I think HubPages has become a much better place after the Panda update.
Another newbie here. I really like hubpages. I'm finding lots of quality writers on here, and I enjoy reading their stuff too. Ezine seems to me a bit like content fodder. Here I feel I can be more creative.
Ezine is mainly to expose your knowledge and writing skills, no earnings from them. HubPages has been improving, albeit slowly. Across the board some are reporting better earnings and improved viewership.....
On the whole, in my opinion, I think HubPages is a better platform and forum than Ezinearticles. Your articles get published immediately, whereas with Ezine the one article I published there took about a week to post. Also, Ezine kinda subtly pressures you to buy into their premium service, giving you instant publishing and other perks. Otherwise, in terms of quality, Ezine and HubPages are quite close (Ezine probably has an edge in screening content to ensure high quality).
Also, the opportunity to earn at least a small trickle of revenue from HubPages gives me a sense that I'm a paid writer, albeit a "starving artist". With Ezine, you're just giving away your material with no compensation, except for the publicity (which I'll admit is worth something).
I am seeing more "junk" postings on HubPages (especially a lot of repetitive stuff on SEO). However, I also think Hub has lots more diversity in subject matter and interesting material.
I don't see the comparison. Hubpages is for earning directly from your content. eZine is for promotion of your content that earns (whether it be on a rev share site or your own website.)
I'm very new to HubPages, but I've been a professional writer for many years. It sounds like Panda was designed to upgrade the quality and credibility of online content. If so, that has been sorely needed for a long while - the past decade has seen a huge decline in real journalism and true original (but compelling) writing. I have seen some really poor writing on this site, as well as some of the best-quality writing I've seen anywhere. Those of us who earn a living through writing need to be in a venue that maintains integrity, ethics and high standards for its writers and readers. We all suffer when anyone can post anything, whether it's properly written, original, readable or not. Some hubs here, while perhaps written by well-intentioned wannabes, are nearly unreadable. Those seem to be in the minority, but they harm all Hubbers if they're allowed to publish junk writing.
Junk content is yet another issue. If Google Panda can help rid the Internet of scammers, abusers, thieves who steal our content and other parasitic postings, we will eventually all be raised up and benefit.
If this site suffered a few hits in the Post-Panda era, maybe it was because there were weak spots in the overall content. I'm glad so many of the excellent writers with strong followings have stayed - it helps HubPages continue to recruit quality writers.
Content writing on professional sites should not look like a teen blog, or Facebook. I hope Panda can help elevate the standards for everyone involved. Again - I'm new - please don't flame me for feeling this way!
I can almost guarantee you will get flamed, because there are several high quality writers here on HubPages who got badly "hit" by Panda. And they are rightly sensitive about the suggestion that maybe they can't write.
The trouble with Panda is that it may be designed to upgrade the quality and credibility of online content - but it doesn't work. Top quality, informative blogs were wiped out overnight while spammy sites full of plagiarized content still thrive.
flame you? never-- I totally agree with you :-) I often flag hubs that are really off the charts bad so that a member of the Hubpages staff will at least look at them and either get them fixed or unpublished. Seems to me the community needs to police itself in terms of keeping at least minimum standards:-)
I lost at least 50% of my traffic to Panda.
At the same time I see accounts with hundreds of spun articles or misleading titles like "Adsense Page Login" remain on the site despite repeated reports, and these accounts have millions of views.
Writing quality has nothing to do with it. If you know how to game search engines you can write complete CRAP and still get ranked #1.
Care to provide links to those accounts?
I did before I left, in a thread aimed at having them taken down. I know at least half of them did but have seen a few similar ones still around.
Will see if I can dig up that thread again and also throw up some links.
And your traffic is down? I'm assuming you're talking about your sites off HubPages.
Sorry, I meant after the original Panda. It's back up now.
Original forum thread: http://hubpages.com/forum/topic/75436
Most of those HAVE been removed, although two still have misleading articles on them. I know there are others though and will go find the links.
EDIT: I still stand by my point of crap outranking cream. I often find that a Google search on the same topic as a Yahoo search gives me completely different quality results.
While I've got you, I noticed a few Hubs promoting article spinning software or article spinning services (paid backlinking). I know it's against HubPages TOS to use these services/software packages, just wondering whether it's against the TOS to write about them and encourage their use? Seems to me it should be...
Yes, I believe so. I would flag it and have the moderators have a look.
I believe this type of hub can also be misleading: http://trishool.hubpages.com/hub/eHarmony-Login-review
2 links to the same domain across all of your Hubs is allowed, provided they're relevant to the Hub (I don't know if that's the case on a Hub by Hub basis).
Looks like the dupe checker missed some of these. I've flagged some which should prompt a manual review. Sorry, technology is not perfect. Others don't have a dupe I can find.
Jason, I am absolutely certain that someone from HP has stated on the forums that a hubber that links to the same outside site is overly promotional. Sites such as Wikipedia are exempt, of course.
Although I can't find it, that thread has been referred to and quoted several times in the past few months.
Am I now off base for flagging profiles that put the same link to their own commercial site on each and every hub?
It would be helpful if you could find that link, although I can ask our head moderator next week. I know that you're limited to 2 commercial links per Hub, but you can have more of links to sites like Wikipedia or respected news sites.
However, repeatedly linking to the same site will eventually depress your HubScore to a point where the links will be nofollow.
I give up, Jason, I can't find it. I do remember some other hubber linking to the post from HP, though - maybe someone else will jump in here.
Do check with the moderating team, though - If we (searching for that post I found more than a few hubbers under the same impression as I) misunderstood it would be good to get straightened out.
Jason, I just looked at the "overly promotional" entry in the Help pages and it looks like the rules have changed.
I found a Hub which quoted the old rule
Here's the old definition of "overly promotional":
I've bolded the relevant bit, which no longer appears in the new version. And over the years, I clearly recall responding to forum posts by people who had been unpublished for putting the same links across all their Hubs.
Looks like a rare situation where HP has relaxed the rules rather than tightened them!
Is this the reference? http://maddieruud.hubpages.com/hub/Overly-Promotional
It's not what I was looking for - that was a forum post - but pretty plainly states that excessive linking to one site is overly promotional.
Susana-s's hub, quoting HP, has the same language.
This is the language, if not the actual forum post, that I was looking for. If you link to the same site with every hub you have, that is surely excessive - you can't get any more links that from every hub. It will make the entire subdomain overly promotional.
You should flag the Hubs that are in violation. If a mod finds a pattern, and the Hubber doesn't fix them, then the account can be banned.
These were flagged but were incorrectly cleared (during a time when we were onboarding new moderators). I've reflagged them, so they will be modded.
Maybe. It was never flagged. I've just flagged it so a moderator can decide.
Also flagged a while ago but incorrectly cleared. I've reflagged it.
This was also never flagged. I've flagged it.
Marisa, I agree completely that Panda has hurt good writers in its (alleged) effort to sift out the bad content from its searches. I don't think that's right or fair, but I also realize Google needed to create a way to filter out the crap in order to sustain its streams of revenue. Nothing like that can or will happen in a perfect way. They probably took some hits due to the kinks Panda apparently had. But without some sort of effort in that direction, the Internet was fast becoming the preferred platform for scammers, bad content pushers who created sites just to generate clicks and other predators.
Google did not create Panda in an effort to improve or control the whole Internet. They want to make money, and it they lose AdSense partners due to abuse, they have no choice bur to make changes that will protect their profits. They also realize that without writers, they can't place ads.
It's a shame that good writers took hits as well as the bad. Sites with free access for writers need quality controls to avoid more hits. I hope the Panda-era problems get adjusted before more innocent sites/writers are impacted. But I still understand, to a large degree, why it all happened to begin with.
I did understand that and I agree, something needed to be done to get rid of the spam. However, your original post had no qualification - reading it, I gained the clear impression you were glad Panda had been launched because it had punished the bad and awarded the good. Which it didn't, on the whole.
The black-hatters are still doing very nicely, thank you. Good writers were punished even on their own websites with only quality self-authored content.
Actually, I find there is twice as much spam in Google search results as there was PRE-Panda.
I did a search but could not find when (month/year) the PANDA first came out. When was it?
2-24-2011, The day that HP died (or least fell very, very ill!)
Resurrection was exactly 6 months later, to the day.
Wilderness - I'm curious what event happened after six months? The resurrection thing - can you clarify? Thanks!
Panda happened first. Then six months later the site changed onto subdomains.
Not before trying everything else they could think of and bringing in about 10 big rule changes.
I believe there was a Panda update - that, coupled with HP's decision to use subdomains, turned the tide. A great many of us saw huge increases in traffic, as much as 8 or 10 times what we had seen before the original Panda.
Others, a minority I think, saw a decrease in traffic and some have been on a roller coaster ride ever since. Panda was far, far from perfect and we have seen that as some of our best writers have had a near total collapse of traffic figures.
Put all together, I do believe that it was a combination of those two things - subdomains and a major update to Panda. Google indicated that HP had not been sandboxed, but that time interval - exactly six months - makes that statement suspect, and that might have played a part as well.
I have another account with 50+ hubs that used to get me most of my Amazon earnings and has never gone back to what it was.
I hadn't know you were one of those badly hurt, Wrylilt. I'm sorry to hear that.
Google seems to view such things as "collateral damage" and necessary to improve their algorithm. Unfortunately Panda doesn't work and that "collateral damage" has really hurt a lot of people for no gain at all. If anything it has fostered garbage on the SE instead of eliminating it.
Thanks for clarifying, everyone. I can only imagine the stress those months created for everyone, and the anger and frustration. I don't blame people for being upset. I just wish the search engines hadn't allowed such problems to begin with, because it's obvious a lot of people who indeed played by the rules before Panda were hurt when they tried to weed out the bad apples.
Definitely HubPages, but I haven't written for Ezine, because there is no payment involved. As a professional, I do expect to get paid something for my work.
Don't get me started on Google Panda.
Thanks! So articles on ezine can help you to get more traffic on HP.
The idea with EzineArticles is that you write an article with links to your own website or blog. It's then freely available for other website owners to copy and paste on their own website/blog.
The theory is that by writing on EA, you get hundreds of backlinks, because your article complete with your links is replicated on multiple sites.
The reality is somewhat different.
The TOS states that people who copy your Ezine article must include the "resource box" (the author information and hyperlinks). But it's not policed, so many website owners don't. The result is that your article gets reproduced all over the internet and you get no credit and no backlink.
I have half a dozen articles on EA, which gives me a backlink to each of my sites from EA. I wouldn't bother doing any more than that.
Don't discount Ezinearticles. So long as you post articles there, traffic us gained from the PR rank if 6 on the site. It's free, only costs you the time to write an original article and at the moment accounts for about 25% of traffic to all my accounts on HubPages.
Jase, the OP was asking which was a better place to write - not to promote, but to write for its own sake.
I may have misinterpreted the OP. Then in that case, HubPages would be a much better place to write for many reasons.
Yes Jase, I'd have said it was a no-brainer. Why would you write for no reward on EzineArticles when you can write for money here? It's not as if anyone becomes a loyal reader at Ezine for its literary merit.
There are writing sites for people who just want to write for the sake of writing, Ezine isn't one of them!
The duplicate content penalties accrued by Ezinearticles vastly diminishes the value of posting there, as far as backlinks are concerned.
Search engines are doing all they can to deprecate content that's reposted all over the web, except in rare cases like Wikipedia where the original article gets credit, but the scraped copies don't. Ezinearticles.com, on the other hand, got utterly clobbered by Panda and is still suffering the duplicate content penalty.
According to Quantcast.com, Ezinearticles' monthly US traffic is currently:
PAGE VIEWS not available
PAGE VIEWS 37,351,160
Note that Ezinearticle's traffic is only estimated. Most reputable websites let Quantcast measure their traffic directly by putting a 1x1 pixel image on every page of the site. Ezinearticles does not. So Quantcast is having to extrapolate based on the number of visitors going there from known sites and search engines. The very fact that Ezinearticles has opted out of Quantcast is very telling.
By contrast, even creaky old Livejournal, a social diary-based community from the last century where many writers share their work, is pulling in 6 million plus people a month. If you just want to post where you'll get readers, community and feedback, and don't care about income, you might as well post on a place like that (or Dreamwidth) as on ezinearticles.
I was going to mention that but didn't want to make my post too complicated.
Exactly. I'm still confused by the original question, clearly the OP doesn't quite realize what Ezinearticles is for.
I am new to HubPages, and I just noticed this forum thread about Ezinearticles. Here are some of my observations.
I wrote 12 articles for EZ, the last one in September 2011.
My highest viewed article on EZ showed 83 views since last July. On HP, I have had 30 views of my first article posted 8 days ago!
Ezine's "quality control" is vastly overrated. I often felt that my articles were being reviewed by a robot. As a lawyer, I like to write articles about the law. Duh. Ezine will never accept an article that discusses litigation, including an article I wrote about one of my own cases in which I did not mention the name of the parties (of course - client confidentiality and all that) and it was turned down by ezine as too controversial.
I also wrote an article about the Casey Anthony verdict in which I calmly discussed the topic of jury deliberations. Too controversial for Ezine.
My final issue is the one discussed in many of the posts on this subject. One of my articles has been plagiarized word for word by a website that does not have a "contact" link. I was not named as the author, and of course my backlink was not there. When I contacted EZ I was basically told that it was my problem..
I am delighted to write for HubPages, and I am equally delighted to see all of the thoughtful and helpful comments by you folks. I feel like I have just met a new bunch of friends.
I think that Hubpages is better since the Panda update because they have now become much more proactive in their approach to what is allowed to be posted. I am thankful for what they do even if it means getting a notice that something I wrote does not meet their guidelines. I know that my income has risen sionce the update too.
by Ultimate Hubber 5 years ago
Best hubpages alternative after the panda update?Since hp was hit hard by the panda update. So any good alternative?
by John Coviello 4 years ago
I see signs that Traffic is Starting To Come Back After the Latest Panda? It is hard to confirm since HubPages is not providing traffic stats during their changeover to a new data provider. Has anyone else noticed a recovery in traffic after the steep Panda related drop off?
by Nell Rose 5 years ago
Why does our hub traffic drop so dramatically when they do a Panda update?Can someone explain exactly what happens in simple terms and why? thanks!
by Scott Biddulph 5 years ago
Hey Guys and Gals, Man, I have just about had it with the traffic issues here at the Hubpages. I have published over 100 hubs here in two years. I have won several awards, I have had over 10, 000 views, and I have a following of over 200 people. When this whole traffic loss debacle first occurred,...
by thisisoli 7 years ago
I have kept quiet about this for a while now, but after the Panda update I saw my traffic drop a little then normalize (as expected after any Google update).However since I made the changes required by Hubpages (and I assume changes enforced upon everybody else) I have seen steadily declining...
by TTGReviews 4 years ago
Yes, there was a Panda update yesterday, but this topic will be focused on things we could see far in advance of this update.As someone who has written extensively on both HubPages and Squidoo perhaps I can offer a little bit of insight. While I typically remain silent I'm hoping my feedback on...
Copyright © 2018 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 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.|