2 replies to this topic

[BlaineSch]

Quote

The net effect is that searchers are more likely to see the sites that wrote the original content rather than a site that scraped or copied the original site's content.

Google algorithm change tackles content copying | Relevant Results - CNET News

My question is how do you tell if the content came from that site or not? Some people may link back to the original site, but not all people do. I highly doubt you que of sites to look at is going to be in updated order.

My best guess is you start to rank the sites completely differently. For instance if it's a toss up between "SiteA" and "SiteB" and later on it's a tossup between "SiteA" and "SiteC" then "SiteA" would get more seniority and more likely ranked higher later.

What do you guys think?

[LuthfiHakim]

Well, with the speed of google's crawler I think it's relatively easy for them to decide which one written earlier than the other. If I am not mistaken there is created/modified timestamp in web pages, right? This also helps the crawler to decide which one is the original.

On the speed of google crawler, yesterday I received a post in a yahoogroups mailing list, and only 5-10 minutes later it showed up in google search already (in page one)!

[Alexander]

I can easily presume that they have algorithms to see if the site is a news aggregator, in that case link or not it will be assumed to be less important than any other versions.