content
Duplicate content in search engines
There’re various opinions around how Google and other search engines deal with duplicate content. Google’s comments on the matter give an indication of how they deal with it, and the main takehome points are:
- They can usually spot unintentional (i.e non-malicious) duplicate content
- In the above case, Google will simply index the content it feels most relevant to the query that’s been typed in (so analysis/decision is done on a per-query basis), and will give users the option to see similar-looking results from that site – see below:
- In the case of webmasters trying to game search results by keyword/content-stuffing, they’ll spot that too – and will penalise accordingly.
This is good news and everything, but it does rather raise the question: How can Google tell if you’re malicious or not? And what if Google misunderstands your content and accidentally tags you as a spammer?
If you’re new to web copy writing content/management, duplication perhaps doesn’t sound like an issue…but from a search perspective, it can be. Why could you be penalised? How do you get round it? What are the options? Read on and find out…
1Image(factory) isn’t everything
In order to prove that I’m not obsessed with online shoe e-tailers, I’ve been on the lookout for other sites that are really crying out for a review…and I’ve been pointed toward Image Factory‘s site, a UK-based printing company owned by US print giant Quarto. So what follows, predictably, is…
A critique of www.imagefactoryuk.com
Perhaps naively, I thought a printworks would be chock-full of creative people who’d not let their company website look like the pavement outside an all-night takeaway. Was I right? Was I wrong? Read on and find out. I know you just can’t wait…
0Google to index Flash content
So, a recent update by Google announced that they’re to start indexing Flash content. This is good right?
Well, at first glance yes – since generally speaking, it’s better to index content than not. But there are other more worrying ramifications.
That’s a good word, that: “ramification“. RAM-ification. Sounds like a vetinary term.
The problems I foresee are thus:
- This Flash content will show up in the SERPs, but Flash sites are usually built in one giant file – making deep-linking impossible. So a user will search for a phrase, see a match, click it – and then be dumped at the entry point of the Flash site – nowhere near the information they wanted to find. Great user journey there.
- It could encourage more online design agencies to build more Flash sites. Expensive Flash sites…
- …which will have content that is still inaccessible to screenreaders and similar.
I just hope this doesn’t signal the start of a deluge of agencies recommending to their clients that Flash content is suddenly fine to use. The only way it’ll work is if Google works out a way to deep link into this content – or site developers build start building Flash sites differently to allow it.
Don’t get me wrong: when used properly, well-executed Flash content is invaluable…just don’t build an ENTIRE site in it.
1