2. Using social media to distribute content is completely legitimate, it's done all the time by tons of companies.

3. You're not trying to fool anyone. You're being honest about who you are when you redistribute content. That redistribution will not get content credit, but that shouldn't matter, because you're trying to get people to your site where the original content came from.

In the end, this all seems to be on the up-and-up to me, and it sounds like you've got a good strategy for getting the word out. That's what marketing is all about, getting the word out.


Cheers,
Chris

[angilina]

One of the main issues with article directories is duplicate content problem.

Some of the major sites like, Ezine etc seems to not have this issue: it may be because Google trust them or may be these sites also have fresh articles [some authors submit to just few article directories only and the one who post the article first gets the credit].

But at small article directories, one can expect to see articles that are already being posted at other directories. This creates duplicate content issue which can affect indexing/ranking.

The solution isn't simple. May be you should first check the article to see if its submitted else where or not. Change your site policy to "Only Submit Unique Content"