Okay, enough is indeed enough. I’ve seen enough bullshit posted about content, duplicate content, plagiarism and chasing rainbows to make me wanna hurl. And, no, I’m not going to water it down to the PC ‘BS’ – you guys need to know how I feel; I treat you with the ultimate respect so as to not hold back when I think it matters, after all SEO matters.
First of all – and what really kicked me off – was a thread on Google+ by an Internet Marketer trying to sell Klout for five bucks a shot. Talk about misguided. Or low, unethical tactics – the first word that sprung to my mind was not ingenious or clever or smart AM tactics, but desperate. I’ll not name names, but, if you want to see what I mean, here’s the link to the thread; it requires you to have a Google account, I believe, to pick that up.
But what makes it worse for me – and a sure sign that the Internet’s gone to a crock of shit – is that this person has a huge following, yours truly included. Now, if I had so many followers, I would not be touting Klout at $5 a shot, rather using content to engage with so big a ready audience (provided that they are genuine followers and have not been bought) and using their trust as the funnel for any sales – not outright dangling the carrot of: I’ll improve your online influence for $5.
Am I right to chastise this marketer?
Well, the joint-leading authority (in my opinion) of everything SEO on the Internet, Search Engine Land (up there with Yoast, Joos and the gang, as I’m a bit of a WordPress devotee, although I do dabble in Tumblr and Blogger, too) have this to say on the subject, which I happened to drop in on the end of the thread: 4 signs you’re chasing the wrong goals in SEO
Is writing quality content really that difficult to create oneself?
Lightning never strikes twice, or does it?
To rub salt into my open-hearted, bleeding wound (why, oh why, Internet, do you allow this type of activity to happen? – you get my drift?) it was the way in which I found the search-engine land article that really pissed me off (got me pissed, for the US audience – which means something totally different in the UK; no, it didn’t leave me feeling headily, pleasantly intoxicated – I left that to the Tramadol).
Question: Do you guys use scoop.it?
We all curate Internet content – there are very few new ideas or news items per niche, just existing content with another blogger’s take on them and subsequently adapted to their theme, right?
Well, no, actually; quite wrong, as it turns out.
This Puritan believed that bloggers with integrity carried out their publishing by sourcing reader-relevant content and adding their own voice to the message to produce a new article worthy of the respect their audience deserves. Yet again it seems that my hopes have been dashed on that rock that forms one half of the hard place one so often finds oneself.
I ask the question again: is blogging so difficult?
Scoop.it is a great curation tool that lets you pick up a link to an article that you, therefore you believe your audience will, find interesting. It has a cover page, where you add your own two-penneth about what the original article means to you and could therefore imply to your followers; you can then distribute it to connected social media accounts, such as your fb page (or personal timeline), twitter, LinkedIn, Tumblr and/or WordPress accounts. In my business model, I write an article on my Tumblr blog, or someone in the golf niche uses the guest post service I avail to them, then ‘Scoop.It’ to the other online outlets with a bespoke tweet, fb post or article cover/synopsis and it eventually appears in my weekly ezine, UK Golf.
But what did I find on the cover of this particular ‘scoop.it’ for the search engine land piece? Just a blatant copy and paste of the first three paragraphs of their original article, with no insight from the publisher whatso f’ing ever or any attempt to add their own feelings or translate it in any way to their blog’s theme to enhance the article for their readers’ pleasure.
It made me feel like yelling into my mic: “Listen here you dickhead: your followers, being in that niche, have probably already read the f’ing article by search engine land. They follow you for your heart, your ideas, your thought-provoking insight. They do not want to see your idle-ass cut-and-paste of an article they’ve already seen in their inbox, anyway! You low-life twat!”
I saw the header in one of the LinkedIn writers groups last week questioning whether there were too many people who think they can write on the Internet. I don’t know about that (well, yes I do, but that’s probably best saved for another post, here), but I do think that there are ‘bloggers’ out there who think that regurgitating someone else’s exact content – irrespective of any DMCA laws they may be exposing themselves to – is blogging. Well, let me tell you, you content-thieving tykes: IT IS SO F’ING NOT!
If you want your content to reach your audience in a way that retains their loyalty, repays it even, then buying and selling ‘influence’ is a dip-shit theory that gives you a false sense of self-importance based on what the social scorers are telling you. You’re focusing on this aspect when you should be concentrating on creating. If you can’t create your own content, do not think that copying and pasting makes you a blogger, either. Step aside, get a job in a factory and let the people who can genuinely create work worthy of an online presence get on with it – you owe it to your ‘followers’ to go f’off and clock on. Capiche?