Duplicate Content Is Not THAT Bad...

[Smuck]

Check this out. I posted an entry in my REW blog that is fed to my website. I cut and pasted from our local Habitat for Humanity's site in order to provide more exposure for their upcoming fundraiser.

Apparently, Google isn't as harsh on duplicate content as one would think. If a search is done for "habitat for humanity tri cities wa" in Google, my entry appears on page 1 of Google. And again, the entry is cut and paste content!

[VRI]

Yup, duplicate content refers to the uniqueness of the content of your pages... as compared to your other pages. The preamble is the most cited example of similar.

[Smuck]

BTW, I meant to add to the first post that the content I copied is in the home page of our local Habitat for Humanity (http://www.habitat-tcp.org/), of which is sharing the same first page position in Google. So, not only did Google accept the dup content, but allowed it on the same page (search page) as the source it was copied from. Interesting, don't ya think?

[seo matt]

Smuck, could you post the link to the search that has both sites on the first page? I only seem to get habitat for humanity when I search it.

[Smuck]

Smuck, could you post the link to the search that has both sites on the first page? I only seem to get habitat for humanity when I search it.

Wow! Maybe this is a case of dup content IS bad. My site is nowhere to be found in the first five pages when doing the search I cited in the first post.

VRI, if you are reading this thread, did you do the search earlier? I need a witness that I'm not going nuts!

[Calgary Agent]

Smuck -

I searched the kw phrase you posted shortly after your first post - you were nowhere to be found in the top 20 serps.

[seo matt]

Well someone had to experiment with dup content on REW blogs, so many thanks, Smuck. This thread will be all the more valuable if we can learn something about how Google might have penalized that blog post.

[Micheal Pannell Realtor]

it could be different data centers also

[VRI]

Smuck, no... I didn't do the search and SEO Matt, no reason to think that the blog post has been penalized.

What I was referring to was this: The Preamble

[seo matt]

Could it be that Google simply hasn't had a chance to parse the page yet? To date nothing after Jan 28 on Smuck's blog appears cached, but everything prior to that is cached away. Might be good to wait a few days and see what happens here.