Image via WikipediaThere is a small bonfire burning at the moment in blog and SEO circles around “syndicated content.” Syndicated content is the syndication of existing content on your blog or site. The debate mostly centers around duplicate content and search engines, with two negative points: using duplicate content may have a negative effect on your search rankings or alternatively have no positive benefit for your site with those search engines. Darren Rowse even went so far as to say “The long and short of it is that as a blogger you’re doing yourself and your readers a disservice by using ‘free articles’.”
I sympathize with the SEO debate, as ultimately you don’t want to damage your Google position, but the emphasis is wrong: think of your users first, not SEO.
Yes, that sounds like Jason Calacanis and ultimately his regular arguments in this case are right. If you are looking at syndicating content (be if free articles, news, whatever) will it be valuable for your readers or not?
Syndication and article duplication is not hurting the thousands of news site that syndicate news from companies such as AP, Reuters or even AAP. Check for duplicate content on any major news story and you’ll see hundreds, even thousands of legitimate mainstream media sites running the exact same stories. Why? because they believe running those stories benefits their readers in creating a more appealing news package as a whole .
Have said this, syndicating external content only doesn’t make for a great business plan. Original content is still the key. Only syndicate content where you believe that the content is complimentary to your existing, original content.
And for the record, I’ve looked at syndicating content here at The Inquisitr, and I won’t rule out syndicating content in the future, but only where it adds to the site.
