How many of you are signed up on internet marketing newsletters?
You know, where marketers email you from time to time, with tips and tricks and try to get you to sign up for webinars and buy their products.
Well, how many of these marketers have you heard mention that they use HubPages as a marketing tool? Meaning they treat this site like it's an article directory and just create a hub to get a backlink to their site.
THAT is one of the biggest things that is and will sink this site.
We need to stop the creation of junk articles and linking schemes that take advantage of this site. I'm sure that the HubPages staff takes care of a lot of it, but we can do our share... as I have just recently.
Russell Brunson is one marketer I follow and I just heard him mention in his video that he uses this site for marketing... And I took it upon myself to ask him to stop promoting this as a marketing method and told him why.
* It's sinking the site.
* Their articles will get deleted anyway.
The only way to kill the "dark side" of HubPages is to shine some light on it, right?
So, all I'm asking is that if you see marketers promoting HubPages as a marketing method, instead of writing on it to create quality content, ask them to stop! Tell them why they should stop and so on... And if enough of us mention what it's doing to the site and that it no longer works, perhaps they will stop.
So, which big marketers do you know of who use and abuse this site?
I'm pretty sure Hub Pages knows quite well that many of us actually write here with some informative hubs and I can estimate about 95% of the people who sign up are just here for the backlinks. I seriously don't mind people getting backlinks if they write quality and not just one phony hub. We need to pursuade the HP team to get rid of all forms of scrap on this site as that's one way to get back some actual writers and prevent marketers from joining. Don't let this thread die, something needs to be done against the mere marketers. We do report and stuff, but HP should make it a rule that those type of hubs should be deleted.
I write on Elance sometimes whenever I feel like it, but I've seen many job requests where people are looking for articles to publish on Hubpages and Ezine (so there's the comparison again). Not many people tread squidoo as a marketing site as they actually scrape content off and prevent search engines from getting to the low quality content.
Hub pages is way better than Squidoo according to me, but, in this aspect they surely are lagging behind.
Just an example - Having 100 real hubbers posting actual content would surely get this site more traffic and earnings than 10,000 single hub marketers. And these marketers are the ones that make the actual 100 want to run away.
When I spot these kind of hubs, I flag them. It's pretty obvious when someone writes a teaser hub, but sometimes they're fairly well-written.
Yup, I do that and I flag lots, but when complete hubs are removed from a profile. HP should delete the entire subdomain if its left inactive for maybe a month or so (0 hubs for a month I mean).
I agree... but I'm sure, or at least I hope, that HP has a rule that if you're flagged so many times your profile gets deleted.
I mean, I've seen them remove long-time writers on here just because they speak in broken English... so, why wouldn't they do the same for frequent marketers?
Some people just write one hub and run away forgetting they ever wrote it (actually spun it). So, those people will have flags just once on a single hub and then their domain will remain dormant and the overall quality of Hubpages as a site diminishes. Such people won't return to write another hub. So, they won't get more flags. That's the reason I suggested an automated system wherein any profiles without hubs for a period of say 1 month or so are automatically deleted or at least de-indexed.
That would also kill off profiles where people create them just to secretly post in forums or people who sign up just to leave a comment and are only on here to read.
People sign up to only read? Hmm I didn't know that, thanks for the info
No one is required to sign up to leave a comment unless the author instructs otherwise.
Yes, I know that. But, will people actually take the trouble to sign up just to leave a comment? I know I wouldn't
My post wasn't directed at you Lobobrandon. My post was directed at Bendo13 for passing out false information. An author cannot dictate readership- meaning no one has the power to stop people from reading the pages once they are posted, regardless of being a member or not.
Authors dictate whether or not a person is required to sign up or not because of the settings of the comment capsule.
And, yes some people might sign up to leave a comment. However, it is also likely that they will not use the account again.
I have had some people who appear to have signed up just to leave a comment on my articles and I DO NOT require them to do so.
I've looked at their profile to find that they just signed up and the only activity is leaving a comment on one of my hubs. So, although not common, it does happen.
And what I was saying is that someone might sign up to subscribe to your articles, to be notified when you post new stuff, rather than following your RSS feed, which I find no one really does much of. That would be them subscribing to be a reader... I didn't mean that I control who can read what I write.
I do flag as well. I find it rather disappointing myself to stumble upon such hubs.
I don't flag all of them. I don't see a problem if a marketer is writing a helpful, content rich, informative hub about a service or product. I've seen some well written hubs that are not written simply for backlinks. They're writing to give information and it would be unfortunate if everyone started flagging any hub that looks like marketing. I think there's a difference and a fine line between those who are simply spamming the site for backlinks.
The term marketing is being used as a majority of them are spam. Of course, a few gems do exist and I doubt anyone flags those hubs. Even if they are, I'm pretty sure the moderators will just ignore those flags. As long as the hubs meet the basic guidelines.
I never thought of flagging these hubs that advertise! Great idea! Glad I came to the forum!
My feeling on the matter is that if you fancy yourself a serious member of HubPages, you should do a bit of Hub Hopping whenever you can. Even just five minutes helps. I just got done, and of the 10 Hubs I looked at, 7 of them had blatant problems requiring a flag.
That's the serious part, folks. Each day new crap shows up, and we all have a vested interest in making sure what's here is quality.
I think that's the key. If I want information, I search for it. If the Hub answers by providing the information, great! If the Hub happens to have a link to where I might buy a product or services, that's ok too. Hubs that say nothing useful, or are spun, or are obviously written with "filler text" are what I want to see gone.
I flag a LOT of stuff. I also am very strict about the comments I allow on my hubs. Almost ALL comments containing a link get rejected. Even though they're no-follow, I don't want that on my hubs.
I have several accounts around the net where I NEVER publish and seldom comment... I guess you could call it forum lurking. Half my family members have HubPages profiles, but only my sister has published a hub. Her one hub does really well, but other than that she lurks... doesn't write more hubs or comment anywhere.
Walking the fine line between SEO and the genuine curating of content has always been the game. Google isn't a library or a publishing house; it's a search engine with ad revenue, and HP has been trying to work the middle ground. Everyone on here plays the game, and some play too hard one way or the other. HP has been trying to run a profitable business working in between Google and content, and all of us are playing that same game in our own way.
Sometimes, when HP got it all right, it way paid off for everyone. Other times, they missed and people get spanked... sometimes the SEO people get spanked, sometimes the genuine content people get spanked. The middle-ground players sort of float along getting marginal spankings and marginal victories depending on how the wind is blowing and which edge of the wide gray area they operate in.
HP gets the no-no finger for stepping over the line and letting every douche with a keyboard in only because they got caught, again (if you weren't here three years ago when all the "naked aunties" hubs and other soft-core silliness was dragging us down, then you don't have the perspective other hubbers do). The sytem-players and SEO people who got smoked, well, they move on and do what they do elsewhere, figure out the system, and make money. It's who they are. The content-only people, well, they can abandon ship or stay and try to help right the ship for the next attempt.
HP has soared and sank enough times it's hard for me, even now with my traffic down 90% to give up. I do want them to punt the douches again, like they did the "naked aunties" people before, but hopefully they'll weed out the garbage again and we can all do well again.
All I know is that, while the OP means well, you're never going to convince an exploiter to stop exploiting. It's like begging a tapeworm to flush itself out with the next bowel movement because it's killing the host. That's not how parasites work. You have to rip that f-er out of there and put it in a jar of formaldehyde so everyone can see what the problem was.
Yeah, it may or may not get them to stop, but I think they should know that marketing on HubPages like that doesn't work the way it use to. Just trying to educate the SEO people so they move onto some other method and stop ruining this site.
I'm glad HubPages isn't like Squidoo, which will de-index any content that isn't drawing a continuous crowd, but isn't there some rule where you have to write so many hubs before your links are "do-follow" links? I think it helps a little bit, by draining the power of that marketing method, but something's still sinking this site.
You need a hubber score of 75 to make your links do-follow and I'm not sure, but if not HP should notify new writers about this in bold letters
I don't think it's a good idea to penalize so heavily for inactivity. There have been times where I haven't published for months. Heck, when's the last time Relache has published a hub (her content is awesome)?
I think the issue is that there are hubs that fit within the site rules, but are terrible. I do hop and flag when I come across ones that break the rules. Some of the hubs are so terrible that I actively LOOK for rules they break (hover over all links to make sure there aren't more than two to a single domain, etc.)
There could be a rule like hubs have to be a certain length, but then what about poetry hubs? What are short hubs that are actually well-written and perform well?
Another problem is crappy hubs where the author isn't a marketer... maybe the person is REALLY trying, but just isn't great at writing. You can't penalize hubs for sucking.
I suggest a very hard to read captcha for publishing hubs containing links that aren't pre-approved in the system.
This is one of the many actions that some of the Elite do and we try to catch these "articles" as soon as they are posted. Sure we miss a lot but on the average a large portion of them are flagged as spam.....
While I hate the over-commercialization of the web, you have to be careful what you dismiss as marketing.
Hubpages got slapped. Other sites where I write did not, yet they are much more lenient about affiliate marketing links provided you steer clear of the most spam-prone topics (diets, "getting your ex back" and the like). This shows that marketing of certain kinds is untouched by Google's recent algorithm changes.
One should be careful not to assume that articles we don't like have no value to anyone else, or that Google considers all kinds of marketing spam.
All Google cares about is relevance. If a Google user wants to know where to buy tacky toilet seat covers, and a content creator writes an article featuring tacky toilet seat covers with zany and colorful designs, carefully picked out from the bowels of Amazon...well, that isn't exactly Shakespeare, but it may be exactly what the searcher wanted. Google awards accordingly.
Hubpages tries to promote excellent writing. Alas, not everyone using Google is searching for excellent writing, or even well-researched, original, in-depth content. They want results. They want answers. They want solutions. Or maybe they just want a stupid cat video. Google is in the business of giving it to them.
If Google can't find anything that fits its searchers' needs in your beautifully-written prose, it may brush the hub off as "thin" content (meaning it may be great literature, but it's not relevant to any particular searches) and move onto the next 300-word article telling people how much old Star Wars Jawa figures are worth.
This is a very good point, GG. I think the quality issue is always a "relative" one. A hub that can look spammy or over commercial to the casual viewer, can infact be much less so when viewed within the context of its competition (in the specfic area that it is targeting).
Currently (you never know when google may change the rules) a subdomain stands and falls on its own merits; the only help that HP gives it is the layout and the related links in the sidebar etc.. These links are already devalued in the eyes of google as they are not within the text of the article..
There is only a modest difference now between writing on HP and having your own site with regards to ability to attract traffic..
If someone puts a load of unrelated articles on a HP subdomain which are substandard and people do not read them fully but bounce off they will not get trafic from google - and I would guess if a hub gets no traffic that the link in the eyes of google is worth close to nil...
If however they put engaging content that people stay and read and follow links to other content then google will keep sending traffic, if that content has links to other sites which also have good content then no problem, in fact wonderful..
It is going to get harder and harder to truly game the system in the future as the readers behavior is becoming more of a factor in how google ranks a site - or is it??
by Steve Andrews4 years ago
When it was first introduced I was annoyed by it but made an effort to tweak my hubs to get them out of Idle status. Now, a whole load have got zzs against them again and many of them are hubs that at one point were...
by Nathan Bernardo4 years ago
How many times do you edit an idled Hub before deleting it? Or do you keep it idled so that links to it are still good? Also, for what reasons do you either leave it idled or delete it or still try to fix it? I have one...
by Kylyssa Shay19 months ago
Only the best Hubs on HubPages are being moved to niches, so everything on the niche sites is spam free and trash free. There are no pieces written in broken English or written in ways that appear to be spun. Everything...
by Shil19786 years ago
HubPages has this wonderful feature called Hub Hopping or Hub Hop to flag low-quality/copied/spam content. I know some hubbers do use this and help HP staff weed out the substandard content. Here's one more reason why...
by alternativeto3 years ago
Hey guys, i think HubPages is losing it's rank on Google, i have multiple accounts here and all are experiencing decreased traffic by 50% !!! . Anyone experiencing similar problems? Or did Google introduce any new...
by Cindy Lawson6 years ago
I am not looking to name names here as this happens quite a lot on Hubpages, but can someone please clarify whether or not it is against the rules for a Hubber to come to your hub, leave a comment and then include a...
Copyright © 2017 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.