What is the issue with content farming websites?

  • Thread starter Thread starter BenVitale
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Websites
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion centers around the concept of "content farming" websites, particularly in relation to Google's efforts to adjust search engine rankings. Participants explore the implications of these practices for bloggers and the broader internet landscape, including issues of duplicate content and the impact on search results.

Discussion Character

  • Debate/contested
  • Conceptual clarification
  • Technical explanation

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants express concern about the definition of "content farms" and question which sites will be categorized as such.
  • There is a desire for Google to filter out duplicate content effectively, with one participant emphasizing the need for original sources in search results.
  • Another participant highlights the prevalence of misleading websites that use search terms to attract clicks but lead to unrelated or harmful content.
  • Concerns are raised about the implications for bloggers who repost material, questioning whether they would be labeled as content farms despite sourcing their information.
  • Participants differentiate between quoting and commenting on articles versus copying entire articles, suggesting that the latter is unnecessary and detrimental to search results.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on what constitutes a content farm and the implications for content creators. There is no consensus on the criteria for labeling websites or the potential consequences for bloggers.

Contextual Notes

Participants note the complexity of defining content farming, particularly regarding the reposting of sourced material and the varying practices among bloggers and mainstream media.

Who May Find This Useful

This discussion may be of interest to bloggers, content creators, SEO professionals, and individuals concerned with online content quality and search engine practices.

BenVitale
Messages
72
Reaction score
1
Computer science news on Phys.org


If Google can find a way to filter out 100 hits to 100 copies of the exact same piece of information, and just give me ONE hit on the original source, please can I have it implemented by yesterday!

If it zaps all the hits to a few million blogs that have no original content, well, that's just tough on the people who cut-and-pasted them.
 


I agree with AlephZero.

I'd also add there are a lot of websites which seem to incorporate your search result - you search for XYZ on Google and it returns a number of results. Within the top few you may note there are some exact hits that look promising. You click them and they end up taking you to a website full of adverts (again all showing what you searched for but leading to a load of unrelated rubbish) and they'll display your search phrase on the page as if showing you what you want. You click on any of these and you end up in god knows where, usually to some illegal site regarding torrents, chock full of malicious software.
 


I did some search on this topic, and found

Matt Cutts, head of Google’s anti-spam team, writes:

http://googleblog.blogspot.com/2011/01/google-search-and-search-engine-spam.html

Last year Google faced a rash of webspam on Chinese domains in its index

http://googleblog.blogspot.com/2008/06/using-data-to-fight-webspam.html

TechCrunch is referring to websites that that post any duplicate content word-for-word

http://techcrunch.com/2011/01/21/go...-were-fixing-that-and-content-farms-are-next/

What about re-posting of material, even if it is sourced? Most bloggers that writes about political/economics/social issues do that. I do that too. Will I get the label of "content farm"? By the way mainstream media does the same.
 


Well it's one thing to take quotes and comment on them in a blog, but it's another to copy the entire article over (referenced or not).

By copying the entire article all you are doing duplicating the source material. Highly unnecessary and taking up valuable Google result spots.
 

Similar threads

Replies
7
Views
3K
  • · Replies 26 ·
Replies
26
Views
5K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
3K
  • · Replies 99 ·
4
Replies
99
Views
8K
  • · Replies 41 ·
2
Replies
41
Views
6K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
3K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
3K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
5K
  • · Replies 22 ·
Replies
22
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K