Doesn't say how much she made from it. Guess: very close to zero, if not zero.
Including hosting? I'm sure it's actually in red.
To show how easy it is for plagiarized news sites to get ad revenue, I made one
21–30 of 40 posts
Re: To show how easy it is for plagiarized news sites to get ad revenue, I made one
#22Doesn't say how much she made from it. Guess: very close to zero, if not zero.
Re: To show how easy it is for plagiarized news sites to get ad revenue, I made one
#23I suspect one of the hard parts of this for Google is that many news sites legitimately publish the same articles because of wire services and correspondence arrangements, like AP and Reuters. Hard to tell whether the new site is plagiarizing or syndicating.
Don't they always include the source as AP or Reuters in the body of text somewhere?
Re: To show how easy it is for plagiarized news sites to get ad revenue, I made one
#24Unethical Continuation of This Idea: Scrape existing news sites, and use machine learning to paraphrase everything so Google doesn't detect plagiarism.
Re: To show how easy it is for plagiarized news sites to get ad revenue, I made one
#25Unethical Continuation of This Idea: Scrape existing news sites, and use machine learning to paraphrase everything so Google doesn't detect plagiarism.
In this new dystopia, generating content for the machines to read could be a decent job for a human.
Re: To show how easy it is for plagiarized news sites to get ad revenue, I made one
#26Earlier quoted context omitted.
It may be a low bar, but being able to automate this (scraping website ansible playbook?), makes the effort required as near-nil. They only have to clear $50 to pay for ALOT of domains and hosting.
Sure but you need thousands of legitimate-seeming pageviews to get that $50 back, and the networks - even or especially the bottom tier ones - are likely to be hotter on click fraud than scraped content.
Re: To show how easy it is for plagiarized news sites to get ad revenue, I made one
#27In Turkish whatever, you search the first few pages of results is from the Turkish largest news outlets because the SEO’ed for everything and Google doesn’t care.
Do you want to learn how to renew your driver license? Good luck with that because your search results will bring you a wall of text articles that are almost the same for every search term.
“Lately people started to ask themselves how to renew their driver's license. But do they consider the risks of renewing drivers licenses? Experts agree that renewing the driver's license can be a complicated thing. Now strap on and get ready to learn how to renew your driver's license”
Think to have pages like that on CNN, BBC and others. They are the top result for so many searches.
Plagiarism of news, on the other hand, is more nuanced IMHO. There’s nothing stopping you to say “NBC reports that” anyway. As per the article, you can not use their assets but you can create or even generate articles about the news based on the news.
The ad business is dirty. I’m almost proud of blocking ads.
Re: To show how easy it is for plagiarized news sites to get ad revenue, I made one
#28Re: To show how easy it is for plagiarized news sites to get ad revenue, I made one
#29Earlier quoted context omitted.
Including hosting? I'm sure it's actually in red.
If you include the hit to your professional reputation from actually plagiarizing a news site for revenue and getting blacklisted from the industry, then what did it cost? Everything.
Re: To show how easy it is for plagiarized news sites to get ad revenue, I made one
#30Earlier quoted context omitted.
Sure but you need thousands of legitimate-seeming pageviews to get that $50 back, and the networks - even or especially the bottom tier ones - are likely to be hotter on click fraud than scraped content.
You would have to get ~16,000 pageviews to make $50. (assuming $3.00 CPM -- which would be low for adsense, but not for these second tier networks).
If you're lucky, you trigger something in Google's black box and they rank your site better than others at the same level, but you'll still only do long tail, and even on long tail, you'll compete with the original source of the article, which has a billion links pointing to its domain. Since you'll also need to go for quantity, you'll have a giant amount of pages as well, which will not help you even with niche rankings.
I doubt that the site would pull in 10 actual, human visitors per day on average with just scraped content.