Article Marketing Is It Dead?

article marketing

Is Article Marketing Dead??  Don’t Ask Robert DeNiro, He Won’t Tell You

If you read my last Byzhub post, I talked about the Panda update and how it was more of article marketinga scare tactic/money grab by Google than anything else.  Google is about as tight-lipped as Robert DeNiro in Goodfellas when it comes to giving users information on exactly how they rank websites and discussing this topic in too much detail is as constructive as discussing politics, it’s a circle that leads to more questions than answers.  Panda did however make changes, and these changes did affect some sites.  Some article marketing directories were docked because of Panda, but getting links from quality directories is still very effective.  In fact, I still think it’s a great link building strategy.  For example I took a look at eZine (one of the big article marketing directories) web stats recently.  This site still has major ‘link juice’.  The truth of the matter is, article directories will never die because the good ones have a ton of quality content, and getting your article approved on these sites is still very valuable.

Now days, it’s more difficult to get articles approved by these directories.  The good ones have strict guidelines and many are reviewed by humans not computers.  Here are some things to remember:

  • Write your own articles, or at least review them thoroughly if you have a writer
  • Read the directory’s publishing rules (ex. some don’t allow links in the body)
  • If you choose to “spin” articles by rearranging synonyms in one article to create multiple unique articles, make sure you do it correctly and with care.  Spinning can be powerful, as long as you are providing relevant, quality, grammatically correct content to the web with every spun version
  • Don’t use spammy automation or submit to low quality content farms (it won’t help in the long run)

I’m a long-time marketing junkie who’s fascinated about the inner workings of successful businesses and the people behind them. Proud Vancouverite that lives for the sun, while avoiding rain complaining. Interviewer and founder; ceo1on1 and founder; VanWest Marketing.

Pete Banicevic – who has written posts on Owen Clark.


  1. Wayne F says:

    Only a lawyer would regard same-content articles with words replaced by synonyms as “unique articles” (a lot like getting off on a technicality).  Dude, its still the same article.  

    Its a disdainful practice and you shouldn’t encourage it, it only denigrates the web.   (You mention it, so tacitly you’re encouraging it.  Lets not spin that.)

    1. ByzhubOwen says:

      Wayne I do not see an issue with it, by posting on other sites you hit a new target that otherwise wouldn’t see or hear you.  If you don’t change it up Google punishes you, if they didn’t punish you people would copy and paste everywhere.  This process in mind eliminates the lazy ones.  The reason I do not have an issue is because I blog for and I admit and they know that I take popular posts from Byzblog and re-write them to post there.

      1. Wayne F says:

        Do you think Google is punishing the duplication just to make people a little less lazy, and get them to change up some words?  What do you think is Google’s intent?

        1. ByzhubOwen says:

          Probably to prevent robots from copying pasting content all over the web.

  2. Pete Banicevic says:

    I had a feeling you would comment again Wayne…  There are degrees to every thing.  That is why I said to only do this practice if you do it correctly.  A well spun article can include whole new sentences and paragraphs even sections NOT just single synonyms.  

    A talented writer or marketer should  have full control of their content and means of distributing it. 

    If you took some time and wrote a lengthy article on a topic you are passionate about and believe you can help people with the information.  It would be INSANE to give up and write a whole new article on a different topic.  By re arranging synonyms, sentences and paragraphs you are essentially giving immense value to the web by allowing others to read your work.

    Like I said there are degrees to everything in life.  

    Some people are responsible when they drink alcohol some people are not.  So are you saying you would ban alcohol completely because there are a few idiots who get tanked and get behind the wheel.

    I suggest you be a little more realistic as oppose to reading every statement Google says word for word.  Human beings are individuals and people should have the right to make smart decisions.

    Google likes quality relevant content that gives value to users.  If you read between the lines, there is nothing wrong with what I suggested in my post, and Google would agree. 

    And Owen you are exactly right.  If you have something awesome to say why not extend that to other audiences.  


    1. Wayne F says:

       Setting aside for the moment that you went from “…if you choose to “spin” articles by
      rearranging synonyms in one article to create multiple unique articles”,
      to “…A well spun article can include whole new sentences and paragraphs
      even sections NOT just single synonyms” (and I objected to the
      former, which were your words not mine)…

      The question (put to Owen) remains: what is Google’s intent?  Why does Google not want to see the identical content in two different contexts?  I personally endorse using your article in different places if it’s a good one – but not dodging Google in the process, that’s black hat SEO.  The question I put should be addressed more ethically.  Knowing the precise answer might present a much better solution.

      BTW, if you run an open blog format like this Pete try not to be dismissive
      when someone takes you to task for something you’ve written.  “I had a feeling you would comment again Wayne…” (audience imagines you rolling your eyes), et al.

      1. Pete Banicevic says:

        One of the cool and unique things about the Byzhub is It’s a 300 word quick hitting format so there’s no room for technicalities, that being said, It’s  apparent you’re not familiar with this topic.  So, if you want to get all technical; In article marketing SEO terminology, “synonym” can also refer to more than just a single word.

        1. Wayne F says:

          Hmm, it’s a cool thing that ByzHub’s 300-word limit leaves no room for
          technicalities?  So you have a excuse for making gross generalities?

          Anyway, here’s the reason Google “punishes” duplication: to avoid having the same content show up multiple times in a single search.  And it’s not “punishing” – it’s filtering so that your content only gets indexed once for a specific search term.  Why on earth would anyone want to see the same article show up three times in one search – dressed in 3 different costumes?  I used to see that ALOT, and I hated it.  Thanks Google for reducing that irritation.

          And THERE’S your solution: your content should appeal to (at least slightly) unique search
          terms relevant to the different contexts it is placed in.  3 versions, 3 indexings – so long as they’re not all precisely the same search term.  At the very least, changing the title should be a given.