As I read and try to learn about the internet, I keep running across people talking about content spinners. Isn't the content that they create considered duplicate content? Or not? Does anyone use them for any other applications? Are there good applications for them? I'm curious on what everyone thinks about them?
Content spinners are used solely to get around being a duplicate. Although there are legitimate uses (publishing your work in multiple places) I think you will find that the primary use is by thieves stealing someone else's work.
They also have a very poor track record of producing a good, readable article. Many are so poor that they make no sense at all and it is often very easy to spot the use of one, which is probably why few spun articles are legitimate. A real writer won't want the garbage they produce under their name.
I have a distrust of any computer program that involves language. The programs I have seen merely rearrange words. I am guessing that most automated programs will read the spun articles as unique. The results are usually strange and looks like a poorly translated article. You have to clean up the article you had spun, or get flagged for the moderators. In my opinion, it would be better to just rewrite the article yourself.
It's not something I've ever explored. I think it always pays to write totally unique content. Of course that takes time but it's the best approach in the longrun. Still, there's always the possibility that others will steal content or spin it, but it's hard to avoid that.
If it is your own work and you plan on submitting to many directories then spinners are good. But it is a lot of work and I find it just as easy to write different versions of your article. Way less confusing and more interesting. Spinners are okay but more work than what they are worth in my opinion.
I know that HP doesn't allow content spinners to be used. However, I have heard of people using them and some versions are better than others. A good spinner wouldn't come up or produce duplicate content, and a bad spinner will just make a mess of the content to begin with.
When I was writing for my college newspaper, we sometimes had to write three stories (to be published on different days) about the same upcoming event. In effect we were taking the same basic information and giving it a slightly different slant-- to make a new original article.
I somteimes do the same thing today when I am writing press releases for an organization that are going to two competing news sources in the same market. So I guess that is a type of spinning.
I think spinning your own content so you can publish it in several places without dupe content is a valid use of a spinner but you should still go back and tweak it so it sounds good not mechanical or awkward. But stealing work and spinning it is unethical and lazy. I never use them, but I had one once I used soley for idea generation but it was useful then unstable for the most part- kind of wish I knew what it was called it was interresting how it worked- not spinning individual content but rather pulling from the web to create an article that often looked weird but ideas were ok.
Automatic content spinners work in two ways:
1. Simply replacing words with synonyms, which obviously results in lost meanings and confusion when read.
2. Putting content through a translator then translating it back to English.
Obviously each way results in difficult to read content, grammatical and meaning errors.
Manually spinning (basically rewriting in different words) takes longer but is the best way because you know what sounds right and can make it readable!
I agree, rewriting though I never thought of as spinning as your not changing "peices' of the work but rather rebuilding the content from the "concept" and it's framework.
I manage writers at a content mill and we have a service for rewriting articles that people supply to our writers but we are very strict in how this rewriting has to be done.
They are essentially rewriting the content 100% but recycling the framework (points, structure, ideas etc...) so they use it like someone who paints a scene- as a focal point or research but rewriting it so even next to the original a human being wouldn't see it as the same article.
The most popular use of this is rewriting sales pages- instead of paying 100.00+ to get one written from scratch you find one that's well written and have a ghostwriter rewrite it in new words for 10.00... I think it boils down to ethics and the writer/person using their head and not using it so much as a shortcut as a time saver...
To answer your original question - Bad. I can't see anything good about content spinning software. It exists to cheat and steal. The result will always be inferior to the original. Its like copying a painting badly - why would you want to do it? HubPages certainly doesn't allow their use here.
sounds like their only used to steal content!
if you don't touch it up it's bad, if you use it correctly there are legitimate uses. Although people do more than not use them for stealing/cheating it is a legitimate tool if used ethically and not to shortcut the process but rather to help it i.e. writers block uses I describe elsewhere in this thread.
Content spinners are terrible.
The web is a library. It becomes useless if it's just the same content spun over and over, slightly randomized. What good does that to? How can spun articles add any new value to the web or to readers, when they're just remixing an existing article? It's useless. It's like selling somebody a book they've already bought by changing the title and rearranging the order of the chapters.
Content spinners steal content. Most content spinners work by taking YOUR content and trying to remix it just enough that a search engine won't be able to tell which is the original. The content thief then posts the "spun" content on his/her own website to make money off of it, instead of adding anything of value for readers or the web.
And just think, the web doesn't exist in a vacuum, so all that spam and spun content is hogging space on servers that take massive amounts of power and energy to run!
Luckily, search engines are getting much better at detecting and penalizing sites with spun content. The Panda update includes tweaks to suppress domains with a lot of spun content. You can bet search engines will continue to refine and improve algorithms to fight this practice as much as they can.
I've reported a few spun articles here on Hubpages. If you look at the "flag" categories, one of the specific categories of spam they ask you to flag is spinning. It's easy to recognize -- since it was created by a computer stitching together content like a Frankenstein's monster, it never makes that much sense, and it doesn't sound like anything a living person would really say.
"The Panda update includes tweaks to suppress domains with a lot of spun content"
You know this or are theorizing? I know google wants that to happen but have not seen anything to indicate it is actually working.
Needless to say it would please me greatly if Panda has become even somewhat successful here - it would even help make up for the loss of a summer.
Agreed. Content spinners do not spin content, they spin garbage and to be both ignorant and lazy enough to try to get away with the use of such is destroying the internet by making it, in effect, unusable.
Would it not be a good idea for Google and the like to stop Content Spinners existing in the internet at all, before the search engines all around are landed with the job of picking it up and dealing with it before putting it up on our screens.
content spinners are used by a lot of writers when you must write several different articles for the same subject. there are some clients that may request this task from a freelance writer. if you dont want to use a content spinner or spinner software, you can manually spin an article. this means that you rewrote an article manually to provide the same content with different words.
hope this helps
Don't want to seem rude or to denigrate anyone's comment, and I say this in good faith, if anyone states spinners are bad then they simply do not know how to use them.
A content spinner is as only good as the user. A good user can spin content to an average of over 250% unique. Basically at those figures, even at 100% of course, the new content is original from the one article.
Spinners have their place especially when using it for a sound ethical backlinking campaign.
As for producing gibberish or content that is unreadable then once again, that is the users failing, not the software.
Once again, not looking for an argument or trying to put anyone down, just my view.
TerriGi: but is that respun content actually useful to the reader? Did it provide anything that the original article didn't provide?
Or is it just empty content, respun, for the purpose of earning money and backlinks?
If the latter, then it violates the quality rating guidelines used by Google -- and, presumably, other search engines -- and over time, their algorithms will evolve to detect and devalue that content for purpose so backlinks.
I really don't see how spun content provides anything of value to readers, users, or visitors beyond the value of the original article. And that is what all search engines are trying to rank well.
Read Google's quality rater guidelines. Sooner or later, spun content will lose.
If the article is spun and used on many different sites such as blog networks and article sites, it does add value. The article in essence only is the same with the content reworded.
As for Google they guide us to say our pages need votes and votes are backlinks. What they do not want is duplicate as they discount all but one link. Such as social bookmarking enmasse without changing the description or url.
I think there are two types of internet users who have an online presence. One is they do this for fun and the other they do this to make a few dollars.
While many might not condone this type of behaviour you must remember those that wish to make a few dollars could not give two hoots for that opinion as long as those few dollars are coming.
My point is though, that in the right hands a spinner program can be an asset, just like any social bookmarking software or rss submit software. When a user takes the trouble to understand the spinner program they produce articles often better than the first produced article as basically all your doing is "tweaking" that article.
For myself, I would contest anyone to identify my spun content. There are no tell tales or footprints with what I produce (ethically).
wonderful point made and taken. i agree that if the original article is providing quality content and you manually spin an article the second article can also be quality content. thats like saying a great writer can only produce one great article or piece of content.
thanks for your reply
i never used one for hubpages because it would be considered non-unique content, but i did try one out just to see what they were about and it took a decent article and turned it into an unintelligible mess that made it look like it was written by someone illiterate sitting in a third world country
That is a good point and one to be re-iterated is not to use any spun articles on Hubpages.
Some people find that by the time they have to go clean up whatever mess a spinner created in their original article, they could have just as easily whipped up other article (particularly, maybe, because the kinds of articles people tend to consider spinning aren't all that complex in the first place).
The following example may not be quite fair, because I've heard there are far better programs available than what's available in free, online, spinners; but I ran the paragraph I wrote above through an online spinner. Here's what I got:
"Some tribe discovery that by the duration they've to go cleanse up be it what it may dish a garden-spider call into existenced in their origin head, they could have equitable as easily whipped any other item Especially, it may be, on this account that the familys of parts tribe protect to keep in view spinning are not whole that complication in the first courtyard."
You be the judge.
Wow! That readily shows how bad it can really be. It makes no sense. But aren't there better versions out there. I can't imagine anyone considering buying software that did this. Now my curiosity is piqued. The engineer in me is coming out. I find it hard to believe that this is typical. What about quality?
True lisa but if you have writers block it may help you crack out of it- again using it ethically not to shortcut. I also agree with Terry as although google doesn't allow you to use the same content elsewhere without penalizing it the reality is that that same content may be useful in more than one site- for example what if people never heard of or go to Hubpages? They'd never be exposed to a brilliant article you wrote- The reason they penalize it is due to the theivery and rediculouseness going on these days but it also takes away from legitimate reposting of the content to reach a wider audience. In this case a spinner helps (again if you touch it up so it's readable and valuable content still) you to bypass the penalty and if ethically done not to cheap or get lazy- it's a good use of spinning.
As for the point on a spun article needing to "add" more than the original- in the case I mention here- the value addition is not based on being better or more valuable (more points etc...) than the original it's about it being more valuable because it can be seen my other people who'd never go to HP, ezinearticles, or whereever you originally post it.
It all boils down to ethics. It's a tool, it's not bad or good until someone uses it and then it's about how they use it.
You can bash someones head in with just about anything in your home but you can't say that because you can bash someones head with a hammer that a hammer is bad- it just is- it's how we use it.
Or to steal a phrase used in gun control- content spinners don't kill content- people do haha. This is another case of the idiots out there ruining it for the rest of us- but there are still countless ways to use the technology without breaking any laws, man made or ethics.
Backlink campaigns are only ethical uses of spinners if you use it on your own content not to steal and rebuild others or if your content published is weak due to spinning it....
Sorry about my typos- why can't we edit our posts but we can with our comments??
You can edit your forum posts for about 4 hours.
Online spinners are crap and useless. You need to buy a dedicated spinning program like magic article rewriter or Article Marketing Robot.
These are advanced spinners where the USER has complete control and quality assurance over the content produced. Its not just a matter of changing a word here and there.
Its all about changing whole sentences, whole paragraphs, dot points or numbered points, spinning anchor text and url's, images and video titles.
In fact, done right you can spin one article one thousand times. Print the first article, the 500th and 1000th, stack them on top of each other and hold them up to the light. That is the beauty of a spun article and all those in between - none will be the same being quality readable informative and nicely seo'd articles that anyone would enjoy reading.
Glad you're around to put the right perspective on the right kind of spinner. Personally, I wouldn't be "above" using one (not on here, since they're not allowed) for my own purposes sometimes.
Hi Lisa, I often use one article that I spin to some article directories and other blogs in networks such as Ning sites etc. To create nice articles from the one is a time saver for sure. The backlinks it brings are insurmountable.
With Google's fresh content filter a spinner can be a real time saver.
Unfortunately there are some ratbags that have given spinners a real bad name and I do my best to praise spinning software in the right hands.
Just as an aside, spinning can make thousands of articles. That is a lot of content that can be used to drip feed onto wordpress blogs and other sites. When done in one go or in batches, it is the submission dates and times that are tripping the duplicate filter for the content rendering it mute and a lot of people do not understand that.
Thank you Terry. I have so much to learn. I know that it is thru one of your articles that I hooked up with social monkee, and that I became acquainted with sunforged and his works. On the hub, I did ask you a question about one of the other things that you were talking about and you never responded. Do you know which hub it was and maybe could help me with the answer? I think it was in the same area that you were talking about social monkee.
If its about spinning send me a pm. Last time KatieM discussed spinning in the forum she lost her account I believe and I have been put on a moderate before publishing penalty. Its still there after some time, so HP don't forgive that easy, even though there must be a statute of limitations somewhere.
[EDIT] I found your question. In social monkee in your dashboard there is the rss next to your submission. The title is the page you bookmarked. Those are the ones to use when pinging.
One of my hubs was spinned...or should I say spun? ...Anyway, I think it depends if the content that is being spinned...spun (there I go again!) is your own, then spin on!
It has already been stated that spinning is taboo here on HubPages, and I actually appreciate that.
I don't spin, expect when I'm dancing...Go Muva...Go Muva!!!
Most Article Spinners are used by thieving morons who don't have the brain cells to come up with an original thought. Others are simply looking for the next magic pill. If you want to pollute the web with paraphrased shit that offers nothing new then it’s certainly worth considering. If you are a spammer, Article Spinning will most definitely a boost your nefarious activities.
It’s up to you and your conscience, can you live with yourself knowing you are a brainless thieving moron totally bereft of original thought? Dumb question really, if you are too stupid to make the distinction in the first place!
Not really a dumb question when you don't know what it is and are trying to learn. It would have been more dumb to believe all that you read elsewhere without checking it out and then use it to "pollute the web" because you did not check it out in the first place.
Everyone has to learn somewhere and if you cannot understand that, then that is sad. If you discourage people from asking valid questions, then they will proliferate the stuff that you espouse to be s**t. Even you had to figure out what it was before you could judge it to be a bad thing.
homesteadbound, that response was not directed at you. The question that I refered to as being dumb was whether users of article spinners want to be seen as brainless thieving moron totally bereft of original thought?
You, on the other hand, have had the common sense to question the use of article spinners beforehand.
Article spinners apparently make it easier for some people to "steal" other people's work. Buying the software, for any purpose, will support such an industry. But the same can be said for many dual-use technologies. Does article spinning software serve any perfectly benign purposes?
Excellent question, and one that I suppose I was looking for when asking my initial question. Thank you, Website Examiner!
Good point WE, I can't honestly think of one. Even if you spun your own content all you are doing is spreading content that no one wants or needs to read other than the first version they encounter.
Peter: I am not a moron, and I have used article spinner. Let me explain.
The Internet is full of these wonderful tools that will saver writers time in rewriting their own articles or those they have stolen by copy and paste, and of course those PLR articles that thousands of others have in their aresenal of articles too. So, I decided to try one. God, help the morons and the lazy. But my quick note to them is that if you have money to throw away, send it to me because I can use it.
This is what I did and what happened:
I took one of my articles and let the mechanical genius rewrite it for me. The mechanical genius, I love it. Actually I can't feel sorry for a machine, but I will say this, it is a moron too.
It cannot spell.
It does not use a thesarus or a dictionary
It spells by phonetics even if it does that
It replaces words with what it thinks is synonyms incorrectly, with incorrect spellings, and in the wrong places.
It does not know what a sentence is, let alone correct sentence structure including spelling, grammar and punctuation.
Oh, yes this wonderful Spinner. It spun alright. Imagine taking a bunch of strings and mixing it all up. What you get is nothing but a tangled mess, which is what spinners give you.
So, now I have my wonderful mess, and decide to correct it. Oh, yes people, you actually have to read the spun article, word by word, sentence by sentence and correct every mistake. Believe me, there will be plenty of errors.
To make this short, instead of using a spinner whether you waste your money on one, or find a freebie:
Just use your head and write your article from scratch. It will take 1/2 the amount of time that you will waste on the spun article. But, of course, you will need to know how to spell, proper grammar and punctuation also. But the flip side is that you need to know all of this when using a spinner that totally destroys the article it spun for you.
Hey spinners, I hope you saved the original.
LOL Peter. I expected a few errors, but OMG! Those things should be outlawed.
Oh, I forgot one important point about spun articles. Most of your submission sites can and do pick up on spun content, which is against their rules, and they will shut down your account.
Another point is, whether you manually spin your article or use a mechanical genius, you still need to run it through programs such as Copyscape, to detect duplicate content. Even if you believe that you just rewrote an article, you still need to do the same. If you don't do this, you will get flagged and penalized for DUPLICATE CONTENT.
Spinning is not a life saver, a time saver a benefit to anyone but those who are selling it.
"Spinning" content is not good nor bad, it's just a tool that can be used and also abused.
Writing mills already have ways to detect badly spun content to protect their customers from dupe content issues later and especially because they are selling "original" content not spun/similar/rewritten. When content is straight spun and not fixed, edited etc... it's very easy to detect with an algorithm (grammar filter).
Using a spinner incorrectly, As Linda said, is also a great way to lose your monetization accounts- especially Google. Many get away with it, granted, but it's just a matter of time.
It boarders on the difference between SEO and "Tricking" the search engines. SEO is about working WITH the search engines and although technically it's cheating, it's not something Google frowns upon because SEO is designed to help people not hinder them- but as spinners can be abused- so can SEO!!!
Now there is a GOOD way to use spinners none the less. If you have writers block you can crack into a spinner that grabs random content off the web and creates a semi coherent article for you. I knew of one of these years ago.
It would basically do keyword searches for content, then it used an algorithm to find content to copy and spin into an article- not sure what it was called but it was pretty cool for generating ideas.
If you plugged a keyword/phrase into it it would kick out a strangely written article but reading it would give you great ideas- thus breaking out of writer block on a subject.
I used this concept when I would write for content mills based on keywords they gave us-
I never used anything it found but it sparked my imagination. Another trick was using Google images with keyword search you just scan through the images until a "story" pops into your head- it's associative brainstorming.
I think that merely seeing article spinners as "a tool" (similar to a hammer) is wishful thinking. As far as I know, they come with a lot of technology like submission tools that mean they are designed to populate the Internet with hundreds or thousands of spun articles. The promotions seldom make the point clear that one should never spin content one does not own.
I agree, the makers are as bad as the people using them, but my point is not that they aren't being used and even built and promoted for rediculous reasons, unethical reasons, and the like- but that anything can be used as a tool or not- we're thinking human beings and regardless of their promoted reasons for being in existence, or why many use them- I don't think we should discount anything without realizing that it can also be used ethically, as a tool (like a hammer lol), and even in ways that have nothing to do with publishing!
You could use a particular one for a research tool of a sort... it's about htinking outside the box because sometimes the people that use the box, and the manufacturers of the box- whatever their reasons- aren't the end all of how something is used or what for...
I am not suggesting they should be banned, either. I can see your wish to experiment and that it might be helpful for analytical purposes. Which would probably account for less than 1 percent of all users.
Personally I prefer writing from scratch- but with research or awareness infusion to guide me.
I write for money but before that I write to contribute my own view of the topic which is a consolidation of research over the years including new things that spark me to write on something.
But it is also a consolidation of the wisdom I've acquired from learning and using the information.
In the end scratch writing is about taking the clay that I didn't invent in the first place, and turning it into an art-form.
There is no law stating two people can't mimic an idea, as even in them doing so the two pieces of clay will become something original and unique-
A new perspective is what is the true uniqueness.
Outright copying, rewriting so that the "shell" is exactly the same (the framework) as the article your rebuilding, I would consider plagiarism as your not infusing your own personal "style" and "form" of thinking into it.
The framework is essential to the uniqueness of the work as it's built out of the most unique source- your unique way of thinking, perceiving the data, and so forth.
As I said below- nothing is original as far as content/concepts- but even a rewritten article can be truly unique if it's done ethically and in the form of using your own style, words, and format to write it- not just duplicating someone elses words, frame, or even way of speaking/talking/writing.
Think about it in the way that a teacher walks into a classroom and 32 students see a dashingly crazy display of dancing and acting strange- then are asked to all write down what they saw- no two people will have seen the same thing- but they all witnessed the same event- it's not the event- the article- that is copied, it's the event fused into your perspective and displayed as a whole different way to enjoy and even comprehend something.
Take also into consideration that that new perspective may make information easier for others to understand than the original writer did- personally I tend to write metaphorically where data is too technical in nature.
Which means you are stealing other people's writing, which is a copyright violation. it's illegal. It's also unethical, exploiting someone else's work for profit without asking permission or giving them anything in return.
Even if you rewrite it, it's still stealing. It's still plagiarism. It's Paraphrase Plagiarism.
This is one of the many reasons why spinning software is wrong: it gives people the idea that it's okay to take and recycle other people's work.
Thank you, Greekgeek, Website Examiner, and Jerrico for you input into this thread.
I better stop though- getting too philosophical lol, and a bit off the topic... what a fun thread though! I enjoy both sides of the coin, I'm glad there are two views in here- it makes it exciting and sometimes it even changes my view over to the other side- I've ping ponged in here with my view- I try not to be rigid or static, as an open mind sees much more than one that is opinionated or rigid Hope everyone is having a great day!
Technically it's not stealing their work (if you mean rewriting), because technically all hubpage authors do research to write their own hubs, that research wasn't their work was it? It was read and used to come up with ideas and knowledge to write a hub. based on that assertion, most hubbers are stealing work- if they use any information (even rewritten) based on their research.
They do so to 1. learn more about the topic- this is ethical 2. Speed up their writing by learning through other people's research- what research is is basically reading what others have researched and written, they themselves likely also researched others writing and it goes on.
Are you saying that all people who do research should give those people's work money/credit/other?
Rewriting a sales page, for example, if it mocks the page exactly i.e. uses the exact structure and points and simply rebuilds the content as it is (simular) that borders unethical but if you take that information and build a sales letter BASED on what you learned from it- which is what our writers do- then your not stealing or pilliaging, your doing normal research. Our writers don't just rebuild line for line, they rewrite- in the same exact manner as one woudl research and build a hub that is original. There truly is no original writing anymore- original in the form of ones thought patterns that are unique to them- sure- but content? it's all just research consolidated into an article. There's a difference between "spinning' an article (changing out verbs etc...) and actually rebuilding it.
In the research rewrite process- even from one source- the rewrite is done abstractly with information gathered (awareness earned from reading it) from any one or more sources and written in that persons dialect. Just rewriting the article/sales page/etc... into your own words is not stealing, in fact since it's in your own words it's as original as it can get- no two people write the same, so the way it's explained alone is unique.
Are you saying that every hub you write you wrote without anyone elses work being read, seen, or regurgitated into your own words even years later? The fact that they use just one article as the research makes no difference- it's in how they rewrite it that counts. If they read it and rewrite line for line- they are stealing (technically) the format not the writing, the ideas, the concepts- they were found somewhere else by the writer they are rewriting from...
I can't see how anyone could rationalize a complete rewrite of anothers work as stealing or plagerism any more than you can say that researching then writing a hub is stealing ideas... ideas are shared and regurgitated through the filter of perceptions- that alone changes it's meaning and "adds value" to the work.
Just my opinion, your entitled to your own I simply see it differently but neither is right or wrong as far as I'm concerned.
Makers and Users of Content Spinners are most definitely only using and promoting them as means to quickly generate filler material to contain backlinks.
If the generation of backlinks to inflate your position in the search engine results makes you uncomfortable then so would the use of spinner software.
The description of content spinners is WAY OFF BASE here (not of the users, but rather the software)
I found that the time it took me to learn the software and then create unique articles that were actually as readable as Terry described was not worth it to me.
It was way to boring and tedious for my tastes, I can manually rewrite/spin/rephrase/ change voice, position or perspective easy enough to fit any multi site promo campaign I may have.
But that would be impossible for people who utilize press release services or article directories as part of their seo campaigns. For those who were discussing ethics .. press release services would be an example of a perfectly legit and ethical use of a content spinner. Anyways, that sort of promo technique does utilize 100's of copies of a piece of content and would never be feasible with manually rewriting or paying some odesk/fiverr schlubb to slave for pennies.
I mention these techniques, because I really dont think most of you have any idea of what your up against out here!
Even the big brands who you think are squeeky clean or deserve high ranking are actively hiring seos, who in turn may outsource some of the tedious work , ... as those required tasks trickle down, most of them are hiring people to do all of the above techniques, all the crap software, all the spinning,paid links, paid testimonials, email blasts etc etc
So, back to the actual spinner software ... seems the detractors used free or cheap software, got what they paid for and think they know something about the practice.
Nope ..you dont, I trialed The Best Spinner as I came upon a decent promo coupon via a membership site. This software program is actually connected to a main database and learns from its users .. the synonyms/replacement words it suggests dont come strictly from a thesaurus and are not specific to a single word. It recognizes slang and can replace entire phrases.
It could still produce garble and issues with tense and grammar. But, those that are willing to pay the subscripion fee and take the time to get used to it can probably clicjk a single button, spend 15 minutes putting it into the proper format and instantly have dozens if not hundreds of unique articles that would pass as being written by a human.
thats the reality of "content spinners"
THe reason that those of us that actually write our content arent completely swamped under these options is that luckily those that are drawn to such shortcuts often take too many shortcuts in other parts of their education and campaigns too.
But competing against someone like Terry above who outlined the care he places into the conversion would be impossible without equal talent with software or th budget to hire dozens of writers (who may just be using spinners themselves!)
The write for hire sites are filled with ESL writers armed with spin software filling requests for content at pennies to the article and they show no signs of being short on work!
So to the OP ... your likely to do more harm then good with a content spinner but the tool in the right hands is still quite powerful even with recent "advances" in search quality standards
by Theresa Kennedy 8 years ago
I'm looking for a sentence or two that are obviously spun from an article spinner program. I've been told they are easy to pick out, but want a few solid examples please.
by Rupert Taylor 3 weeks ago
There is a toad in Vietnam (I think) who has lifted several articles from Owlcation. You can find them here: https://citrineapartment.com/author/namhuynh/They have then been turned into a gibberish version of English; is this what's called spun?I would file a DMCA but it appears I am uniquely...
by BenjaminB 8 years ago
Now I know there is tons of horrible spun content here at Hubpages and I do believe that's total crap, but here's something I find totally funny on many writing sites.Many of the people griping about spun content, usually the ones who do so from an ethical viewpoint have portfolios filled out with...
by PaulaHenry1 9 years ago
I've seen this expression quite often, what is a "spun Hub?"
by kerryg 8 years ago
I used to have an eHow account, but when they closed the Writer's Compensation Program back in May/June, I removed my articles from the site and deleted my account.A couple days ago, I republished one of the articles here, and yesterday I got an email informing me that the hub had been unpublished...
by Melanie Palen 8 years ago
Let's say you see an article on someone's blog and website and they've got good information, but their entire article is extremely poorly structured, poorly worded, and just a gloppy mess.You could easily take the information they present and present it in a totally new way essentially entirely...
Copyright © 2020 HubPages Inc. and respective owners. Other product and company names shown may be trademarks of their respective owners. HubPages® is a registered Service Mark of HubPages, Inc. HubPages and Hubbers (authors) may earn revenue on this page based on affiliate relationships and advertisements with partners including Amazon, Google, and others.
HubPages Inc, a part of Maven Inc.
|HubPages Device ID||This is used to identify particular browsers or devices when the access the service, and is used for security reasons.|
|Login||This is necessary to sign in to the HubPages Service.|
|HubPages Traffic Pixel||This is used to collect data on traffic to articles and other pages on our site. Unless you are signed in to a HubPages account, all personally identifiable information is anonymized.|
|Remarketing Pixels||We may use remarketing pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to advertise the HubPages Service to people that have visited our sites.|
|Conversion Tracking Pixels||We may use conversion tracking pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to identify when an advertisement has successfully resulted in the desired action, such as signing up for the HubPages Service or publishing an article on the HubPages Service.|