"Is discussing content in material submission sites good for SEO?" Not since Panda!Article promotion and material submission sites used to be a great way to get more visitors, get inbound links, and enhance SEO (Search Engine Optimization), but not any longer.
Since 2011, Look for engines Panda has effectively destroyed the SEO benefits of material promotion, so you might want to reevaluate discussing content to material submission sites that are being affected by "duplicate content" issues.
But getting inbound links and on the internet exposure is part of any strong SEO or Internet on the internet promotion strategy, so how can this be obtained without putting things off on material promotion and material directories?
This material will emphasize why material promotion and material submission sites are struggling, and how to discuss material the right way to get as much SEO juice and on the internet exposure as possible.
How Panda eliminates the SEO rewards for discussing content in material directories
Since the release of Google Panda and Penguin methods (although Penguin is really more about webspam than copy content), many traditional websites, like material submission sites, have taken a actual defeating.
Because Panda penalizes "duplicate content", the value offering of material submission sites, in SEO terms, has been obliterated. There is no longer a actual SEO motivation to discuss content in open material submission sites.
Article discussing & SEO before Look for engines Panda
Prior to Panda it was possible to write an material for your own blog, and enhance the possibilities of it being came back in google search by re-posting it to as many material submission sites as possible.
This also provided a convenient method of getting back-links to the coming web page.
But copying material like this offers no actual benefit to people searching on Look for engines - it only contributes "clutter".
How Panda affected material directories' SEO
Panda overrode this problem by penalizing sites that copy most, if not all, of their material.
Take a look at the chart proven above. As you can see, two of the biggest material submission sites, article dashboard and articlesbase were both increasing continuously until Feb 2011, when the Panda criteria was revealed.
Since then, they (and many others like them) have proven noticeable decreases in visitors.
Why discussing material in material submission sites is bad for SEO
Here is the situation:
Article internet directories have decreasing traffic
Many material submission sites still have plenty of authority
Panda is only going to position one edition of an article
Either Look for engines will choose to show the unique edition of the material, in which situation there was no point in discussing it in the first place. Or, it will show the distributed edition (because the material listing has higher power than your own website), in which situation the SEO juice goes to brace up an material listing that is in decrease anyway.
The best you can hope for is a bit of short-term visitors produced once the material is published and it gets shown on the home page of the listing (the possibilities of which are vanishingly small given the number of content that are published every minute).
Can material submission sites restore from Panda?
The only way material submission sites can restore is if they change their business structure to:
become particular about the material they publish
insist on publishing unique content
But then they wouldn't be material submission sites, they would be material curators or weblogs, which is very different. http://ajmalseotips.blogspot.com/
0 Comments