Comments on: Duplicate Content Penalty After Social Bookmarking

By: doolally

doolally — Sun, 04 Oct 2009 20:57:52 +0000

I don’t believe that getting duplicate content on a social bookmarking site will be detrimental to your site. I’m confident that the search engines (Google) can work out that a site is a bookmarking site and therefore any site linked from the content will be exempt from any penalties.

By: Gary

Gary — Thu, 01 Oct 2009 23:00:45 +0000

I’m curious to know whether pages which are in the supplemental index still have their links counted by Google. What’s your theory on this?
I have a number of sites that have been created purely for the purpose of providing links to other sites, I’m not concerned if these sites are in the main index or not, I only want their links registered.

By: Internet Marketing

Internet Marketing — Wed, 30 Sep 2009 11:35:15 +0000

“I would think that what happened is that the page had little to no inbound links and these links either were removed or they dropped in their PR. Therefore the measly PR of this page dropped even further and because it had little content Google therefore dumped it into their supplemental index.”

The only reason a page goes supplemental is because of duplicate content – not because it has little or no links of value (or does and then loses them). What is possible here is that the content on the page in question in the first place was not unique (or unique enough), and as a result was thrown into the supplemental index.

“Surely that cant be true about social bookmarking websites and duplicated content? If that were the case then you could bookmark all your competitors webpages and get them put into the supplemental index if they had little PR.”

Think about it like this. A page (perhaps the page in question) has very little written content – lets say a paragraph explaining a product. The rest of the page contents are images etc. The bookmark made to the social bookmarking website uses the same paragraph in the submission as the description – and the title of the page is also the same. In such an instance, yes this can happen, but not very often at all. As far as doing that to your competitors it’s highly unlikely as most people have more content on the page and there is a limit as to description length when submitting via social bookmarking websites.

As I said above, it’s hard for me to pin point exactly what happened here without knowing the page/s that have dropped and seeing what’s going on. But again, it’s likely to be combination of all of the above factors listed or lie somewhere amongst them. There’s not too much else that would cause this. My guess is probably the first on the list; “You’ve probably not got enough unique content on the pages in question.”

By: munkyonline

munkyonline — Wed, 30 Sep 2009 11:22:08 +0000

Surely that cant be true about social bookmarking websites and duplicated content? If that were the case then you could bookmark all your competitors webpages and get them put into the supplemental index if they had little PR.

I wouldn’t have thought anyone would post a majority of the page/article in the social bookmark description for that page which is the only way it would be a duplicate content issue isn’t it? Bookmarking sites save a snippet and link to the original article, they would even probably pass PR and traffic to the original article.

I would think that what happened is that the page had little to no inbound links and these links either were removed or they dropped in their PR. Therefore the measly PR of this page dropped even further and because it had little content google therefore dumped it into their supplemental index.