Quantcast

The Panda Reaps – Is Article Marketing Still Viable?

Google Change Throws Tactics Into Question

Get the WebProNews Newsletter:
[ Search]

It was predictable and effective and we all knew it. Article Marketing was a reliable way to build quality links and drive significant traffic to web properties. It was a perfect way to augment most any SEO campaign, that is until the Google Farmer/Panda update.

We now face the stark reality that a method revered by many, will be reduced to a mere supplemental method of obtaining links. We knew the day was coming. And to be honest, it took longer than I expected. There had been numerous times in the past where I experienced the game of cat-and-mouse, sifting through multiple search results only to find countless versions of the same regurgitated garbage.

A change was needed to clean up the landscape and Google responded with the Farmer/Panda update.

Even though Google released an official statement on their blog claiming their intent was to find more high-quality sites in search (released only in the United States at this time). It became obvious the Farmer/Panda update was a laser sharp effort to disparage content farms, and claim back the territory they once owned. Good or bad, article directories were a main target of this algorithmic change. And even though collateral damage is inevitable in a change of this magnitude, at the end of the day the Internet will become a better place because of it.

It’s still too early to determine the fallout of this seismic algorithmic change, but one thing is clear.

Quality metrics for content and site will be taken to a new level.

Adjustments will be needed to salvage campaigns that relied solely on spinning and mass submission to hundreds, even thousands of article directories.

So where will article marketing fit into the new SEO landscape?

It will likely remain a viable method, but will now contain barriers to entry. Brands will be given priority, and you will need to knock them off their perch by showing superior content and site structure.

Here are some things you will want to consider:

  • Deliver only high quality content.
  • Become an authority on your chosen niche.
  • Publish content on your site.
  • Attain a more natural linkage progression.
  • Consider reducing the number of article directories used to the top few.
  • Theme content through silos.
  • Deep link from article directories (not just your home page).
  • Social Media integration.
  • See opportunity to fill gaps that will be voided.
  • Diversify, diversify, diversify.

Quality content will become even more important in the days ahead, especially if you are looking for long-term results. When you choose a niche, be determined to become an authority on it. MFA (Made for Adsense) sites will become a thing of the past.

Article directory links will most likely drop in value, at least for the short-term. Therefore you should consider publishing content on your site, using article directories sparingly. When you do use article directories, consider submitting only to the top few, thereby decreasing your chance of becoming an unwarranted target.

Your objective should be to make your site the primary “owner” of the content, establishing a more natural linking progression in the process. I believe this algorithm change is a precursor of what is more to come, as Google continues to ramp up efforts on low quality/thin sites.

Site structure is most likely another major factor. Theming your content into silos will aid in the overall keyword ranking and allow for easier deep linking. In addition, excessive Ads on your site is considered to be a detriment factor in the Farmer/Panda update.

Social media integration has become a very effective way to diversify and expose your content. Google now observes and uses signals from social media outlets, this will only increase over time with a premium given to those that can produce a “buzz factor.”

Google will always be changing their algorithm, that’s a given. Diversification will be the key and ultimately the deciding factor, to long-term success. Never hang your hat on one method of satisfying Google’s algorithm, it’s a game won by few.

Content will continue to reign as king. This new paradigm shift should be seen as an opportunity to fill the gaps left by the masses. Building an authoritative presence is a long-term effort that produces rewards at the end for those that persevere.

The Panda Reaps – Is Article Marketing Still Viable?
Top Rated White Papers and Resources
  • http://www.duran-seo.co.il דוראן

    the weight of article submissions has been very low for more than two years so there is no need to be suprised now… rankings are not achieved by rubbishing article directories …

    • Roger

      If Article Marketing has been a poor method for the past 2 years, then you have been lost my dear friend and will eventually continue to be according to your methods.

  • Adsense Publisher

    I wonder how much Google is loosing in income from all the traffic they are sending to other sites instead of those that didn’t fall into the “Farmer” update.

    • Roger

      I can tell you one thing for sure, you no longer need to wonder as Google is never loosing but always gaining in everything that have done and will do.

  • Wes

    Great article, and so incredibly true. I say down with spam and in with quality content.

    • http://www.danderoeck.com Dan

      Thanks Wes.

      I think this latest change (and more to come) will eventually allow quality to rise to the top, and weed out some of the repetitiveness prevalent in the SERPs.

  • http://www.callboxinc.com novemh

    With these new updates on Google’s algorithm we expect that we get quality and relevant search results. Nothing really to worry if you have been having good quality and relevant content.

    • Roger

      By far this has been the best true reply on this page filled with nonsense comments. You are on the right track.

  • http://www.d2moto.com/ Motorcycle Accessories

    The new design makes the titles & pics stretched up & down a small. Or possibly that is me.

  • http://www.wordtracker.com Justin

    Dan, as you say, Panda might have already hit you if your Google traffic comes mostly from the US.

    If your traffic comes from mostly outside the US then Wordtracker has a quick guide that will let you know if you are about to be hit: it’s the Google Panda survival guide

    Hope that’s useful.

    Justin

    • http://www.danderoeck.com Dan DeRoeck

      Thanks Justin, it looks like a good resource.

  • http://www.brickmarketing.com/website-internet-marketing.htm Nick Stamoulis

    Article marketing isn’t going anywhere just yet, but the Panda update means that companies have to take it seriously. Writing and submitting a surface-level article to get a few links isn’t going to cut it. Articles have to give the readers real information and value to make a company stand out.

    • http://superiorwowguide.com/wow-hunter-leveling-quest-guide/ Paul Burkhardt

      I’m glad you said that Nick. Article marketing is just going to be more refined and meticulous than before. We all know the phrase “Content is King” and this is the direction google has been moving towards for years. If you have been taking your work seriously then you already have top notch content and this should not be a problem. Google is kicking it up a notch so that “QUALITY CONTENT” is king.

  • http://www.airfoilpr.com/services/digitalsocialmedia Social Media Services

    Being a leader in your market doesn’t happen because you wrote as many crummy articles as possible and submitted them to article directory sites. None of us that have a viable business got to where we are by doing that type of marketing, if you can even call it marketing. Less than surprised that Google put the kibosh to it but I am amazed it took as long as it did.

    • Roger

      I am afraid to break the news to you, but yest many have succeeded and sky rocked by these methods. Where have you been all this time?

  • Nelson

    “save bamboo heat Panda”

  • http://www.bluelightlabs.com Markus Nelson

    We have suffered a 10 placement drop on mostly just our primary terms. We had used SEO Link Vine in the past for article marketing and such. What has been really bugging me is we start to see a drop every time we add new content. It’s almost like if you don’t have inbound links ready and waiting for new content you get a little hit from spreading out the 100% page ratio of the site. Or method before was to post content on it’s own blog page – wait for it to be indexed by Google First ( This way we know Google will claim it as the origin of the content. Then we would spin articles based on our blog posts. Well that method did not seem to work as well as we thought..

    Cheers,

    Markus Nelson ..

    • Roger

      That is one of the poorest methods practiced only by those with no taste or smartness for creativity.

      • Anthony Jamese

        When you say poorest methods… are you referring to the submission of articles through Link Vine or placing new quality content on your site and waiting for google to re-index it?

        Wouldn’t that be smart? Some of my content has ended up on others blogs, forums, or websites. This is w/o my permission. Not a big deal though.. it is the Wild West. Anyway, I don’t want my content that was on my site first appearing as duplicate content because someone else copied it to their site.

        So I guess what I’m inquiring about your response.Letting the content sit on my site for a while before pushing it out to the web would be a way to prevent this right?

  • http://www.ableinspector.com Bruce L

    What does “Theme content through silos” mean? It’s in the article, just not sure what that means.

    • http://www.danderoeck.com Dan

      Hi Bruce,

      This is IMHO, one of the more underrated aspects of SEO. To get best results from your website, it is best to incorporate silos into your site structure – this achieves “theme relevancy.”

      Organizing your site into silos allows SE’s to recognize the theme easier. The end result is higher rankings for keywords.

      The link to Bruce Clay’s site in the article gives you a great description.

      I hope that helps.

      Dan

      • Anthony Jamese

        Regarding Bruce Clay’s article… is it important to incorporate both virtual and directory silos on your site?

        From what I got out of it… a directory silo is sort of like Categories –> sub-categories –> sub-sub categories –> etc… As an eCommerce site, this is almost a given that all will match up down the silo.

        What about other content on the site rather than products. Talking about press rooms, info, news, tips etc. This would have to be in a Virtual Silo right???

        For example, let’s say you have a press room page with a bunch of links to press releases. A lot of these press releases have the same theme but also there are numerous themes throughout.

        To create a virtual Silo in the press room page, would you want to make sub-categories of press release topics. Then under those topics place the themed press releases and cross-link all relating.

        This would create a virtual silo right? Or would each press release topic have to be the main topic with no categories above it?? Just trying to figure out what Bruce is suggesting?

  • http://www.centralrestaurant.com Rob

    The changes had a positive effect on our natural traffic. We continue to utilize unique content, best-in-class SEO practice without buying or creating links via link farms.

    • Beamer

      FINALLY!!! Someone else who knows that buying links and link building is not necessary. I tried to tell other hard heads this in a forum and they called me a liar! I build sites, perform SEO and use nothing but pure whitehat techniques. I NEVER link build. All links to sites I build happen naturally without any interference from me. I don’t do search engine submissions either. I test and make sure relevancy is 100% then send the bots. That’s it. I get clients indexed in all the SEs Google, Bing, Yahoo!, Yandex, etc. NO link building and NO SE submissions.

      THANK YOU ROB!!!!! You are my HERO!

  • http://www.webdesign-webhost-webmaster.co.za Ron Darby

    I am very happy with the updates google is making, it has turned a few of my websites into #1,2 and 3 page rankings on various keywords where they weren’t doing as well previously. What I noticed signifigantly is the weight in the domain name itself.

    I am a regular user of google.com myself and must say that I am very happy as a user and I have noticed a drastic improvement in the top organic listings.

    Ron

  • http://www.webdesignshowroom.co.uk Web Design Showroom

    Actually, I’m going to have to disagree a little!

    Releasing articles in to the www space serves more than one purpose – it infact serves many and tying it down to just one benefit isn’t possible. However, we are only talking about QUALITY content and not QUANTITY as you touched on.

    After working for a web design agency in Bournemouth for about 3 years I could see exactly where they were going wrong. They employed university students to write and release hundreds of really poor articles for each client – desperate to improve page rank and traffic quickly. This is not the right approach and was doomed to failure.

    As an onlinr marketer you need to look at the whole and Article writing as a small but still significant part. Releasing 2 to 3 articles per month per client has very little cost in terms of time and effort but will ensure that you keep the quality high and you can tell your clients – “yes, we’re trying everything”.

    Releasing quality content with links back to your site, through quality channels wills always be a positive thing.

  • http://www.hobotraveler.com/blogger.html Andy Graham

    I do not enjoy writing knowing Google is more important than my readers. If I want to use profanity for some strange reason, I cannot because of fear.

  • http://www.seo-theory.com/ Michael Martinez

    Article marketing can only work if the articles are written specifically for audiences that read the articles at their sources. Whether you submit articles to a print magazine, a blog, or a “directory”, if the publisher has no audience you’re not really marketing through articles.

    As always happens, the SEO community went on a link building binge because it bought into the myth that SEO is all about links (it never was, it never will be).

    That happened because too many people read bad SEO advice on popular Websites.

    • http://www.webdesignshowroom.co.uk Web Design Showroom

      Absolutely agree with you Michael. In a previous role I worked for a car loans company here in the UK back in 2006 – an extremely competitive market. We were guilty of buying huge numbers of links, releasing a lot of articles (mostly pretty poor), setting up keyword based sites to attract visitors etc etc.

      Search has really come of age. However, I don’t think Google has gone far enough. The industry that’s grown up around directories and articles I think proves this. Most offer very little use nowadays to natural searchers who are looking to find businesses in their local area.

      We should really be heading towards purely natural links created by real users who are interested in our client businesses services – I guess now mainly through Social channels. Having said that, how the hell are we supposed to satisfy our clients want for “instant results” in the search without using all of the above techniques? How is Google going to distinguish and put the best site at the top? Maybe Google is actually part of the problem, not the solution!!

      I guess we’re damned if we do, damned if we don’t!

      • Beamer

        You hit the nail on the head here. Natural links is the way to go. Phooey on link building and buying links. I think that is absolutely crazy to beg or buy links.

        So HAPPY to see a few here; you, Rob, and Michael Martinez, who actually know the truth about link building.

        Where have you guys been all my SEO life? I sure could have used your help letting a few “SEO Wannabees” elsewhere know the real deal. They had link building so ingrained in their brains because Google told them you HAD to do it. they couldn’t see the forest for the trees.

        Thanks guys!

    • Beamer

      Absolutely correct Michael. Link building is a myth that belongs in Mother Goose Tales with the gingerbread man and the three little pigs.

      Internal linking and natural inbound links work perfectly for me. Those natural links bring me plenty of traffic. I don’t actively advertise my sites anymore. I can spend my time doing other pleasurable things, like getting away from this computer and out into the sunshine. Feels Good!

  • http://www.dreamtraining.blogspot.com Man from Modesto

    My traffic has increased in the last several days. All my content is original and based on my experience and research: www.dreamtraining.blogspot.com

    I have Google PR of 4. Each day I receive 50 to 100 page impressions, as reported by my Google Adsense account. Last several days have all been over 100, except for yesterday, which had just 70.

    My only inbound links are from other pages on the blog itself.

    -Man from Modesto

  • http://onecoolsitebloggingtips.com timethief

    Thanks so much for providing both information and advice in your comprehensive article. I’m researcher and writer who has been aggravated by the dominance of low quality, no quality, duplicated content in the SERPS. Consequently, I have no empathy at all for the content farms or for those who spam multiple copies of their articles throughout the interent. Duplicated low and no quality content pollutes the SERPs. Do not need! Do not want! Go Google go!

  • http://www.hedgehogdigital.co.uk/ SEO Bedford

    Every time I master an SEO technique comes Google and raises the bar. Was doing quite well with article marketing and now thanks to these damn content farms it wont generate such good results. Mind you none of my clients have been affected by the Panda so I guess I’m on the right tracks. Nice.

  • http://www.quickmedical.com QuickMedical

    The online landscape changes with the search engines. There will be a shift in focus towards social media outlets

    • Anthony Jamese

      You are 100% right. Social Media outlets and true social interaction will determine your site presence on SE

  • http://www.hostgator-info.com russ

    just supports the fact that if you are going to be lazy and dont want to create content and build your sites out, then SEO wont work too well for you in the future… Article directories more or less just repurpose your content anyway…

    • http://adrianduta.info/Blog/ Adrian Duta

      Google is not on it 100% yet, nor will ever be. Marketing articles just as before will still work, even if it’s just for content related links and keyword pushing. Who needs PR? That’s just stupid.
      Keep working, you’re doing it right.

      Oh, and: SEO is not about the links? Says who?

  • http://ericbank.com Eric Bank

    1) What means “more natural linking progression”?

    • Brad

      How come you dont understand that your article on your site can easily be wiped out from google without you doing anything bad at all? 2 out of 4 of my very successful how-to’s on my number one blog are in omitted results and i never spinned and distributed any article from that particular blog. There is 20-30 results in google for those two of mine articles thanks to scrapers and around the same in omitted results where my blog is. I checked those bhat sites and they’re just autoblogs with nothing unique on it im sure, so why was my blog penalized when i never, ever published nothing but my articles on that blog. Google still loves my blog when it comes to my commercial keywords thank god, i just don’t understand why are my own how-to’s penalized.

  • Brad

    Sorry, replied in wrong box

  • http://www.gilmorehorsemanship.com Dan Gilmore

    I have noticed that searches I do on Google are turning up even more irrelevant results than ever before. And I think I figured out exactly what Google is up to: The longer you spend on Google looking for stuff that you probably won’t find the more advertising they can expose you to. I mean, if you search for something and you find it and it only takes you ten seconds, where’s the profit in that? Now, if you spend twenty minutes on Google trying to find something before you find it or give up trying, then that’s more time for you to be exposed to all the advertising and an increased chance of you clicking on one of those ads (or at least product/service ad exposure, regardless). Maybe the next algorithm will be called Google Farmer/Panda/Ferengi

    • Beamer

      I have noticed this as well, Dan. The search results are appalling to say the least. I believe you are right about the longer you search, the more ads you are exposed to, and G’s faith that users drink enough of their kool-aid to click on those paid links and make more money for them. It’s like people are so mesmerized by Google that all critical thinking ability has jumped out the window.

  • http://howtoincreasestaminainbed.com/how-to-increase-stamina-in-bed John Geoffries

    I really don’t know what all the fuss is about. Do a search for some long tail keywords with commercial intent and you will find a lot of ezinearticles and other article directories still ranking.

    So on one hand – google is trying to get rid of so called content farms, and on the other hand target thin sites – it can’t have it both ways.
    Sounds more like a very successful PR exercise by google.

    Stop listening to the hype, and look at the actual results before you change what you are doing.

    • Anthony James

      True

  • Allen Graves

    Hi Dan,

    I’m sorry, but you’ve touched a nerve and I just had to say something. Anything after this is purely business. ;-)

    Some of your points are valid and refreshing, however some of them show just how much you DON’T know (or don’t let on that you know) about article marketing, the state of article directories as an “industry” whole, and what is REALLY happening with the article directory traffic from Google.

    You speak about article marketing as an avenue for backlinking – as mass submitting a bunch of crap content. That’s not article marketing and that’s not what article marketing is about AT ALL.

    You can’t base an entire industry’s outcome from blog posts from 2 or 3 article directory sites and speculation from a bunch of…well… guessers. The danger here is focusing on what we WANT to happen rather than what might actually be happening instead.

    Speaking of article marketing in past tense like you did is short-sighted – and listening to some of the things you are saying, from my standpoint, throws a serious wrench in your words from an article marketing standpoint.

    When you (anyone) can seriously study a valid baseline of data prior to and following the Panda update, make an experienced and qualified judgement on your research, then test/confirm your findings, then you can’t tell everyone what’s happening – anything other than that is speculation and should be attributed to OPINION.

    I apologize for being so blunt, but I feel we all need to see REAL LIVE data on a consistent basis before we write things off. I could write forever about this, but I don’t think the comments field will handle it.

    Respectfully,
    Allen Graves

    • http://www.danderoeck.com Dan DeRoeck

      Hi Allen,

      Thanks for commenting. I value your viewpoints, you come across as somebody that truly stands up for good.

      I can also appreciate and understand your defensiveness, but please don’t take this personally. I’m an advocate of article marketing and want to stave off the wolves as much as you most likely do.

      However, you also have to look at this change objectively, from a business standpoint if you will.

      “You speak about article marketing as an avenue for backlinking”

      I personally use article marketing first and foremost, to produce useful content for my visitors and readers. Do I use article marketing for backlinks? Sure I do, it’s silly not to.

      The reason Google is taking objection to what’s happening, is the rubbish that’s spewing about on the Internet. They (Google) has become ridiculed for producing sub par results. I’m sorry if you can’t see that, but it’s right in front of all of us! I can’t blame Google for taking action.

      As a whole, marketers have taken “article marketing” too far, and I’m speaking of article marketing from a mass distribution standpoint, not as a profession.

      “Speaking of article marketing in past tense like you did is short-sighted”

      That certainly was not my intent. I’m actually trying to support the industry. Article marketing is important to me, but article marketing is in trouble as we use it today. It’s in trouble because of the marketers that use automated tools to blast thousands of versions of the same article!

      My overall objective from the article was to emphasize the need to pick up the quality as a whole. Article marketing cannot continue down this path, we need to improve. If that improvement comes through intervention from Google, so be it.

      Dan

  • Glenn Madden

    Well I love the Panda. I have a small content farm of sorts but it has real content and we have a business that supports every product on more than 200 websites. Each of these websites gets a new article as often as possible hand written for that site content. This still seems to help as we post the artcles, maybe even more so now.

    Since the Panda went to work we have seen an increase in sales and our advertisng income has more than doubled over the past few weeks, GO PANDA, GO GO GO

  • http://www.seonorthamerica.com Tom Aikins

    Your article states that high quality content is going to be given higher priority by Google now. This implies that Google can somehow tell the difference between high- and low-quality content. Just how is this done, exactly? Are you saying that Google can actually “read” like we do? That it can scan two pieces of text on a particular subject and tell which one is higher quality and thus deserving of higher ranking? That’s patently absurd. If Google can do that then why does it need an algorithm? Answer that one. Matt Cutts can talk all he wants about how great content is so important but the fact is that Google can only distinguish between duplicated content on multiple sites and original content. And I’m sorry, but original content is not necessarily good. Google has been fostering this myth for years because it has to. They can’t come out and say that their algorithm isn’t perfect and that crap like Demand Media puts out can rank because of it. They want everyone to think that the number one rankings on their SERPs are the best pages for the information someone is seeking but the JC Penney debacle put that to rest. Now they’re trying to show that they’ve fixed everything by coming down on article directories and similar sites. Yes, some of these sites have a lot of garbage but sites that I submit to mostly manually check the articles before approval so there are some sites that do have good quality content. Google uses a cleaver when it makes changes because that’s all it can do. If it could use a scalpel it would have done so years ago.

    • http://www.danderoeck.com Dan DeRoeck

      Hi Tom,

      If I understand you correctly, you are referencing: “Quality content will become even more important in the days ahead, especially if you are looking for long-term results.”

      I was referring to producing content that a) provides value for your readers, and b) attracts natural links. Attracts is the operative word. Sorry, I should have been clearer.

      The more advanced Google gets, the more difficult it will become to produce “artificial” results/links. Therefore, one of the best ways to achieve long-term results is to produce quality content.

      Look, I am not diminishing article directories in the least. I use them, and personally think they provide a lot of value. Cars provide value as well. But if somebody intoxicated gets behind the wheel, they become dangerous.

      Dan

  • http://kentsmith.myrandf.com Kent

    Great article. I agree with eveything that was said. I try to use these same priciples on my blog and have found it to be very successful in my Google rankings.

  • http://house-zakaria.com luki

    Hi,
    I want use this opportunity to express my gratitude for many useful articles I got from WebProNews till now… especially for this one
    -The Panda Reaps – Is Article Marketing Still Viable?

    Well, quality sites will be even more outstanding after this Google algorithmic change… It is well deserved… I think it is natural… we suppose to look up to the good websites and learn from them.

    Which sites will be affected? Well, lets be hones, each one of us who try to copy know when we are cheating… the standard is a standard…
    This is true for the Search Engines as it is for the real world.

  • Glenn Madden

    My “GUESS” is that Google will not 100% rely on its algorithms.

    Though it is impossible to maintain a fully user governed system it is possible to inspect one with a complex algorithm like Google’s and make manual adjustments as needed.

    I am guessing they might use gossip, reports, their own research, and maybe even a special Google team that just looks for content farms that or creating rubbish. There are some big ones out there and they are not hard to find. My guess is these will become targets and possibly manually degraded ratings will be given to these website and their entire network of sites.

    PLUS I AM SURE THERE IS SOME NEW ALGORITHMS GOOGLE HAS IMPLEMENTED THAT MAY HAVE HIT SOME OF THE SMALLER CONTENT FARMS WITH LESS SKILL TO CAMOUFLOUGE THEMSELVES.

  • http://chrisandsusanbeesley.com susan beesley

    This is definitely a good move forward for authors of good quality articles. There will always be “systems” that arrive on the scene to take advantage of changes in Google’s algorithms.

    However the good news is as you say that good quality articles from good quality authors will win through.

    Thanks for a great article Dan

  • http://www.writingreviewstoday.blogspot.com Chinemere

    With this new algorithm by Google, I’ve not noticed change in the SERPS, but have seen this change reverberate all around the world wide web, making content sites like Hubpages, Xomba etc completely reversing the way they do things(still wonder why many irrelevant search results still grace the number one spot on the SERP’s?).
    Good as this can be, I just want to ask one question- creating bookmarks as back links, is this step still worthy or is the panda coming down on social bookmarking too ?

    • http://www.danderoeck.com Dan

      Hi Chinemere,

      Social Bookmarking is a great way to “alert” SE’s, with sub par link value.

      I doubt you’ll gain anything in terms of link value, but you will get Google and other SE’s to crawl your site quicker and/or more often. It is worthwhile IMO if you do it on a large scale, i.e. OnlyWire.com, as opposed to manually.

      Dan

  • http://www.macam-2.com/ Jali

    For me it is still a good thing to the search things. More natural linking should be the priority. But how google determine this?

  • Ari

    So which directories are the “best of the best”? I heard ezinearticles took a big hit – are they still up there? Who else?

  • http://www.peoplequiz.com DaveH

    The change seems to have helped my site. The rank is up and traffic remains solid. The site is fairly original with fairly orginal content, and wouldn’t classify as an article farm, so it makes sense with everything I’m reading here

  • http://freelancewritingnet.com OnlineWritingExpert

    There is no doubt that article marketing was being substantially abused especially with wannabee writers producing exceptionally low value content, and then hoping to obtain high rankings. As a professional writer, I often cringed at the pure garbish that was frequently presented on certain reputable article directories i.e. no proofreading, with numerous spelling and grammatical mistakes. The new changes that Google instituted, is for the better because original quality content is undoubtedly a winner. Even EZA is now insisting on minimum 400 word articles in an attempt to up the quality.

    • http://www.danderoeck.com Dan

      Good point. I did not go into the changes EZA is making, but they have been fairly substantial. Hopefully the changes will be enough to get back in good graces with Google, I believe it will.

      Dan

      • http://www.indigo-herbs.co.uk Indigo Herbs

        I frankly don’t think that google is looking for this sort of content. They seems to want content on your site not the same content spread out all over web.

  • STR82U

    That’s a little biased sounding “the Farmer/Panda update was a laser sharp effort to disparage content farms, and claim back the territory they once owned” and incorrect in my niches; content farms are popping up in places they weren’t before displacing competitors of mine that actually were accurate and relevant, now there are articles there instead of the answers.

    • http://www.danderoeck.com Dan

      It was only meant to stress a point.

      A change of this magnitude will be far from perfect. One can only expect there will be a period of “righting the wrongs” for the unfortunate exceptions.

      Also keep in mind, there are other factors the Farmer/Panda update is considering.

      Dan

      • STR82U

        It’s understood Dan. I’m guilty of good and bad but got a front row microscope in exchange. Another obvious benefit, for those who didn’t improve sites but “built a better one” instead, is that the more “established” domain is another opportunity to improve. With HTML5 maybe?

  • http://www.dbais.com Chris Dbais

    It would be nice to be a fly on the wall at google and see where they are heading.

    Thanks
    Chris Dbais

  • http://www.onlinecheck.com/merchant_cash_advance_how_it_works.html Merchant Cash Advance

    well, it would be wrong to say that articles submission over web has been low and if it is than the google is losing tons of income..this would be kinda impossible…

  • http://www.packshot-creator.com PackshotCreator photo studio

    Great article on SEO and article marketing. Now, there will be higher competition with quality contents.Great!

  • http://www.ecoselectwindows.com Windows in Seattle

    The Panda update might be useful. I like the thought of a cleaner internet to surf.

  • http://www.seo-in-kent.co.uk/ lawrence kent

    perhaps to say article marketing is dead is to misunderstand true article marketing, if you mean article marketing as the putting an article spun on a million sites and then energising the links through some program connecting to social media sites then GOOD i hate this kind of rubbish content. However if you mean writing journalistic content that adheres toa publishing calender and is syndicated in an optimised manner (like a newspaper does) then no its not dead but very much alive…perhaps it just means you wont be able to pay someone in some far away country $2 to write about your local enviromental issue

  • http://www.webartistuk.com/services.html london seo

    Im sure article marketing is still good for backlinks if your technique is to only submit to the best 10 article’s per month with 1 article spun in 10 different ways…but i think the days of submitting the same article to 200 directories are gone, its a shame because i never even had a chance to try it out.

  • http://www.anthonymorrisontestimonials.com/ anthony morrison

    Article directory links will most likely drop in value, at least for the short-term. Therefore you should consider publishing content on your site, using article directories sparingly.

  • http://www.anthonymorrisontestimonials.com/ anthony morrison

    If you have been taking your work seriously then you already have top notch content and this should not be a problem. Google is kicking it up a notch so that “QUALITY CONTENT” is king.

  • http://www.virtual-sidekick.com Ina Stanley

    Like many of the others, this comes as no surprise to me. I haven’t liked the kind of attention article directories were getting for some time, especially when we worked so hard for ourselves and our clients to produce quality content that seemed to get constantly overlooked in the search engines because of content farms and the like.

    Our site has seen a bit of a boost since since the update, and as we’ve never solely relied on article marketing with our web marketing strategies I’m actually happy with the update and look forward to more.

    My advice isn’t any different from what’s stated in the article, but I will say that I’ve been seeing some great results by paying really close attention to our site’s link structure (particularly with categories etc. on our blog) and by making sure that everything that can be optimized is optimized – images, links, content, meta tags – everything. It will be a slower process, but if you’ve been focused on creating quality content you now have more of an opportunity to shine now that you’re not being overshadowed by content farms.

  • http://GregAndFionaScott.com Greg and Fiona Scott

    I think this is a good thing if you’re an article writer. The whole idea of article directories originally was for owners of ezines to publish articles from article directories. Imagine now if you post an article to ezinearticles and it’s high enough quality, if an ezine picks it up then you’re going to get more traffic.

  • http://www.industrialjigandfixture.com/ Jimmy @ Jigs and Fixtures

    KISS is the way to go, at least for me. who the heck could keep up with all this new changes. Sometimes I think to do the opposite of whatever the “gurus” preach.

  • http://www.allseoexperts.com All SEO Experts

    I must agree with most comments here. Quality is the king and it better stay that way. We still do “mass” directory submissions” but as part of a broader strategy including features articles on authority sites. After all, getting links from 200 “article farms” won’t bring nearly as many leads/visitors as well written content prominently placed.