New anti-spam algorithm against content farms launched by Google.

The article came to me via newsletter of IBP. I thought it would be useful for our DP members as well.

Source:-http://www.free-seo-news.com/newsletter458.htm#facts

Shortcut lovers will fall short on lasting success.

 

Thanks for letting us know. Interesting article

 

It sounds like great news for anyone who works hard on original content and then gets their content scraped.
I suspect the date a page is first published will be one factor that is given more weighting

 

Another factor that is going to effect this is the new "syndication-source" tag.

Ex: meta name=”syndication-source” content=”the-original-URL-goes-here”

I bet content farms who implement this tag correctly will not be de-indexed or penalized.

Also, the new search engine Blekko has stated they are not indexing and/or banning content farms.
Search for list of banned Blekko sites in Google (I can't post links yet).

 

I operate a web site http://www.globetreader.com. All of the articles are unique and written by my team. However, we do use other websites for information and cite them accordingly. Will this type of site get accepted into Google news?

 

woa, thanks for sharing

 

So basically spam blogs are getting b!tch slapped again. Good.

 

Bro, You kind of said both. So what did you really wanted to say?

 

Google's content farm algorithm is not live yet. The algo that went live last week is blocking scraper sites not content farms.

Blekko on the other hand has started removing content farms from its index. Some of the sites removed include ehow.com and encyclopedia.

What does the future hold for sites such as Squidoo, InfoBarrel, HubPages...etc? Surely they have tons and tons of spam, poor quality non-original content. Will the power of their links and serps go down? I think so. Which is not a bad thing at all.

 

Thanks for sharing valuable information, hope this information about new Google algorithm will helps us lot

 

What do you mean what did I want to say? I said it...

 

Your sentence confused me at the beginning. It felt like indexing and banning. Any way I got it eventually. Sorry about that.

 

Well, makes sense from user stand point. too much trash out there. Quality control is needed at some point....

 

Ah, no prob!

 

What is the point of renewing the algorithm then ???? I really appreciated if someone would respond my question here.

 

great news for me, less dimwits to deal with.... news is however a month old.

Nigel

 

Google engineers are trying hard but they always seem to fall little short of the spammers in the race. Google develops a new algorithm. After few days spammers discovers that and try to manipulate. Google knows their results are not perfect. Their most recent step was developing a extension for Chrome by which users can actually indicate sites that they do not want to see in their search results (marking irrelevant sites). In this way they will be able to serve better results as users will contribute some important data.

You might also visit matt cutts blog for a video that has a lot of latest information about web spam fight. http://www.mattcutts.com/blog/google-bing/ (Although it was basically a debate about "Bing copying Google results").

 

Thanks for the information, it is very helpful and to be honest I noticed some other changes like ranking domains that contain the search term higher than before

 

What is the difference between scrapper sites and content firms? From that article above they are suppose to be the same.

 

They've been working on this for a while, according to our in-house metrics. One major plank is the ability to detect 'badly spun' content that has been 'repurposed' from an original source. It's computationally relatively easy to do this - 'collaborative' spinners (even in 'best' mode tend to introduce statistically significant amounts of grammatical errors into text (even short sections of text) and those are a red flag (either it's been badly spun, or badly written, either way, ignore it). Cheap spinners do this because the developers of those cheaper spinners have misunderstood the nature of the problem - language constructs are not statistical in nature, they're binary.

There is, of course, one spinner that doesn't suffer from this problem. Hint - see my sig.