Syndic8 gets Wiped by Google - WordPress Style

17 comments
Source Title:
Waxy.org
Story Text:

Andy Baio unearths yet another "high PR site sans business model" spewing out articles on subdomains and sticking adsense on the pages. This time the links are plain text. Whoop dee doo!

Here's a list of the sites I found, with the number of articles indexed by Google and Google pagerank. At current count, over 194,000 articles are indexed.

- credit.syndic8.com: 27,700 (PR7)
- debt.syndic8.com: 8,780 (PR3)
- glasses.syndic8.com: 6,310 (PR6)
- insurance.syndic8.com: 38,400 (PR7)
- jewelry.syndic8.com: 4,010 (PR3)
- loans.syndic8.com: 37,400 (PR3)
- marketing.syndic8.com: 14,500 (PR6)
- mortgage.syndic8.com: 10,500 (PR6)
- personals.syndic8.com: 21,700 (PR4)
- training.syndic8.com: 25,500 (PR6)

Sooner or later people will realise that this is what a fair chunk of SEO's do for beer money.

Comments

 

You'll notice they have been wiped now...

 

For a moment I thought you meant syndk8.net

Ouch!

That must have hurt.

 

at what point do articles which have adsense next to them become adsense with articles next to them? and what type of sites aren't allowed to have articles?

I don't mean to defend this one especially (looked at a couple of the pages, couldn't be bothered to carry on) but there're a load of articles I see on various sites which I personally wouldn't give site space to and a load of sites which carry them - and a site called syndicate seems a fairly natural place for articles to me?

I'm feeling the slippery slope shadow this morning - this is another one of those 'intent' decisions and other people should only make decisions about someones intent when they're sitting in a jury box and there's a defence lawyer present.

 

I've had that same thought Gurtie. You could apply the same thing to any blog with Adsense on it - where does it end?

Many webmasters used to generate "content" as spider bait, now the do it to attract visitors that might click on an ad. I don't see a lot of difference.

Public hanging?

G-uillotine? There could be more to follow...

Google has to start somewhere, right?

BTW - the title of this thread has a misspelling. Intentional?

Public hanging

"Is it just that this was noticed and highlighed. If so, it is wrong that it was nuked imho."

This is what gets me too. Twice now something has been hung out to dry publicly by this well read blog and action was taken.

 

Not only that - I think G are on a public mission: Check out seoinc for starters...

I've wondered aloud a few times about how G will handle this type of thing now. It used to be all nicely enclosed within seo forums but now it's wide open for all to see..

Something tells me this could be a very bad thing for G in the long run..

 

It looks like the original outing was on Surfarama and picked up by Waxy? Who appointed them to be watchdogs?

 

I found this part of the story particularly interesting:

"By e-mail, a Google engineer also confirmed that the Google AdSense account for Syndic8's ad affiliate was terminated."

So Google are disclosing information on their clients to the people reporting the story?

Well, if they report them

they'll probably know they're AdSense clients, too - no confidential info disclosed then.

And, of course, denunciation has to be rewarded somehow: disclosing what's obvious anyway to make the snitch feel more importatn is a whole lot cheaper than coughing up a cash reward, he.

AdSense terminated?

I don't know what "engineer" the guy was talking to, but the account is still active. If the publisher was suspended, the AdSense would not be showing up at all, even if the AdSense javascript was still there and even if the site owner switched to another publisher ID.

 

Don't believe everything you read in a blog ('nuff said) : ]

 

So it's really really bad to publish poorly written articles which make people think they're written only to support ads on the page?

er, didn't Google express an interest in buying about.com?

Hehe...

Gurtie - do you really think those articles are below par? LOL

I know we all hang around at seo forums, but oh my, some articles are just too bad to be true... I often feel relieved reading just a mediocre one : ]

 

>er, didn't Google express an interest in buying about.com?

I think they just wanted to run up the cost for whoever bought it.

About.com ads OVER the article text

they just wanted to run up the cost [ of about.com ]

That's right - they were a little worried that AskJ might use it for self-resuscitation.

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.