Scraped content ranking above the original source content in Google.
-
I need insights on how “scraped” content (exact copy-pasted version) rank above the original content in Google.
4 original, in-depth articles published by my client (an online publisher) are republished by another company (which happens to be briefly mentioned in all four of those articles). We reckon the articles were re-published at least a day or two after the original articles were published (exact gap is not known). We find that all four of the “copied” articles rank at the top of Google search results whereas the original content i.e. my client website does not show up in the even in the top 50 or 60 results.
We have looked at numerous factors such as Domain authority, Page authority, in-bound links to both the original source as well as the URLs of the copied pages, social metrics etc. All of the metrics, as shown by tools like Moz, are better for the source website than for the re-publisher. We have also compared results in different geographies to see if any geographical bias was affecting results, reason being our client’s website is hosted in the UK and the ‘re-publisher’ is from another country--- but we found the same results. We are also not aware of any manual actions taken against our client website (at least based on messages on Search Console).
Any other factors that can explain this serious anomaly--- which seems to be a disincentive for somebody creating highly relevant original content.
We recognize that our client has the option to submit a ‘Scraper Content’ form to Google--- but we are less keen to go down that route and more keen to understand why this problem could arise in the first place.
Please suggest.
-
**Everett Sizemore - Director, R&D and Special Projects at Inflow: **Use the Google Scraper Report form.
Thanks. I didn't know about this.
If that doesn't work, submit a DMCA complaint to Google.
This does work. We submit dozens of DMCAs to Google every month. We also send notices to sites who have used our content but might know understand copyright infringement.
Everett Sizemore - Director, R&D and Special Projects at Inflow Endorsed 2 minutes ago Until Manoj gives us the URLs so we can look into it ourselves, I'd have to say this is the best answer: Google sucks sometimes. Use the Google Scraper Report form. If that doesn't work, submit a DMCA complaint to Google.
-
Oh, that is a very good point. This is very bad for people who have clients.
-
Thanks, EGOL.
The other big challenge is to get clients to also buy into the idea that it is Google's problem!
-
**In this specific instance, the original source outscores the site where content is duplicated on almost all the common metrics that are deemed to be indicative of a site's relative authority/standing. **
Yes, this happens. It states the problem and Google's inabilities more strongly than I have stated it above.
**Any ideas/ potential solutions that you could help with ---- will be much appreciated. **
I have this identical problem myself. Actually, its Google's problem. They have crap on their shoes but say that they can't smell it.
-
Hi,
Thanks for the response. I'd understand if the original source was indeed new or not so 'powerful' or an established site in the niche that it serves.
In this specific instance, the original source outscores the site where content is duplicated on almost all the common metrics that are deemed to be indicative of a site's relative authority/standing.
Any ideas/ potential solutions that you could help with ---- will be much appreciated.
Thanks
-
Scraped content frequently outranks the original source, especially when the original source is a new site or a site that is not powerful.
Google says that they are good at attributing content to the original publisher. They are delusional. Lots of SEOs believe Google. I'll not comment on that.
If scraped content was not making money for people this practice would have died a long time ago. I submit that as evidence. Scrapers know what Google does not (or refused to admit) and what many SEOs refuse to believe.
-
No, John - we don't use the 'Fetch as Googlebot' for every post. I am intrigued by the possibility you suggest.
Yes, there are lots of unknowns and certain results seem inexplicable --- as we feel this particular instance is. We have looked at and evaluated most of the obvious things to be considered, including the likelihood of the re-publisher having gotten more social traction. However, the actual results are opposite to what we'd expect.
I'm hoping that you/ some of the others in this forum could shed some light on any other factors that could be influencing the results.
Thanks.
-
Thanks for the link, Umar.
Yes, we did fetch the cached versions of both pages--- but that doesn't indicate when the respective pages were first indexed, it just shows when the pages were last cached.
-
No Martijn, the articles have excerpts from representatives of the republisher; there are no links to the re-publisher website.
-
When you're saying you're mentioning the re-publisher briefly in the posts itself does that mean you're also linking to them?
-
Hey Manoj,
That's indeed very weird. There can be multiple reasons for this, for instance, did you try to fetch the cached version of both sites to check when they got indexed? Usually online publication sites have fast indexing rate and it might be possible that your client shared the articles on social before they got indexed and the other site lifted them up.
Do check out this brilliant Moz post, I'm sure you will get the idea what caused this,
https://moz.com/blog/postpanda-your-original-content-is-being-outranked-by-scrapers-amp-partners
Hope this helps!
-
Do you use fetch for google WMT with every post?
If your competitors monitor the site, harvest the content and then publish and use fetch for google - that could explain why google ranks them first. ie google would likely have indexed their content first.
That said there are so many unknown factors at play, ie how does social stack up. Are they using google + etc.
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
-
Ranking fluctuation
Has anybody got any ideas? I have a website that ranks quite well for an industry keyword, the site has a reasonable amount of authority. But the term is fluctuating between position 3 and position 9! It is on a beefy stable server. It is reasonably well optimised from both SEO and speed point of view. It is tracked using Moz RankTracker. I do realise that rankings fluctuate, but this is ridiculous!
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | seoman101 -
Does Google frown on using 3 different page titles with same content to secure the top 3 results in SERPs?
Is it frowned upon by Google to create 3 different pages with the sames content yet different titles to secure the top three results in SERPs? For example: Luxury Care Homes in Liverpool Care Homes in Liverpool Private Care Homes in Liverpool The page titles are different with slightly different meta data but the user content is exactly the same, would this be considered a cheeky win or negative to rankings?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | TrustedCare.co.uk1 -
Google is alternating what link it likes to rank on wordpress site and
Hi there, I'm experiencing a problem where google is pick and choosing different links structures to rank my Wordpress site for my main keywords. The site had pretty good #1 rankings for a long time but recently I noticed Google is choosing to rank the page in one of two ways. Let me just say that the original way where it held good rankings looked like this for example: flowers.com/the-most-beautiful-wedding-bouquets/ this is just an example it' is not my site. And when google decides to switch it up it uses this link structure:flowers.com > weddings (this still points to this link flowers.com/the-most-beautiful-wedding-bouquets when I hover my mouse over it) however this link structure that never appeared before and now does, usually has much lower rankings. Please note it's not both link structures being ranked at the same time for the keywords. It's one or the other that google is currently alternating in ranking and I believe it's hurting the sites position.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | z8YX9F80
I'm not sure if this is a wordpress settings thats gone wrong or what the problem is but I do know when shows the expanded and descriptive link structure flowers.com/the-most-beautiful-wedding-bouquets the rankings are higher and in 2nd place. I'm hoping by rectifying this I can regain back my position. I'm very grateful for any insight you could offer on why this is happening and how I could fix it. Thank you. PS Wordpress site has several SEO plugins0 -
Showing Different Content To Members & Non-Members/Google and Cloaking Risk
How do we safely show logged-in members/Google one type of content on a page and logged out/non-members another kind of content without getting slammed for cloaking? Right now we do this thing where we show Google everything on the page, but new visitors partial forum comments with the pitch to sign up and see full comments. So far, we have not gotten into trouble for this. The new idea is to show non-members a lot of marketing messages and one kind of navigation and then once they sign up and are logged in, show different or no marketing messages and a different kind of navigation. How do we stay out of trouble with this? Where is the cloaking line drawn? It's got me kinda nervous. Thanks... Darcy
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | 945010 -
Google displaying a content box above the listing link for top ranking listing in SERPs
Hi, In the attached Google SERP example the first listing below the paid search ads has a large box with a snippet of content from the relevant page then followed by the standard link. Does anyone know how you get Google to display a box like this in their SERPs? I checked the code on the page and there doesn't appear to be anything special about it such as any schema markup. It uses standard list code. Does this only appear for particular types of content or sites, such as medical content in this case? Is the content more likely to appear for lists? Does it only appear for high authority sites that Google has selected? We have a similar medical information based site and it would be great to try to get Google to display a similar box of content for some of our pages. Thanks. Damien ZmPJVSl.png
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | james.harris0 -
Do you bother cleaning duplicate content from Googles Index?
Hi, I'm in the process of instructing developers to stop producing duplicate content, however a lot of duplicate content is already in Google's Index and I'm wondering if I should bother getting it removed... I'd appreciate it if you could let me know what you'd do... For example one 'type' of page is being crawled thousands of times, but it only has 7 instances in the index which don't rank for anything. For this example I'm thinking of just stopping Google from accessing that page 'type'. Do you think this is right? Do you normally meta NoIndex,follow the page, wait for the pages to be removed from Google's Index, and then stop the duplicate content from being crawled? Or do you just stop the pages from being crawled and let Google sort out its own Index in its own time? Thanks FashionLux
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | FashionLux0 -
Are links to on-page content crawled / have any effect on page rank?
Lets say I have a really long article that begins with links to <a name="something">anchors on the same page.</a> <a name="something"></a> <a name="something">E.g.,</a> Chapter 1, Chapter 2, etc, allowing the user to scroll down to different content. There are also other links on this page that link to other pages. A few questions: Googlebot arrives on the page. Does it crawl links that point to anchors on the same page? When link juice is divided among all the links on the page, do these links count and page rank is then lost? Thanks!
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | anthematic0 -
How do Google Site Search pages rank
We have started using Google Site Search (via an XML feed from Google) to power our search engines. So we have a whole load of pages we could link to of the format /search?q=keyword, and we are considering doing away with our more traditional category listing pages (e.g. /biology - not powered by GSS) which account for much of our current natural search landing pages. My question is would the GoogleBot treat these search pages any differently? My fear is it would somehow see them as duplicate search results and downgrade their links. However, since we are coding the XML from GSS into our own HTML format, it may not even be able to tell.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | EdwardUpton610