Just Another Blog Post on Google Algorithm Changes: It’s Panda Monium This Time…

Don't be shy. Share this to the world!

Las Vegas Local SearchOh no, everyone panic, it’s another Google Algorithm change! The world’s about to crash, and don’t get thrown under the bus by the Big G. Now, you may be wondering why I just wrote this blog post. Do I have something new to add? Probably not.

But here’s a newsflash: People, if you’re a content provider, you have to keep up with the trends, and this is an area of keyword research that I’m not going to miss the boat on and neither was the rest of the world, I think. However, I do promise that it will at least be funny and insightful—without the “panda monium”. (Did I mention that I always do my keyword research, even for this…)

I wrote this article after scanning an article on NPR about a girl that works for “content farms” for $8 an article. Who are we kidding? Content farms pay a lot less than that. Ezines and whatnot are a step above content farms. And the people that brag about their Native English speakers, aren’t always that far away from the content farms in India. If I’m going to write for $8 an article, it better be some continuing education. Then at least, I can chalk it up to improving my skills.

But I don’t work for that much anymore. I already got my foot in the door through hard work and dedication. None of us should have to be subjected to that, but we often are at first. Just consider it your internship and keep learning as much as you can in the meantime. It’s your choice to stay there, but I don’t think that we are making any big commodity out of content supply by playing with the people that pay low for very long. We can only expect to be devalued that way. Move on when it’s time or stop complaining about the pay.

Backlinks are Backlinks when It Comes from a Low Ranking Webpage

And if you are buying articles for ten bucks or less, are you really that delusional to believe that it is anything more than a backlink with someone occasionally stumbling upon an article?

At the same time, I’m of the mind that if you are an affiliate marketer riding the next big thing to catch on, that you probably shouldn’t be paying more than that, anyway. It’s all going to get lost in the wash and come out to a low level backlink. However, if you are trying to break into a field where you can actually get paid for your skills, you need to understand a lot more than article marketing. You need to study this—A LOT.

I read up on this at least 10 hours a week. And that’s why I believe that I end up working with clients that have something real to offer that need a real solution for a business with real people…

Same Article, Same Keyword, Different Day

If you are writing an article about any of the typical things these days: diet, anti-aging, superfoods, extreme workout routines, security software, making money online, etc., (you get the idea) do you really think that there is going to be something much left to say? Probably not. Expect to get the door slammed in your face by the upper crust in article marketing occasionally (don’t get your feelings hurt though, they are on the rebound from Google). I think article directories are all the same when it comes to these niches. Let’s face it; you are looking for a backlink. Take it and run.

Now if you are really serious about making this a viable industry, you’re going to have to figure out some ways to get creative in conjunction with onsite SEO, offsite SEO, extensive networking, a good product or service and  a good reputation.

Is it just me, or did anyone ever really expect that these articles were getting read on these massively saturated article directories anyway? Once again, the google algorithm change is trying to get us to give them something that is worth showing, while content writers keep providing cheap material that amounts to not much more than a backlink (and backlinks work). But don’t expect it to pop up in the search engines as soon as you post like it used to with ezines.

Oh yes, and don’t worry folks, I have a lot more to say about these things in the weeks to come. I love talking SEO. Don’t buy into the hype and always go with a content based SEO company that doesn’t sacrifice what the service is worth just to land a job. This never works out in the end.

 

Don't be shy. Share this to the world!

Elizabeth Crane

As an owner of Ranking Edge, Elizabeth Crane oversees all projects and designs and develops websites. She specializes in (and loves) everything WordPress. Her childhood included not wearing a helmet, drinking from the hose, not wearing a seat belt, and playing in the neighborhood streets. And yes, she is still alive.

5 Comments

  1. Imogene Suarez on May 13, 2013 at 10:50 pm

    This is sort of why I don’t really believe Google in this case at all. They say this update was algorithmic, and not by hand. But there are clearly a bunch of examples of sites that don’t pass the “useful content” smell test but are still ranking well… which suggests there actually was a bit of manual editing going on.

    • Eliz Crane on May 14, 2013 at 9:56 am

      We’ll never know exactly what all Google is doing with algorithms or by hand. They only give us a small fraction of the actual information. Good point!

  2. Jaime Buckley on June 13, 2013 at 10:47 pm

    I honestly don’t understand the hate for the so-called “content farms”. Your average Joe writes on Squidoo or Hubpages, or he writes on Blogger.com or WordPress.com, what’s the difference really?

    • Eliz Crane on June 16, 2013 at 12:14 pm

      The problem with many (but not all) “content farms” is that the content is generally poorly written, often by people that do not speak English as their first language. Content is generally very cheap…and you get what you pay for.

  3. Terry K. Carey on July 1, 2013 at 9:47 pm

    Ickipedia, as usual, is no help because it currently offers the tacky definition of “In the context of the World Wide Web, content farms are companies (or their divisions) that employ large numbers of (often freelance) writers to generate large amounts of textual content” (but don’t blame Ickipedia — they’re apparently just blaming PBS for that awful definition of “Content Farm”).

Leave a Comment