Will our website traffic be adversely affected by Google by allowiing other sites to post our content on their sites?
-
Hi,
We're a radio station posting original content each day.
We belong to a sector of similar radio stations. It's been proposed that we all contribute content to this group
so any radio station can grab this content and post it on their own websites.As the site with the most content and web traffic, could this potentially harm us?
-
Thanks EGOL for taking the time to give me your thoughts. I've got some things to think about before jumping in.
-
We're a radio station posting original content each day.
Nice work! You are making a big investment to make this happen. I hope that you are getting a lot of traffic from search out of this and that people visit your site daily to read your new content.
It's been proposed that we all contribute content to this group so any radio station can grab this content and post it on their own websites.
Those weasels who proposed this want to ride your train. I bet the ones who propose this run the laziest stations on the planet. Tell them to get off of their lazy duffs and write their own content.
As the site with the most content and web traffic, could this potentially harm us?
In reality it has a greater chance of tanking your competitors because they could be viewed as the republisher - because your site is probably stronger and may be credited by google as the original publishing source. BUT, that can not be guaranteed.
If you think that there is little overlap of direct traffic, meaning people who visit your site are unlikely to visit their site, you could consider this....
For a monthly fee, you would allow them to publish a certain number of your articles on their site but the requirement is that they have rel=canonical properly installed on every one of your articles. That would generate income for you and the article would be attributed to your site, thus protecting you and them from Panda problems and duplicate content filtering.
Or, with rel=canonical installed on every page, you could allow them to use a limited number of articles and you get the ad revenue. I think that there are some ways to do this that will be to your advantage, but I would not do it without contracts and regular inspections of how things are implemented.
-
I'm not sure this would help the other radio stations and as others have suggested will damage you. I would fight the proposal as much as possible. It won't benefit either party.
I appreciate though that you may be tasked with making the best of a bad situation. Patrick has come up with some great suggestions.
Good luck whatever you end up doing
-
Thanks Stramark,
There's a desire to help other radio station websites, so a content pool was suggested.
We'd be participating to help the sector rather than ourselves. But, I don't want to be disadvantaged in the process. -
Yes! Google would punish you (or do not give you credit for the links) if you would overdo it.
Matt Cutts explained that using pr articles, press releases and blog spinning in order to get more (or to much) links was not allowed and a nofollow should be added to the links.
Also excessive use of linking from widgets can be a reason for penalty. The question is: what is excessive?!
Google is all about unique content. So no excessive content spinning.
-
Thanks Patrick.
Option B would be a prerequisite for us. Are you aware of any penalties that Google and other search engines might impose?
-
Hi there
What I would do is ask the other station sites to either:
A. Place a canonical tag to your website in the content they use
B. Place a link to your site on their site as the origin for the content - preferably nofollow if multiple sites use your contentIs it imperative that to be a part of this group that other station websites can take your content? Your content makes your site unique - I would protect that as much as you can and not allow websites to just take it. Not ideal at all for you.
Let me know if you have any questions! Good luck!
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
-
How to create link from google redirect?
I have seen redirect links from google but not sure how to create one. Please guide if anyone knows the answer. Example: https://images.google.cv/url?q=https://moz.com
Link Building | | Melissacarter3 -
In order for Google to recognize a hyper-link on your website, does it have to be written in a specific java script?
Does it have to read as the following script? KBB 2018 Best Buy Overall Winner
Link Building | | Greg_Barnhardt0 -
Having High Quality sites link to my site
How can I tell if a site is high quality or not, so far I have been using Moz's Toolbar to find the Domain Authority and Page authority to determine the quality of the site - is this correct?
Link Building | | VoodooCreativeLtd0 -
Total Links vs Google Webmaster Site Links
I am interested why the numbers between SEOmoz and Google are so different. In SEOmoz we only show 17,000ish links from 190ish domains. In Google, we show 200,000+ links from 370 domains. Why is there such a dramatic difference?
Link Building | | webspecdesign0 -
Will placing links in articles on my site help my rankings?
I have a few page rank 2 articles on my site. Will placing links to other pages on my site with appropriate anchor text in the body of these articles help the other pages to rank higher for the anchor text i place in these links in the articles? Thanks in advance! Ron
Link Building | | Ron100 -
5th failed Google reconsideration attempt, can you help? (are scraper/related news sites the issue?)
(sorry for the long question - I thought it would be useful to give the background!) I am really struggling a Google's reconsideration request for my site, and although we thought we had removed almost all the 'bad' backlinks I am still getting no-where... We are really wanting to focus on building our brand, and establishing our site as an authority but this penalty is really holding us back. The latest response from Google: There are still many inorganic links pointing to your site. At this point, we believe we’ve evaluated these links appropriately, and no further action from us is required. In order for your site to have a successful reconsideration request, we will need to see a substantial, good-faith effort to remove the links, and this effort should result in a significant decrease in the number of bad links that we see. We do not recommend that you submit another reconsideration request until you have been able to make a good amount of progress. Once you’ve been able to get the links removed, please reply to this email with the details of your clean-up effort. My Website: http://bit.ly/KXg8y1 History: This is a new domain - approx 6 months old Old domain received a Google links warning We decided to start a new website, launch a new brand and start from the beginning We 301 re-directed the old domain so we didnt lose customers We then got a Google links warning for the new site We assumed this was related to links from the old site and so removed the 301 redirect on the 20th August Our old sites links still show in Google webmaster tools Reconsideration History 1st re-consideration request: Explained the 301 redirect had been removed, assured we would now be focussing on high quality content/brand building and after 2 weeks received a standard message to say that still had inorganic links 2nd Request: Went through the new sites links (using open site explorer, AHREFs, SEO Majestic and GWM) and removed those we identified as low quality (mostly directories built by an SEO company we had started working with). We complied a spreadsheet with all the links in it (including 301 redirect links) and explained which had been removed, webmaster contact details etc. We also uploaded our template email and screenshots showing contact with webmasters. 3rd, 4th and 5th Request: We went through the new site links and were able to remove a few more links which were thin or could be seen as inorganic, and the end result is that apart from 6 links we have removed all those we have identified as inorganic. Links The old site had some pretty poor links We have done no paid linking, no blog networks, no spammy web 2.0 sites on this site. We've added good quality content to our blog, focussed on social media, published an infographic, and are committed to long-term brand building The links mostly come from guest blog posting. An SEO company (who told us they were 100% content based) built some directory links - but 99% of these have been removed There are some links from Scraper/related news sites (ones that have related blog posts or scrape images etc) Press releases which were picked up and re-published (some of these include anchor text) My Question/s: Do you think Google is still seeing the links from the previous 301 redirect in Google webmasters and including these still? Are these scraper/related post sites causing the issue? (organic links - but some dubious sites) Are sites re-publishing our press releases causing the issue? (organic links - but includes some anchor text I really appreciate your time on this one, I have tried really hard to identify and remove links, but am now struggling! Many Thanks
Link Building | | twhite0 -
Link Buildinf for new sites
Hello friends, I would like to know what link building strategies you recommend for a newly created websites? Thanks a lot!
Link Building | | pasape0 -
Has Anyone Heard from Google?
After submit RR last week, we got the following from Google: "We've received a request from a site owner to reconsider how we index the following site: http://www.butterflycraze.com/ We'll review the site. If we find that it's no longer in violation of our Webmaster Guidelines, we'll reconsider our indexing of the site. Please allow several weeks for the reconsideration request. We do review all requests, but unfortunately we can't reply individually to each request." We got discouraged that Goodle said that it'd reconsider if we are no longer in violation. However, we have about 4500 unatural links created by SEO co, who has proceed with some, but, we aren't seen reduction of such links. In fact, it went up. I need advise as how to remove the following (they are the few site with bulk links): fantake.com: have their webmaster info, however, since last request, we still have 1200 links from it. blogspot.com - is there any way to remove links from such site? onlineunionmall.com: don't see any contact info on their site Some suggest us move on by building good links, but, to dilute the power of 4500 unnatural links, it would take forever.
Link Building | | ypl0