Dumb SEO Questions

(Entry was posted by Devin Peterson on this post in the Dumb SEO Questions community on Facebook, Monday, August 26, 2013).

Will copy and pasting discussions from social media forums onto a blog count as duplicate content?

Will copy and pasting discussions from social media forums onto a blog count as duplicate content? I find it to be quite an effective means of obtaining interesting content to help saturate a blog, and I think this forum does it also... So, is it a good idea from an SEO standpoint?

This question begins at 00:25:26 into the clip. Did this video clip play correctly? Watch this question on YouTube commencing at 00:25:26
Video would not load
I see YouTube error message
I see static
Video clip did not start at this question

OUR ANSWERS

Answers from the Dumb SEO Questions Panelists.

  • Tim Capper: It does suck +Devin Peterson , but that is the nature of the beast we are dealing with. This is what G says about it : referencing material is fine, but it should not be the whole pages content. You can add a link to the original and add it in "quotes". Some things I have played with, especially with authorship attached. One site that i work on is a financial site - very tough market!! and the landing pages that i ideally want to rank for is tough going. So when i report on breaking financial news (related to site) I prettey much rewrite an introduction the ref the original article... and 8 out of 10 times i eventually outrank the news sites ..... and the site has very low PR. One thing you may find interesting. I copied the source of a page and pasted exact into Google drive and made it public as a web page .... surprise surprise the google drive page outranked the original 
YOUR ANSWERS

Selected answers from the Dumb SEO Questions G+ community.

  • Dewaldt Huysamen: Hi + ;if there is more content on the article itself than just the discussion on social media, then it is ok.

    Depending on where you get the discussion from, like Twitter you can embed it via Twitter embed tool itself.

    If from Facebook etc. I would rather use and image, as this way people will still get the idea it is from a social media discussion.

    But I will not let this be more than 15% of the content of the article itself
  • Jim Munro: Nobody agrees with me, Devin, but I think "duplicate content" is given too much respect. It's probably smarter to listen to everybody else, though. :)  ;

    They can do what they like to dumbseoquestions com because the people that want to find it, are able to find it via this community. The site does not need to rank to serve it's purpose although it will be nice if it does, fingers crossed. :)
  • Devin Peterson: + ;I think what you're doing is a fine practice (so I agree) that can serve a great purpose to other people who aren't even in this community. After consideration, I think to be penalized for having duplicate content of this form would be a flaw in the search engine. Social media content is different than another blog's content for example, because it is usually exclusive to those connected to it socially one way or another. BTW, your site appears to be ranking very well already. Top of the front page for a search I entered. I guess that settles it then!
  • Dewaldt Huysamen: + ;I can say this, the other day again I tested a theory, I copied and pasted an article exactly and published it on a blog, did a little bid of quick link building, and RSS feed dir submissions, and guess what I was outranking the original article
  • Devin Peterson: + ;I have numerous articles on some of my blogs that get outranked by other websites that reposted it (my sites are young and have low page rank). Of course I gave them permission to do so, but what's really strange is that the duplicates even link to the original and it still outranks it.
  • Jim Munro: It sucks, doesn't it?

    Google could and should do better with this. Maybe one day they might start to leverage  ;authorship to give credit where credit is due.
  • Tim Capper: It does suck + ;, but that is the nature of the beast we are dealing with.

    This is what G says about it : referencing material is fine, but it should not be the whole pages content. You can add a link to the original and add it in "quotes".

    Some things I have played with, especially with authorship attached.

    One site that i work on is a financial site - very tough market!! and the landing pages that i ideally want to rank for is tough going.

    So when i report on breaking financial news (related to site) I prettey much rewrite an introduction the ref the original article... and 8 out of 10 times i eventually outrank the news sites ..... and the site has very low PR.

    One thing you may find interesting.

    I copied the source of a page and pasted exact into Google drive and made it public as a web page .... surprise surprise the google drive page outranked the original ;
  • ????? ?: You can copy content from other sites, but need to make it better then original - add good picteres, own comments and so on. I have 1:1 copied article (with seo optimisation) that ranks in top 10, whyle the original site has 40-50 plase.

View original question in the Dumb SEO Questions community on G+, Monday, August 26, 2013).

Reference Links