How does google recognize original content?
-
Well, we wrote our own product descriptions for 99% of the products we have. They are all descriptive, has at least 4 bullet points to show best features of the product without reading the all description. So instead using a manufacturer description, we spent $$$$ and worked with a copywriter and still doing the same thing whenever we add a new product to the website.
However since we are using a product datafeed and send it to amazon and google, they use our product descriptions too. I always wait couple of days until google crawl our product pages before i send recently added products to amazon or google. I believe if google crawls our product page first, we will be the owner of the content? Am i right? If not i believe amazon is taking advantage of my original content.
I am asking it because we are a relatively new ecommerce store (online since feb 1st) while we didn't have a lot of organic traffic in the past, i see that our organic traffic dropped like 50% in April, seems like it was effected latest google update. Since we never bought a link or did black hat link building. Actually we didn't do any link building activity until last month. So google thought that we have a shallow or duplicated content and dropped our rankings? I see that our organic traffic is improving very very slowly since then but basically it is like between 5%-10% of our current daily traffic.
What do you guys think? You think all our original content effort is going to trash?
-
Some believe that the code of your website is taken into consideration by Google. This basically implies that duplicate content only applies to the creation of multiple blogs all coded the same with the same text. This was a tactic used by many using automated software.
This is just a rumor and from personal experience, movie news blogs and website tend to churn out identical news stories including pictures, video and text. I have not seen any of these sites being held back in their rankings.
-
Thanks.
About ten years ago I sold a lot of stuff on Amazon. Things were going well. I was the only person selling a nice selection of items. Then they started to sell the same items - and sold them at such a low price there was no way for me to make a profit. Impossible. That was just like working really really hard for someone who would become almost an impossible to beat competitor and dominate your SERPs for the next decade.
-
(offers napkin to EGOL to wipe up coffee spittle)
-
Excellent points by EGOL.
Amazon, and Walmart, are two edged swords that cut one way (you). I understand why businesses go that route, but it is very difficult to win. Sometimes someone does though:
A lady who is a friend of mine about 15 years ago took over the US arm of a German toy distributor and they created a very cool doll. Everyone with the German company and all on the US marketing team screamed they had to take it to Walmart. She politely refused to and said, let Walmart come to me. She then went all over hawking the doll and ended up on HSN. (I think that is the original big TV sales channel). About a year in everyone wanted these dolls and Walmart did not have them.
When Walmart called, she named the price - she did not have to kiss someone's... They were pleased to do the kissing.
One of my favorite stories of all time.
-
Well, sounds like i am screwed since we are sending our feeds to amazon last 7 months. I am going to update the feed and remove the descriptions from amazon feed. But i don't know if it will help me at all. By the way, i am talking about amazon ads, Not selling on amazon. However if amazon doesn't have that product in their database, they basically use your descriptions and create a product page but says this product is available on external website.
-
However since we are using a product datafeed and send it to amazon and google, they use our product descriptions too.
- spits coffee *
Whoa! I would not do that. I would remove or replace those descriptions on Amazon if at all possible.
When you sell on Amazon, any content, any image, any anything that you put on their site will be used against you. And, if you strike gold there then Amazon will quickly become your competitor.
This is exactly why I don't sell on amazon. They solicit me a couple times a year to sell my stuff on their site. No way. I did that in the past and my work benefited Amazon more than it benefited me and benefited my competitors too.
I always wait couple of days until google crawl our product pages before i send recently added products to amazon or google. I believe if google crawls our product page first, we will be the owner of the content? Am i right? If not i believe amazon is taking advantage of my original content.
This is not true. I don't care who says this is true, I am going to argue. No way. I'll argue with anybody about this. Even the big names at Google. They do a horrible job at attributing first publisher. Horrible. Horrible.
I have published a lot of content given to me by others. Other people have stolen my content. I can tell you with assurance that the powerful often wins... and if a LOT of people have grabbed your content you can lose to a ton of weak sites.
Google does not honor first publisher. They honor powerful publishers - like Amazon. Giving content to Amazon that you are going to publish on your website is feeding the snake!
So google thought that we have a shallow or duplicated content and dropped our rankings?
If your content is on Amazon, they are probably taking your traffic. Go out and look at the SERPs.
-
Serkie
Given these are product descriptions, but apply only to you selling them (even if it is through Amazon/G) I think there are a couple of ways you can go. One would be to add author markup if that is possible; I don't know how many products, etc. you are dealing with or what type of eCommerce or other platform you may be using.
Secondarily, within your actual text, you could state authorship and place a link back to you.(likely at very end of description.)
Last would be that if you register a copyright (no not a circle with a c in it as most do - the real thing) it can be fairly inexpensive. Depending how you package it to the copyright office we find it can run about a dollar a page. That would give you ownership should you ever have an issue with someone using your description without authorization (obviously you give it to Amazon and Google.)
A final note is this: when you started rewriting the descriptions my guess is you wrote, changed, rewrote, etc. In the event you ever had to defend yourself or prove you are the actual owner, in a court the documents showing how you arrived at the final are invaluable.
I don't know if this is what you were looking for, but I hope something here will help.
Best
-
For our ecommerce sites we always make sure to have original content in our product feeds as well as our pages. That way the things from our feeds don't poach from our sites and we have a broader range of search terms covered as well as avenues to be reached through.
-
Google typically looks at who published it first, as well as the authority of the sites that house the content. You could be running into problems because Amazon is going to have much more authority.
Got a burning SEO question?
Subscribe to Moz Pro to gain full access to Q&A, answer questions, and ask your own.
Browse Questions
Explore more categories
-
Moz Tools
Chat with the community about the Moz tools.
-
SEO Tactics
Discuss the SEO process with fellow marketers
-
Community
Discuss industry events, jobs, and news!
-
Digital Marketing
Chat about tactics outside of SEO
-
Research & Trends
Dive into research and trends in the search industry.
-
Support
Connect on product support and feature requests.
Related Questions
-
Copied Content - Define Canonical
Hello, The Story I am working on a news organization. Our website is the https://www.neakriti.gr My question regards copied content with source references. Sometimes a small portion of our content is based on some third article that is posted on some site (that is about 1% of our content). We always put "source" reference if that is the case. This is inevitable as "news" is something that sometimes has sources on other news sites, especially if there is something you cannot verify or don't have immediate sources, and therefore you need to state that "according to this source, something has happened". Here is one article of ours that has a source from another site: https://www.neakriti.gr/article/ellada-nea/1503363/nekros-vrethike-o-agnooumenos-arhimandritis-stin-lakonia/ if you open the above article you will see we have a link to the equivalent article of the original source site http://lakonikos.gr/epikairothta/item/133664-nekros-entopistike-o-arximandritis-p-andreas-bolovinos-synexis-enimerosi Now here is my question. I have read in other MOZ forum articles that a "canonical" approach solves this issue... How can we be legit when it comes to duplicate content in the eyes of search engines? Should we use some kind of canonical link to the source site? Should the "canonical" be inside the link in some way? Should it be on our section? Our site has AMP equivalent pages (if you add the /amp keyword at the end of the article URL). Our AMP pages have canonical to our original article. So if we have a "canonical" approach how would the AMP be effected as well? Also by applying a possible canonical solution to the source URL, does that "canonical" effect our article as not being shown in search results, thus passing all indexing to the canonical site? (I know that canonical indicates what URL is to be indexed). Additionally, does such a canonical indication make us legit in such a case in the eyes of search engines? (i.e. it eliminates any possible article duplication for original content in the eyes of search engines?). Or simply put, having a simple link to the original article (as we have it now) is enough for the search engines to understand that we have reference to original article URL? How would we approach this problem in our site based on its current structure?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | ioannisanif0 -
No images in Google index
No images are indexed on this site (client of ours): http://www.rubbermagazijn.nl/. We've tried everything (descriptive alt texts, image sitemaps, fetch&render, check robots) but a site:www.rubbermagazijn.nl shows 0 image results and the sitemap report in Search Console shows 0 images indexed. We're not sure how to proceed from here. Is there anyone with an idea what the problem could be?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Adriaan.Multiply0 -
Content or Backlinks
HI I have resource issues and need to prioritise my time, I know both content & backlinks are important for SEO, but where will it be most beneficial to spend my time? We are a generalist site, so this also makes things tougher. I have some core areas to work on, but want to be the most effective in the time I spend on them. Thanks!
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | BeckyKey1 -
Is tabbed content okay or bad for SEO? Google takes both sides.
Hello Moz Community! It seems like there are two opinions coming from directly from Google on tabbed content: 1) John Mueller says here that content is indexed but discounted 2) Matt Cutts says here that if you're not using tabs deceptively, you're in good shape I see this has been discussed in the Moz Q & A before, but I have an interesting situation: The pages I am building have ~50% static content, and ~50% tabbed content (only two tabs). Showing all tabbed content at once is not an option. Since the tabbed content will make up 50% of the total content, it's important that it is 100% weighted by Google. I can think of two ways to show it: 1) Standard tabs using jQuery Advantage: Both tab 1 and tab 2's content indexed Disadvantage: Tabbed content may be discounted? 2) Make the content of the tabs conditional on the server side website.com/page/ only shows tab 1's content in html website.com/page/?tab=2 only shows tab 2's content in the html. Include rel="canonical" pointing to website.com/page/. Advantage: Content of tab 1 indexed & 100% counted by Google Disadvantage: Content of tab 2 not indexed Which option is best? Is there a better solution?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | jamiestu130 -
If a website trades internationally and simply translates its online content from English to French, German, etc how can we ensure no duplicate content penalisations and still maintain SEO performance in each territory?
Most of the international sites are as below: example.com example.de example.fr But some countries are on unique domains such example123.rsa
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Dave_Schulhof0 -
Moving some content to a new domain - best practices to avoid duplicate content?
Hi We are setting up a new domain to focus on a specific product and want to use some of the content from the original domain on the new site and remove it from the original. The content is appropriate for the new domain and will be irrelevant for the original domain and we want to avoid creating completely new content. There will be a link between the two domains. What is the best practice for this to avoid duplicate content and a potential Panda penalty?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Citybase0 -
Magento Duplicate Content Recovery
Hi, we switched platforms to Magento last year. Since then our SERPS rankings have declined considerably (no sudden drop on any Panda/Penguin date lines). After investigating, it appeared we neglected to No index, follow all our filter pages and our total indexed pages rose sevenfold in a matter of weeks. We have since fixed the no index issue and the pages indexed are now below what we had pre switch to Magento. We've seen some positive results in the last week. Any ideas when/if our rankings will return? Thanks!
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Jonnygeeuk0 -
Duplicate content - canonical vs link to original and Flash duplication
Here's the situation for the website in question: The company produces printed publications which go online as a page turning Flash version, and as a separate HTML version. To complicate matters, some of the articles from the publications get added to a separate news section of the website. We want to promote the news section of the site over the publications section. If we were to forget the Flash version completely, would you: a) add a canonical in the publication version pointing to the version in the news section? b) add a link in the footer of the publication version pointing to the version in the news section? c) both of the above? d) something else? What if we add the Flash version into the mix? As Flash still isn't as crawlable as HTML should we noindex them? Is HTML content duplicated in Flash as big an issue as HTML to HTML duplication?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Alex-Harford0