So Google penalizes you for content lockers now?

[redmoon]

I got some content on one of my sites that ranked #1 and was getting alot of search traffic for different keywords. I decided to monetize it some more with a CPA gateway to lock the content. I left it up for 5 minutes and something told me to check the SERPS. I saw I dropped to #2 that quick and the site that was above me was a damn parked domain. So I check it again about 10 minutes later and I'm not even on page 1 or 2 or 3. So i do a site:url search and it was deindexed! In less than 30 minutes! The whole site isn't deindexed just the url, so that leads me to believe Google penalizes you for using content lockers on your site. Does Google's spiders recognize the javascript as a CPA widget and start hating on you making $? Is it just my site or has anybody else seen that happen?

 

[elocin]

Are you still de-indexed today?

 

[JohnnyRabbit]

Interesting, similar thing happened to me.

 

[1337WuLF]

I've recently had a site drop from the first 1-2 pages for using a content unlocker. Anyone have any more insight on this?

Any way to get around this without removing the gateways?

 

[blackma]

Google penalises anything which annoys it users.

 

[nanotechno]

f*ck google

 

[JuliaG1]

I've recently had a site drop from the first 1-2 pages for using a content unlocker. Anyone have any more insight on this?

Any way to get around this without removing the gateways?

If a bunch of users go to your page and immediately click the back button, Google recognizes that you should know longer be there.

 

[1337WuLF]

Then whats the solution?

The only thing I can think of is masking the link to the gateway page, and have nofollow on the link, and no index on the gatway page.

 

[kez1000]

Then whats the solution? - get your traffic from else where like youtube or face book.
the same thing hapened to me 1# , then 4# then 9# then BYE BYE

 

[1337WuLF]

Then whats the solution? - get your traffic from else where like youtube or face book.
the same thing hapened to me 1# , then 4# then 9# then BYE BYE

I'm sure there is another solution than just giving up on Google for traffic?

 

[redmoon]

Are you still de-indexed today?

Yeah that url is still de-indexed. I don't know if it was the bounce rate or the code in the content itself. What's crazy is I logged into webmaster tools to see what was going on and it said the url was "restricted by robots.txt". I checked and it wasn't so idk wtf is going on.


Does anybody know a way to encrypt the javascript or hide it from the spiders so google can't see it? If that's even the problem.

 

[champbronc2]

Just put it on a URL that is not on the page that is getting you traffic..?

The homepage will stay ranked, have a seperate one with the $$..

 

[cyberzilla]

Where the gateway is installed? Home page or internal pages? I have a site with gateway installed in an internal page. It is indexed and my home page is ranking #1 for more almost two years. So I believe there is something else which is blocking spiders. Check your site status in webmaster tool.

 

[1337WuLF]

I think the solution is to put rel="noflollow" on the link to your gatway page, also add no index and no follow in the meta data for that page. That way Google can't see it, and your homepage stays #1.

 

[pyronaut]

Are you sure your content locker doesn't redirect users if they don't have javascript turned on (Considering Google wouldn't when they crawl your page)

 

[SEO Controller]

Google behaves very oddly at times. I've heard of many cases where this has happened and of some where Google just doesn't do anything

 

[1337WuLF]

Are you sure your content locker doesn't redirect users if they don't have javascript turned on (Considering Google wouldn't when they crawl your page)

My Adscend Media gateway does. Hmm

 

[Monrox]

Using content lockers is a type of cloaking.The rules (in this regard) are simple. Users should see what the spider sees. If you can cloak successfully you won't need lockers as a lot more money can be made with other methods. If you can't cloak, your vistiors must be from somewhere else as kez1000 said.

Also normal search traffiic will not be convinced enough to go through a survey etc. from a simple 2 or 3 lines text snippet as presented in the search results anyway.

What you can do is have a locked 'noindex' mirror page and show that if the visitor's referer is not a search engine. This way you keep your position (at least in theory; I am not done with my tests yet).

 

[pyronaut]

Using content lockers is a type of cloaking.The rules (in this regard) are simple. Users should see what the spider sees. If you can cloak successfully you won't need lockers as a lot more money can be made with other methods. If you can't cloak, your vistiors must be from somewhere else as kez1000 said.

Also normal search traffiic will not be convinced enough to go through a survey etc. from a simple 2 or 3 lines text snippet as presented in the search results anyway.

What you can do is have a locked 'noindex' mirror page and show that if the visitor's referer is not a search engine. This way you keep your position (at least in theory; I am not done with my tests yet).

That's not true. It isn't cloaking at all. You are showing the same page to both users regardless of whether they are search engines or not.

Your last paragraph IS cloaking, as you are showing a different page to search engines. This is against Google's rules.

 

[1337WuLF]

That's not true. It isn't cloaking at all. You are showing the same page to both users regardless of whether they are search engines or not.

Your last paragraph IS cloaking, as you are showing a different page to search engines. This is against Google's rules.

So whats the better alternative?