Web Publisher or Content Farmer?

Are you a Web publisher or Content Farmer???

Well – if you asked me – the term “content farms” which is being tossed around in the mainstream media, is misleading and while intended to be a negative moniker – it’s really more of a statement about how stupid the search engineers and Public Relations people at Google can get when dealing with the public in regards to their ever changing algorithm tweaks.

Take this article on the NPR org site Web’s Content Farms – Grow Audiences For Ads. It has pulpy semi-newsy tidbits of info that try to explain the Google Panda Farmer algo update and if you ask me – it in itself is a “low grade” article – even though it is written by a “so called” professional “staff writer” as opposed to an internet writer. Oh and they used spellcheck very well – so I guess that makes it a higher grade right there.

Sure – this big Google Public Relations blast exploiting Panda Bears and Content Farming explains the situation in general terms most plain simple folks can understand, but personally I feel this ploy to gain respect by Google really fails to deliver any solid worthwhile information other than lame quotes from Google staff and a watered down translation and insincere explanation of what some sites are doing as web publishers.

What I want to know is when did web publishing become anything lower or less respectable than say a printed mag on the news stand? Is it the article quality or specific sites that got too powerful that needed to be knowcked down?

My theory is it is not really about quality or lack of quality… it’s about putting a few sites like ezinearticles.com in their place because they were too powerful. Their high PageRank helped them rank on top for almost anything and it was time for them to get spanked.

Not everyone can be the Smithsonan and deliver museum worthy high brow text. And to be honest – people don’t always want that. They certainly don’t want it on the internet. If they DO want it – they’ll go to the source – not look for sites on Google.

People want bite sized bits of information on a good looking page with pictures and videos that make them smile. People surfing the net are not always looking to challenge their brains by thinking too hard.

Just because ezinearticles, eHow or Huffington Post may not do 10 page thesis styled articles on “How to Get Dates if You’re Single and Live in the Country” doesn’t mean the quality is always poor or indicative of the information presented sitewide.

If you asked me – Google was doing a POOR JOB and let a few sites get top rankings when they should have been doing a better job of scoring specific pages. Now Google has fixed that and instead of saying we blew it – they’re spinning it as the fault of “content farms”.

Sure – no one site should get top rankings unless they deserve it – but don’t blame it on the quality of the site – blame it on your algo and how it favored those big sites with high PageRank and didn’t deliver the best results.

My point is that I personally feel it is not anyones business to try an classify and generalize about web publishers overall unless they are pointing to specific examples.

Not every article NPR publishes is a good one. It doesn’t mean they should be considered as evil. They’re just doing what magazines and newspapers do. It may be a so called “content farm” but so what – PUBLISHING is a business about CONTENT!

Hot tip from a wannabe Content Farmer aka Web Publisher: >>>

Need cheap content for your web site? Consider using PLR Articles from Underground PLR – the articles are much better thanmost content farms and you can rewrite the articles to suit your purpose!

> Internet Marketing Blog

> Article Underground PLR Articles

> Marketer Friendly