A lot is being made about unique content but as I understand most of these mean to say copyscape passed set of paragraphs. I, for one, don't want to think a unique article as something rewritten cleverly to trick the machine into believing it as a new article. Ok, if it serves the purpose for the buyer but the very concept of enforcing uniqueness by all those who are up to it is beaten by these acceptances. I would like a discussion on the topic as well as whether the overall meaning and spirit of genuine articles is degenerating?
That's ok, It is what everyone is liking it to be. Again, another term for what you said can also be 'SEO piece' which only feeds the SEs.
As long as people invent machines, and not vice versa, any copyscape, article checker etc. can be tricked without much fuss. The thing is that most clients treat "unique" and "copyscape passed" like synonyms. Of course, genuine writing isn't dead - it's still alive and rosy-cheeked - but has nothing to do with working for peanuts.
Unique articles are written from scratched, not modeling or copying any other articles. The true power of article marketing and promotion lays in unique articles. The better, enticing, entertaining and informative your articles, the better you will do. Copied or rewritten articles won't ever do your business good in the longterm. -Dave
For 1-2 cents per word I have stock article packages for basic websites that I rewrite in order to make them unique in the sense that they read differently but still contain the same information. An example of this is the high demand for simple but informative weight loss information. Most of the sites that order a weight loss package are selling other services and could, for the most part, care less about the articles they purchase as long as they are functional and don't violate copy laws. Writing unique content for niches such as weight loss grows harder as the niche grows more saturated. There are only so many ways that someone can outline four or five major benefits to weight loss in a 500 word article. For a higher price, 3-4 cents per word and up I create articles from scratch using more thorough research techniques. These are more detailed articles which can be used as sales letters, in books, or subscription sites which need the originality and rely on being highly packed with information in order to get their customers to return and tell their friends. As far as uniqueness is concerned it all depends on how form meets function; for me at least.
Yes, as long as writing an article isn't about creating the information and as long as machines can't create even an article you have this distinction being made. Unique articles plainly mean new articles and copyscaped articles, may at best, be called successful copies. I would like to make a couple of remarks about rewritten articles. Although rewriting in itself isn't wrong, it has been of late rendered lowly mainly due to 'inglorious' demands such as SERP visibility. Rewriting is considered a 'pass' and in some cases 'unique' because they conform to legal frameworks' definitions of being unique but not because they are. This reduces the intentions of article publishers to higher SERPs by trying to peddle recycled things and not fresh or evolved information. Poor users of such articles are served with the very same information over and again.
In terms of SEO, unique-content is that which does not exist published on the Internet yet. For example, at e-articles.info we have a strict policy regarding duplicated content issue An option to obtain unique-content versions of your already published articles is to rewrite them. You may use this useful content rewrite tool
The concept of unique content is head and shoulders above the definitions we see and understand in the internet industry. Of course, if there is something, it is the law to be blamed for giving this new dimension and meaning to the concept. Content not plagiarized need not be entirely unique in its true spirit and meaning but can just be rewritten matters to circumvent the law (and of course the checkers). True, it is near impossible to make articles unique-first-content unless you are not breaking news. However, what I mean by unique articles is something that really adds value and that which fills the human reader with the fulfillment of having benefited by reading it.
You're absolutely right, Alevoor, that why I began with "In terms of SEO,..."; Search engines have their rules and we have to follow these rules as well as the law and respect copyrights in the same time.
A unique article comes from your own first hand experience. It doesn't really matter whether the article cost you $10 or $1,000 if the writer doesn't have first hand knowledge about the topic he has to do "research" and research without citing sources is plagiarism in the real world. On the internet it's business as usual. If you want a great Diabetes article written then it's better to deal with someone who actually has diabetes or has directly dealt with people who have diabetes. How many times have we heard the term "Pre-Sell"? That's clearly a Ken Evoy term but nobody sites him as a source. That's the nature of the internet. Just make sure you don't rewrite anything besides your own articles. Rewriting is blatant plagiarism and the easiest way to get in trouble. Using several sources to express unique ideas is better. Giving your own unique opinion about a particular topic (like Brand name Blue Micro Widgets for example) is even better.
Just write whats in ur mind, and the resulting article will be unique also, article should contain interesting and correct info
YoungSmeagol;6479121 I agree. Citing this point, I can say, to work on something, one needs first hand experience. Researching on research (as you said) may be perhaps likened to something like trying to swim across a river on someone else's knowledge and strengths which obviously wouldn't take you anywhere. Naturally, "A unique article comes from your own first hand experience." Ultimately the onus of distinguishing truly unique articles from the statistically calculated ones, as it is being done now, rests upon all those involved. Or it can immediately be enforced upon by raising the bar. I can't agree more with you. Angilina True and if you need to research, just do it in the true spirit unlike how it is done in an ablated way.
Aside from the usual prattle about what unique is, it's "33%". To be unique, it has to be 33% original, or some such crap. I think it's kind of weird, that something like uniqueness can even be measured. From a somewhat more biased perspective, I can say that a unique article should be well researched, from multiple sources, angles and hopefully include some original thought. However, original thinking is a precious and rare commodity in the world of both commercial and recreational literature.
One more reason specialization is important. When you know a topic inside and out, you can write a unique article on the same topic a dozen times over by simply focusing on some special nuance each time. Rebecca
Sure, yes. You can come out with real unique pieces when you are an expert, you will be able to add to topics your views or perhaps new findings. This need not restrict writers to anyone niche depending on their abilities to master different areas. Sad thing is the very definition of being unique. You can copy/steal the majority 2/3rds straight off and rewrite only the other 1/3rd and still be able to get a pat for being an original writer.
Unique would be an article that was written or rewritten as a one off surely - unique means one of a kind does it not? Whereas "Original" Content would be just that little bit more unique as the original source of other content.