By Gloria Jean

When Internet marketers and webmasters need content for their web pages, they can either use other people’s articles with a link back to the author, hire writers to create articles for them or write their own content.

You can even use article writing software that has a lot of information for writing articles and hopefully you can create some valuable content. I have been curious about this software but never tempted to try it. The reason is because, to me, it is just generic information. If what I am reading is not coming from a real person or source that has experience in the subject then it is just regurgitated content no matter how much you want to spin it.

It is what I call a “dead” article because it has been generated by a technical writer, program, or word pusher and not by a real person with expertise or opinions on the subject of the article. It is dead because there is no real thought or perspective behind it and no feeling or character in it. It is what some webmasters call “spider food,” the spiders being the web programs that search the Internet for content to put in their search engines.

It may even be a very good article, and it may even have helpful or useful information in it, but ask yourself if there is a real person behind the words or is someone just pushing key words and information around? How do you take the advice of an article of unknown origin? Don’t you need to know who wrote it or at least have some valid references pointing to where the information came from? Are people so gullible that they will believe anything in print or on a webpage with no responsible real person backing it up?

You may ask me, “What does it really matter? Content is king!” and all that jazz, and if the information is good and if it sounds good, then what is the real harm? Probably none. However, I just don’t feel all “warm and fuzzy” reading an article generated by some article writing software on some subject the writer probably knows absolutely nothing about and has given very little thought to. Also, information is one thing, but where is the bottom line? Were do you look for confirmation? Who is the responsible party behind the information?

Please don’t get me wrong, I have nothing against using tools to create articles, or even art. In fact I am using a computer to type this article, with a word processing program, but I am putting my own thoughts and my own words into it. I am actually constructing my own sentences. They may not be perfect grammar, or even politically correct, but they are my sentences. I have given them some thought and some feeling.

The person behind the “dead” article, whether they are doing work for hire or writing under their own name, is just passing along common information and pushing sentences and words around. So take what you can use from it, but take it along with a grain of salt. It’s not the gospel just because it sits on a nice looking web site. For me, if the article is putting me to sleep or sounds like an advertisement for some product, then it is not “valuable content.” It is an advertisement. Given that, if it is an advertisement, I want to know who the person is behind the promotion or product. I am not going to blindly trust or buy from an unknown person. Call me crazy if you want.

Here is the deception.

The deception occurs when the author puts his name on the article as author of the  information, and then accepts the credit for having some level of experience and expertise on the subject he is writing about when he does not.

Keep in mind that he is just a writer passing along words and information that he pulled from somewhere else. He is not writing from personal experience and he is not an expert on the subject. Did he give the article writing program any credit at all for its contribution to the article? Better still, did he give the programmer who wrote the article writing program any of the credit? I suspect not. Then I ask you, why is he taking credit for appearing to be an expert on the subject when he is not?

Not everybody does this but a large majority do. Again, you might ask, what is wrong with this? There is nothing illegal about it. The author might even tell you that they are an expert on the subject even if they are not writing from personal experience. They will claim that they have become an expert after having done a little bit or a lot of research about the subject. (Most of that research having been done on the Internet.) Some will even tell you how you too can become an “instant expert” simply by funneling information through a nice looking web site. This is just not true. You have not become an instant expert, you have become an instant pretender.

They call themselves experts, but what kind of experts are they?

They are expert information compilers and distributors. They may be producers, actors, writers, Internet marketers but they are not trainers of horses, or kitchen re-modelers, or what ever. They are the pretenders. You might say “Okay, So What?”

This is what I say to the pretenders. Words are just words and information is just information. We, (your customers) would sometimes like to find a real knowledgeable person behind the product you promote and behind the “expert” advice. We are looking for the thought, feeling and personal experience behind the words.

Your personal experience is very unique. Just be who you are. People will purchase products from a person they like before they will from a person they don’t like or don’t know. How can I know you if you are one of the pretenders? How can I like you if I don’t know you? Who are you and why should I listen to your advice or buy your products? That is the question.

What is a real article?

I can give you an good example of a real article by pointing you to Steve Pavina’s blog. I can give you a bad example by pointing you to your average article ezine whose articles are weak and written with the intention of getting you to click on their link for more information simply because they did not have and valuable information in it to begin with. Personally, the only links I would click on were from articles that were actually valuable content from a real person, and I would be clicking in the hope that I could get more of the same.

Any article the leaves you in the dark about what the heck they are talking about in an attempt to get you to follow their links for more information is probably leading you by the nose to some pitch page for their product. You will not get any valuable free information from them because you can be sure they want your money for their product or ebook.

The moral to this story, for article marketers, is a plea from me to them to please strive to write valuable content and stop cluttering up cyber space with your meaningless drivel and spider food.

I will put my byline on my articles from this day forward.

Gloria Jean

by Gloria Jean

Originally Wikipedia implemented a “no follow tag” to prevent spam. I’m sure spammers will always find a way to spam in spite of things like the “no follow” tag. Meanwhile, marketing and other people will pay the price. Who would have ever thought that a single search engine called google would have such an effect that they would inspire a no follow tag based on their page ranking system.

What is a NoFollow Tag?

A “no follow” tag is an HTML anchor link attribute that is used to instruct major search engines that a hyperlink should not influence the link targets’ search engine ranking. The HTML tag looks like this :

<a href=”http://www.vretoolbar.com” rel=”nofollow”>VRE Toolbar</a>”

To use or not use a no follow tag.

Don’t’ use it. Don’t submit articles to any article directory that uses it. Don’t pay for any advertising with sites that use it. Don’t let a search engine influence your decision on whether to use it. So(me will use no follow tags because they are afraid that the “all mighty” search engine google will accuse them of being a link farm. A link farm is a site that sells links so you can improve your web site’s search engine ranking.

I think webmasters should stop worrying about the google god and just start creating valuable content. Here is how to improve your search engine ranking. Improve your content! Is that too much to ask? Apparently it is, because good content is rare in a world of scammers spammers and websites that suck, so the battle continues. And all google really wants is to link to quality relevant information.

http://www.vretoolbar.com/ is a site that has a list of the top 50 article directories with up-to-date (last time I checked) information on which ones are using the “no follow” tag.

http://www.vretoolbar.com/articles/directories.php

The idea that article directories would use the no follow tag seems to me they are shooting themselves in the foot. If people spend their valuable time and effort to write an article with good content and submit that to an article directory and that directory uses no follow tags they are diminishing the purpose of the article and not helping their submitters to improve their page rank. The chances of a lot of people reading or reprinting their article are pretty slim, and sometimes the only advantage the author is getting is a link that might help improve their page rank.