If other websites implement our RSS feed sidewide on there website, can that hurt our own website?
-
Think about the switching anchors from the backlinks and the 100s of sidewide inlinks... I gues Google will understand that it's just a RSS feed right?
-
I am more of a layperson, and joined this site to research certain topics.
I wrote a blog post on the topic of RSS feed scraping and content theft .. which if I understand it was not exactly the OP question.
Having read the other answers here, however, I am actually wondering if my blog post is inaccurate ... or incomplete, and needs correction.
Are you all saying that there is no harm in your RSS feed being scraped, and it might actually be helpful due to the backlinks you might get? Or are you saying that Google ignores those links as it is clear they come from an RSS feed?
Or, am I misunderstanding your point entirely?
THanks for clarifyingl Here is the post if anyone wants to scan it and respond.
Thanks
PS if I have misunderstood the protocol, and am not to piggyback on someone elses topic, or add a link, please advise. My first foray into this forum
-
Hi David,
Thanks for the clear explenation!
The ownership implementation is a logical but good idea! Dit didn't crossed my mind until now
-
I do need to give recognition to David's answer below. For while most of the time you don't need to worry about RSS links, I've heard of webmasters who've been stung by this. It seems likely to hit lower authority sites harder.
If it is a concern, at least you have the power to do something about it.
1. Always place a rel canonical on every page, with an absolute URL (full path) This way if the scrapers take the whole page, the canonical link pointing to yourself might stay in tact.
2. If you suspect over-optimization filters you can de-optimize your anchor text, or add greater variety.
3. In extreme cases you can file a DMCA takedown request of your copywrited content, but at volume this solution doesn't scale, and is a messy business regardless.\
Regardless, these are for the minority of cases. Most of the time you shouldn't have to worry about it.
-
Hi Cyrus,
Thanks for your reply! As I thought Google wil understand it and ignore RSS generated links.
Above I explained my question, beceause I gues I was a little bit to short...I just copy-paste the addition from above:
I don't mean that I put 100s of link in the RSS feed but, when our RSS feed is shown on an other website, we receive backlinks from that website (through the RSS feed) with switchin anchors. In addition is 9 of the 10 times the RSS feed implemented in the sidebar, so sidewide links. The question is if this situation can hurt the website?..Did this clear my question?
But your answer is clear... Google will understand and ignore just as I expected.
So we don't have to worry about this issue I guesss...
-
Hi David, thanks for your insights...
Maybe I didn't wrote down the second answer as clear as possible..."I am not sure exactly what the question is in the second part. Are you asking if you should put hundreds of site-wide links in your RSS Feed? Either way, here is good measure to take"
I don't mean that I put 100s of link in the RSS feed but, when our RSS feed is shown on an other website, we receive backlinks from that website (through the RSS feed) with switchin anchors. In addition is 9 of the 10 times the RSS feed implemented in the sidebar, so sidewide links. The question is if this situation can hurt the website?..Did this clear my question?
-
Normally, I would bow out as I must be mistaken to any of the SEO Staff at SEOmoz as each of them have forgotten more than I will know. However, I have spent a lot of time on this issue, I learned jQuery for the reason of combating this. I am 100% certain, at least for how it was between June 2012 and Feb. 2013.
I realize that Google has stated they can tell the difference but, Google has a policy of misinformation as part of it's strategy to protect search integrity. I give misinformation it's due credit, it ended the cold war, but it also means you cannot trust anything Google says until it is proven true.
You can parse an RSS feed in a manor that will not retain anything to identify it as coming from an RSS. Google will only know it is your content by chronology, in other words that they always find it on your site first.
How would google know that this:
Came from an RSS feed? It is just an a link, identical to the other billions out there.
I have tested this with two WordPress Installs. Both had Google Analytic and were Verified with Google Webmaster.
On the first I would post articles of 100% original content. On the second I would pick them up and then parse the feed, post it as a post, mention it on the social medias and 100% of the articles would stay indexed on the not original domain and 0% would stay indexed on the original domain.
Then, we switched and had 100% indexed on the original domain. We tested it again on two more domains that were not new. One a PR3 and one a PR1 with the exact same outcome.
The single best thing you can do is post it on Google+, in my experience, after I post on Google+, within just a few minutes I have Google bot on the page.
Establish ownership on each of your pages with meta author or meta publisher tags too, it will help a lot.
-
I'm hesitant to give a definite answer on this. Short answer: Yes, Google should understand these are RSS generated links and typically ignore them. But I've also heard grumblings from webmasters who swear this isn't true.
A better question might be: why 100's of sitewide links? And why are they included in the RSS? The RSS typically includes an article body without much additional navigation. If you address these issues, consolidating your links and cleaning your feed, I'd say you likely have little to worry about from scrapers.
-
To answer your first question, yes it can hurt you. Are they doing this without your permission? You can always send them a take down notice. You will find a great article here by SEOmoz's Sarah Bird titled 4 Ways to Protect Your Copyrights.
I am not sure exactly what the question is in the second part. Are you asking if you should put hundreds of site-wide links in your RSS Feed? Either way, here is good measure to take.
-
Make sure you are pinging your posts to more than just one service or so.
-
Make sure you are linking your posts on Google+ as soon as you post them and Facebook / Twitter / Etc. Too.
-
Make sure you have SOME good links to establish clear ownership of content.
-
I would not put a bunch of links in these feeds. Google may see this site, which is probably involved in other not so great activity as a desired backlink to you and you could end up with undesired association, especially if the link count is very high.
-
There is nothing about an RSS feed, once parsed and restructured as a web page that will make it known to Google that it was an RSS Feed.
-
Why do you have an RSS feed and does anyone follow it?
If you do not have anyone following it, you may want to just shut it down for a while. If you have a good following for it then that is not an option. I had an issue with copy-n-paste content hijacking and we put a small bit of JavaScript in that would whatever you wanted into the clipboard as they copied and then they would paste it in their site. We noticed a big drop in activity after they noticed alerts on their website like
"ALERT: All readers of the content, I have a confession. I have stolen this content and I am involved in Blackhat SEO. For those of you who do not know what that is you will probably know my tools. Ever had a virus or got spam mail? You got that because of visiting sites like mine. Please click here to report me because this message was actually inserted by the guy I stole this from and I do not even realize it is here yet."
Not only does it reduce the theft, it is also fun for the whole family. I am sure by now there are similar tools for RSS.
-
Got a burning SEO question?
Subscribe to Moz Pro to gain full access to Q&A, answer questions, and ask your own.
Browse Questions
Explore more categories
-
Moz Tools
Chat with the community about the Moz tools.
-
SEO Tactics
Discuss the SEO process with fellow marketers
-
Community
Discuss industry events, jobs, and news!
-
Digital Marketing
Chat about tactics outside of SEO
-
Research & Trends
Dive into research and trends in the search industry.
-
Support
Connect on product support and feature requests.
Related Questions
-
New Website SEO Implications
Hi Moz Community, A client of mine has launched a new website. The new website is well designed, mobile friendly, fast loading and offers a far better UX than the old site. It has similar content but 'less wordy'. The old website was tired, slow, not mobile responsive etc but still ranked well. The domain has marketing leading authority and link metrics. Since the launch, the rankings for virtually every word has plummeted. Even previously ranked #1 words have disappeared to page 3 or 4. New pages have different URLs (301s from the old urls are working fine) and still score the same 98% (using the Moz page optimiser tool). Is it usual to experience some short term pain, or are these rankings drop an indication that something else is missing? My theory is that the new URLs are being treated like new pages, and that those new pages don't have the engagement data which is used for ranking. Thus, despite having the same authority of the old pages, as far as user data is concerned, they are new pages and therefor, not ranking well - yet. That theory would make logical sense but I'm hoping some experts here can help. Any suggestions welcome. Here's a quick checklist of things I have already done: complete 301 redirect list
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | I.AM.Strategist
New sitemap
Submitted to console
Created internal links from within their large blog
Optimised all the new pages (img alts, H1s etc) Extra info: Platform changed from Wordpress to Expression engine
Target pages now on level 3 not level 2 (extra subfolder used)
Less words used (average word count per page from 400+ to 250) Thanks in advance 🙂0 -
I have implemented rel = "next" and rel = "prev" but google console is picking up pages as being duplicate. Can anyone tell me what is going on?
I have implemented rel="next" and rel = "prev" across our site but google console is picking it up as duplications. Also individual pages show up in search result too. Here is an example linkhttp://www.empowher.com/mental-health/content/sizeismweightism-how-cope-it-and-how-it-affects-mental-healthhttp://www.empowher.com/mental-health/content/sizeismweightism-how-cope-it-and-how-it-affects-mental-health?page=0,3The second link shows up as duplicate. What can i do to fix this issue?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | akih0 -
How can a Page indexed without crawled?
Hey moz fans,
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | atakala
In the google getting started guide it says **"
Note: **Pages may be indexed despite never having been crawled: the two processes are independent of each other. If enough information is available about a page, and the page is deemed relevant to users, search engine algorithms may decide to include it in the search results despite never having had access to the content directly. That said, there are simple mechanisms such as robots meta tags to make sure that pages are not indexed.
" How can it happen, I dont really get the point.
Thank you0 -
Google does not favour php websites?
Hi there. An SEO company recently told me that google does not favour php development? This seems rather sketchy, I have not read that google doesn't favour this anywhere, did I just miss that part of SEO or are these guys blowing a little smoke?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | ProsperoDigital1 -
How can I penalise my own site in an international search?
Perhaps penalise isn't the right word, but we have two ecommerce sites. One at .com and one at .com.au. For the com.au site we would like only that site to appear for our brand name search in google.com.au. For the .com site we would like only that site to appear for our brand name search in google.com. I've targeted each site in the respective country in Google Webmaster Tools and published the Australian and English address on the respective site. What I'm concerned about is people on Google.com.au searching our brand and clicking through to the .com site. Is there anything I can do to lower the ranking of my .com site in Google.com.au?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Benj250 -
Can google read ajax
Looking to load a one page product view instead of 10 pages of pagination. Does google read ajax and see all 10 pages as 1 page.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Archers1 -
Website rebranding, what should I worry about?
Hey guys, A client of mine will be doing a rebranding exercise, this include changing their brand name and their domain name. They are considered a well known brand within their industry (Their brand name shows up in Google's "Search Related to..." section) My question is: Apart from making sure all 301 are put in place,changing all the links to point to the new domain and doing PR exercise, is there anything else I should keep in mind / be aware of to ensure a smooth transition? Also can anyone come up with possible issues we might encounter during the move? Apart from having a significant drop in traffic and rankings? Thanks, Clement
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | NextDigital510 -
Do interstitials hurt SEO?
If you go to www.homeportfolio.com and click on one of the links in the footer. you'll notice you are presented with an interstitial. Can you tell me if that hurts our SEO and if we lose any link juice or suffer in any other way as a result of this linking method? my main concern is whether having anchor text that says "bathroom ideas" that goes to an interstitial that doesn't mention bathroom ideas is non-relevant... even if it refreshes 12 seconds to a page that is.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | KaplanSEM0