Articles: Outsourcing vs. Scraping

I have been scraping+spinning for the past couple of months and I have came to a point where I am not too happy with the quality at all. It might seem like an easy process but after the article is spun, its only around 30%-40% readable.

I started outsourcing my articles and have them outsourced again to another VA - he spun manually. I tested 1-2 articles so far and I find the approve rate is much higher. Yes, it does cost more in long run, but at the same time, its also less time consuming for me.

What do you guys think?
Do most of you outsource or still scraping+spinning combo?

Share your experience. Thanks

I am starting sites with articles.

From all the google updates... and all the google changes..
to me... it looks like spun articles will get penalized at one time or another.

Sure, people might argue that the articles might look a lot like they were written by a person lacking strong english writing skills..

but I believe google wants GREAT articles.... articles you would recommend to your family....

so...I passed over spinning for now.
I am outsourcing articles and writing some myself.

Great unique content will NEVER be penalized.

Virus1 said:

Great unique content will NEVER be penalized.

Click to expand...

I'm pretty sure MANY of those hit by Panda would beg to differ.

Spun = Unique but low quality .

NoHoneyWithoutMoney said:

Spun = Unique but low quality .

Click to expand...

In fairness, I dont know how Google determines 'low quality', maybe thru bounce rate?

But I highly doubt scrape+spun articles will be a good strategy in long run.

Maybe written articles + spun works a little better.

If you can find a good writer of unique content then it is well worth it to pay them to do all your articles. Many are just scraping and mixing crap themselves so you need to shop around. However I am cheap sometimes and just scrape then hand re-write myself. I use get article, IAW3, and article shuffler and have never had a problem. However I only "spintax" articles for AMR blasts, for main site articles I do 1 unique per article site, of course hitting up only the best sites.

I use super spun articles, then run the output through copyscape premium and simply rewrite any results that pop up. Most of the time it takes all of five minutes.

For content on your sites that you want to rank, write it your self or outsource to a quality (not $.8 100words!) writer. For everything else just scrape and spin, but do it smart, by combining articles and paragraph level spinning.

I know people will say "but you need good content top get an article on blah blah.com" but in most cases these links really arent worth the effort.

Ok, if its a paid press release or guest post on some popular related site, then write good content, but you wouldnt even think of scrape and spin for something like that anyway, would you?

At the end of the day your great content will get scraped and reposted (spun and direct copy) anyway, so keep it for you money site.

The main thing to realize is that articles arent the be all and end all. I can get all sorts of spun crap (for backlinks, not on money sites) indexed quicker than a lot of people get quality stuff indexed.

The key is link type and anchor diversity.

A typical successful campain for me would be:

Quality bookmarks to money site and internal pages, targeting a wide range of related keywords.

Network of unique (eg super spun, at word, sentance and paragraph level, with multiple source articles) content web2.0s, all multipage, some random interlinking, most (NOT all) linking to money site with both www and not, multiple related anchors and plain url links.

wiki spam, linking to money site (same rule on multiple keywords) and a few of the web2.0s

Manuall high pr blog comments, preferably on register only pages (register to comment, not view) to money site

High pr profiles (edu, gov etc) to money site.

Scrapebox/xrummer blast to all above links (including money site. If new, keep it lighter and use multiple urlshortner redirects for moneysite urls. Eg moneysite.com/blue-widgets.html gets shortened to bit.ly/23sdg, bit.ly/84fg3 bit.ly/89dfdf ************/dfsds89 etc etc and you load THESE links into SB, xrummer)

drip feed scrabebox comments to main site (small amounts, continuous)

Drip feed social spam (twitter, fb etc) to all links, use shortner redirects and normal if urls are short enough.

I use this technique for all sorts of sites, including ecommerce (hence not much internal content) in very strong niches, and it gets solid results.

They key once again is link diversity and anchor diversity.
If i discover a nice platform suitable for link dropping, that can be automated easy enough, ill throw it into the mix. If you have diversity, you can get away with a lot of spam and scraped crap, and see great results.

I prefer to spun articles as it cost much less than outsourcing. But sometime output is more important than cost.

Does anyone have any concrete evidence on how much content needs to be on a site before Google will consider it "worthy"?

I've read 5 x 500 words a fair few times, but never seen anything that backs that up.

I'm struggling with motivation to write content - knowing the tipping point in terms of what needs to be posted might make it easier to focus on Word for a few hours/days.

PLR articles are cheap and easy to rewrite.

M

You guys bumped a thread from over 2 years ago...


But what the heck:

Better question.. can you AFFORD to not use quality content.

Since user engagement (bounce rate and time on page) plays a role in SEO these days... along with spun content killing any chance of organic clicks/promotion...

Content could be the difference between a profitable seo campaign or a failure.