All This Fuss About Duplicate Web Content

There's an attempt by the search engines and content owners to clean the web and many Web content appears to be limited. That, when a piece of content is published on a Web page, it may not be published elsewhere. Period. Seemingly admirable movement, like the way we live and fully expose the information goes to the opposite. Japanese tsunami disaster movie clips that end up being stored's television programs and Web sites showed a very large number, ie multiple copies all over the net was exactly the same content. President's address is broadcast on several TV stations globally, the same movie, ie multiple copies of the content material and web sites is a great number. The teachers to their students the electronic hand your notes, exactly the same content sits on a number of web servers. The list just goes on and on! If the cleanup activity is successful, which I seriously doubt that it will, we watch a television station, read a newspaper, go to a university in the state 'unique and quality "to approve materials.

Of course, opponents of multiple content has not been properly introduced to share and distribute content. Content delivery network, to reduce CDN: There is a scientific term for it. Its main use to reduce latency and increase bandwidth use, why exactly is required to distribute content is repetitive. For the sake of satisfying a large set of users, I recommend a solution. There is a desire for two types of materials: for archival (1) content and (2) to share content for reuse and republication.

We start with archival materials. Academic world for decades have been using this model. The way it works: you an archival media (magazines, internet sites, etc.) to publish certain material. A central repository content referral (ISI and Scopus come to mind) is indexed by. When a scientist wants some information, the index data base queries and information that is needed. Than a functional model that only a small percentage of published materials archived and the content may be republished or reused not seem to be like. The upside is that there is any material so long as the writer wishes to maintain the archival situation is not repeated.

Content for reuse to meet the need of a second model has been adapted from the news industry: content syndication or distribution. The way it works: you publish anything on any web site and free access is allowed to use such distribution (or all parts), or republication, provide source material is acknowledged. Of course it will generate multiple copies of the same material, however, that effect, such as book publishers and all the countless copies distributed in the same book when you buy the digital version and a web server host, then the content to be multiplied. So here I am proposing: something about you, you state that it can be archival or for free distribution, and accordingly publish content, ie type archival Web site or distribution network.

What about search? Lead to poor search experience multiple materials, such as 5 would be similar to the top ten results come from? Google has done a great job to find similar or nearly identical content and flagging them as duplicate. Top 1-3 the rest still use this one to the visitor should see all the results would have been lumped in with the list may list as well. The extent that such information is duplicate content, yet great search algorithm based on the spread must be the end result can be tolerated for Repetition free (or at least).

Web content is bad for so many? Which not. On the contrary, it is bad for the enemies of multiple materials. Here's why. When you have a publisher, its membership base, aka your bottom line in multiple materials are cut. If you offer your page to archival material, multiple material impact your site's traffic and reduce your monetization, such as selling advertising can be. If you are a search engine, multiple materials and their ad revenue effects of a headache. We admit it: Download and readily available material is bad for business, especially if it has multiple copies!

http://www.photosig.com/go/users/view?id=354450
http://ostatic.com/member/tomhooper6
http://rockthebike.com/users/johndenial9
http://www.hot4s.com.au/user/markwaugh5
https://support.mozilla.com/en-US/user/406802
http://www.melodramatic.com/users/tomhooper6
http://www.melodramatic.com/users/johndenial9
http://www.texasatvs.com/MemberProfile.aspx?MemberID=9894
http://community.sessionswithcesar.com/members/johndenial9/default.aspx
http://www.supernova.com/markwaugh5/blog/5355/hello
https://www.flatworldknowledge.com/users/johndenial9
http://americancowboy.com/users/tomhooper6
http://www.getfitmississippi.com/user/18119/
http://www.photosig.com/go/users/view?id=354453
http://community.sessionswithcesar.com/members/tomhooper6/default.aspx
http://www.texasatvs.com/MemberProfile.aspx?MemberID=9895
http://www.teachingenglish.org.uk/users/markwaugh5
http://cs.finescale.com/FSMCS/members/tomhooper6/default.aspx
http://www.wellsphere.com/johndenial9-profile/225121
https://support.mozilla.com/en-US/user/407650
http://americancowboy.com/users/markwaugh5