Mahalo Autogenerating Spam Pages Targeting Google

Nothing left but ads and navigation, LMFAO. Scraping content, not giving any link love back to the original authors, using the same title, and most if not all of the content they scrape, they are the authoritative site so outranking is a non issue.

And Google doesn't give a shit about anybody but Google, it's not a turning a blind eye, it's a hand wave that says who gives a shit.

How are the mom and pops supposed to survive???? Answer, who gives a shit!

I do cause I'm part of the mom and pops percentage, but hey, who gives a shit??!

Glad SEO Book does, way to put'em on blast, might accomplish something, might not, at least it's out there.

Way to give a shit Aaron!

Funny that Jason is trying to get people to Boycott Comscore and this post is trying to Boycott Jason's site. I know Jason is loving the attention.

I'm not sure any of these sites are as pure as they want you to believe. I would imagine any site that makes money for Google somehow has an advantage in their SERP.

Great insight into the scraping issues. The other thing which I believe factors into this is when Mahalo moved to a revenue share strategy in June 2009.

Like Demand Media, they provide people with an incentive to build links to these pages. More links = better SERP rank = more money in your pocket.

Given the current state of the Google algorithm, this incentive can move mountains, particularly if the root domain has accumulated enough trust and authority.

Mahalo gets to sit back and let others build niche specific links for pennies on the dollar. There's a sick beauty to that!

I think Jason's right on the comScore issue, but I'd also like to see Google do something about scraping abuse and link inflation.

P.S. - Mahalo has always pushed the spam envelope. In February 2009 you could see them generating Twitter spam through various accounts (@MAtips, @MAsports) essentially grabbing hot trends and creating matching Tweets so they'd show up in Twitter search.

"What happens when the media gets in on this "what the bloggers have to say" scraping game?"

This is underway already. I'll be posting an example on http://johnon.com very soon.

Watch Jason's Twitter stream as well. Jason and Mahalo are also targeting trending topics. When Jimmy Kimmel did his Jay Leno impression it popped up on trends, Mahalo published a page, and minutes later Jason posted a message on Twitter to his 60,000 followers that pointed to the brand new page and how funny it was.

Pretty interesting methodology... see a trend, pop up a page, and use your mass following to generate buzz and backlinks so that you can cash in by pushing ads and showing up on trending topics. He's able to totally manipulate the system and put more $ in his pocket. Can't say I blame him, though.

Don't hold your breath on Adsense cutting him loose, though. As long as he's providing a farm for them to cash in, they're not going to cut him.

blogburst.com has been helping major publishers accomplish this "what bloggers have to say" effect for years. They pay the independent bloggers next to nothing while posting their content on sites like the USA Today with no link attribution.

There's nothing new under the internet, I mean sun...

Some of the top earning pages might have freelancers thicken them out, but the only reason humans are involved at that stage is to legitimize the mass content scraping farm that is the base of the operation. If a company has 200,000+ automated pages with 0 overhead that make 5 cents/day each that is real cashflow - $10,000+ per day of profit!

Shit to me that sounds like a hell of a business model ..only a few employees and damn near pure profit and automated...winner winner chicken dinner is what I say...

the only thing I see wrong with that is not putting a follow link back to the source.. which if you can get away with it fuck it..

it might not be right.. but as a cut throat, content generating, autocash pilot machine they can do it and do it well..if they did link back to the source then they might not outrank the source..

yes this business model can pollute the web, but either get in or get out... and if you can make a brand out of it then do it.. nothing better than autopilot cash generating websites that have almost zero overhead...

Shit just look at some of the other branded, ad wrapped sites that have been around for years .. ezinearticles.com what value do they add?.. hell they're just text, adsense and a couple of links to an affiliate or adsense site? They haven't changed anything in years and they've grown year after year and continue to do well in Google.. and what do they give they're users? No revenue share, you get 2 links buried below the fold, so they make damn sure they get their adsense clicks.. but people continue to build their user generated empire and even link to the pages... to get a referral click here and their.. lol I could go on and on.. but simple thing is, if it works why not do it.. but have some ethics as well..

There is a big difference between people opting to submit content in exchange for exposure and links AND someone just taking your stuff (without permission) and blocking off the link flow.

The first is a legitimate business model...just like publishers of books who want most of the profits from the project. A known exchange that was agreed to in advance.

The second is not far removed from just stealing money. (Sure there are a few intermediary steps, but there is no consent and the attribution is filtered).

The problem, Aaron, is that "stealing money" online in this sense is legal.

I'm certainly not one to justify tactics like this, but we're somewhat stuck when we try to bring it into the realm of ethics.

If we're not willing/able to drum up legislation against these methods the ethical debate is dead in the water.

Unless the anticipation is that we're going to convince Google to shut this kind of operation down. But as a profit-driven entity I can't see how we'd expect Google to do that...

I do applaud you for pointing this out - it does, in every sense, fly in the face of everything Google deems "evil." But it's an evil that hurts so good when it comes to Google's bottom line, and we can safely bet that at this point they're way off the idealist tract.

Hey at least you didnt link to his site.. Lets see if we can get this Mahalo page ranking on page one for 'Mahalo'..

Im sure Jason Calacanis will chime in at some point and jusitfy all this spam that hes churning out... 'Sure we may auto generate some pages, but the majority of our content is awesome.. etc etc..

Just goes to show, if you have good authority and generate a shed load of adsense clicks, you can get away with murder (spam)....

Scott

Isn't there a way to block Mahalo, and others, from even accessing your site? I doubt using robots.txt will stop them but couldn't you block the originating ip? This isn't my area of expertise so any input would be appreciated!

Not really. In most cases you can't block Mahalo stealing your content and using it against you. Since they scrape from Google's scrape of the web (but then add nofollow), you can't really block Mahalo without blocking Google.

And if you do block Google, then likely someone else will still steal your content and wrap it in Google ads.

The system is rigged to where either you carry Google ads and share your content, or SOMEONE ELSE WILL DO IT FOR YOU (see Mahalo, for instance).

It is unfortunately true that the greater a domain strength, the more, the greater you can push the limits.

The strange thing to me though Aaron is that I have always seen complaints against Calacanis and Mahalo as not worth the time of day since all he is doing is basically the same thing we all want to do which is make money from the internet.

Do I think Mahalo goes about it the right way? No.
Do I think Mahalo will last in the SERPs? Not forever, but I think he will make a great deal of money from it.
Do I think he is the greatest guy in the world? No.

However, he is doing what we all do using the same cycle that is universal to anyone trying to make a buck off the web...

Create content - promote content - monetize content

Everything you have laid out above is absolutely true (great article btw) in fact the first conversation I ever had with Matt Cutts was about the weirdness of how superior content pages on weaker domains are ignored for subpar content pages on strong domains.

It is now three years later and Google often still has the same problem, although it better than it was back then.

Whatever the case is, the bottom line I see is that if someone wants to rank for "best computer speakers" then the best way to do so is to have a great page about "best computer speakers" and since the term is somewhat competitive it likely needs to be on a domain with some strength too.

Any search term will have competitors who are using crappy methods, any search term will have some schmuck doing nasty things that aren't very kind or very nice. But I say...

"Damn the torpedos. Full speed ahead!"

I get that he isn't doing stuff nicely. I get that he is doing stuff sneakily and lying about things. IMHO I hope Google does something about it not because I don't like him, but I hope Google does something about it because if they do not then they are teaching the next wave of webmasters to be schmucks.

He has been successful online so others will mimic this and try to replicate this.

It is not the same thing thing. Not even close.

I don't go into the automotive industry, state that all car dealers are shitbags, and then use that as a platform to sell cars from.

That was *exactly* what he did to the SEO industry, and most of the (lame) "leaders" in our industry were stupid enough to give him a soap box to yell from. And so someone needs to do a follow up about what a lying piece of trash Jason is.

He is a liar and his site uses content without permission (and not a little bit either...in bulk...as in it is the foundation of the site).

He is worse than the people he spewed hate about, and so long as his recycled garbage is ranking I may as well help brand it for being what it is.

Why is he worse?

Well he is not trying to make a Dollar like anyone else. No. He is jacking people's content wholesale and PREVENTING OTHERS WHO PUT IN THE EFFORT AND WORK FROM GETTING CREDIT FOR THEIR WORK.

You can call it something other than theft, but the functionality of it is 1:1. His gain is ill gotten and driven off of stealing from others.

I understand if a person who is just staring out does whatever they have to do in order to pay the bills, but when you are already well-to-do it is slimy to steal money from the poor.

Some people try to play Robin Hood.

Jason Calacanis goes hood robbing.

I just do not the practical upside of concentrating time and effort on others who are doing things badly.

What does Google recommend?

"If you've found a particular site that's spamming our index, we'd like to hear about it."

Report it as spam.

your figures or about 10k daily are spot on, thats about what I was making in the my scraper sites heyday before Google killed off my 15 accounts and keep my $190,000 just because they could:). Am I bitter, naaaaa, that was moons ago but its very interesting to know that they scraper game is still alive and well.

Like I said earlier the only thing I see wrong with it is not putting a link back to the source... if he wants to talk shit about SEO's/Affiliate marketers let him.. I dont care.. if people let him speak and link to the bait on their blogs thats their problem.. what else can we do? Report his site as spam.. not gonna work hes a brand and breaks alot of bread for Google... what else can we do? rant about him on our blogs? that only gives him more press and publicity.. the only entity that can change this is Google.. and their not gonna..

Unless their is a way to pressure him to link back to the source then it's a waste of time.. who cares about the shit talking.. go on about your business and let him choose the long tail keywords that make money and model after that.. same with Demand.. let them choose the money long tail and then copy their ass..

Jason's email response to Aaron.
http://calacanis.com/2010/01/25/my-thank-you-email-to-aaronwall-for-the-free-seo-advice-great-seo-great-guy/

Hello Aaron,

you are right, but why you are surprised?
At the end Google is a big player in the system called "capitalism". In that system the rules are not applied to everyone equal, it is called in other terms "corruption". A strong brand or domain not means fair play.

Seo Networker
Doing SEO in Hamburg since 98
http://www.suchmaschinen-experte.de

I've been reading your site for a long time, and I have to say you are right on the money with your advice. This article really struck a nerve, hence the comment.

I find it to be positively criminal that Google repeatedly rewards this type of behavior, while punishing innocent sites. The fact that Google continuously has chosen to define the way in which webmasters behave makes it even more frustrating that they continue to allow this type of thing to continue.

It is not limited to Mahalo either. There are zillions of sites that do nothing more than aggregate content from other sources. These range from places like NewsTin - which uses your RSS feed to identify new content and then actually culls material directly from your site, while adding only a nofollow link - to Blogger blogs that host nothing original and are loaded with AdSense.

Everything that I publish on my site is 100% original. I have been publishing online for over 12 years. The links to our site that we have received are all organic. We have NEVER bought links back to our site. We follow all of Google's guidelines. When things are going fine, my content ranks very well in Google for relevant searches. I don't have to do anything except write new content and publish it. This is the way it should be. Create quality content and be rewarded.

Increasingly, however, I am having a hard time maintaining a Google presence because other people just keep swiping my content. Our reward? Google punishes our site when other people steal our content. It does not matter whether they link back or not. A few things here and there don't seem to matter. But when people take a lot of content in a short period of time or when they take our content and publish it (WITHOUT PERMISSION) on sites that are much bigger than ours, Google decides to completely eradicate our site from its rankings. Google tosses out the articles that have been copied AS WELL AS the ones that HAVE NOT been copied.

I have been studying this issue for several years now. It never fails. My content ranks well until it is stolen. Then Google throws out my site. The pattern is so predictable that I can see it happening. There is nothing I can do about it except try as hard as I can to get the stolen content removed as quickly as possible. Sometimes, I am able to salvage my site from ruin. Other times, I can't, and I'm left to clean up the mess made by someone else.

You have to just love it too when someone takes your content and uses it to promote the infringement of other copyright protected content. The fact that Google promotes these by suggesting the words "torrent" and "rapidshare" and other similar phrases is criminal.

You also have to just love it when someone takes your content and uses it to sell the same products on their site (or some other big affiliate site). This happens all the time. People steal. The anonymity of the internet makes it even easier.

This alone is annoying beyond belief. However, when Google decides the sites featuring the stolen content are more relevant than yours -- even though you wrote and published the content a month, a year, or 5 years ago -- it becomes maddening.

This is absurd. I file spam reports. I file reconsideration requests. Nothing changes. The only thing I am left to do is try to get the content removed. If I am successful -- which is not always possible -- my site eventually comes back. This takes time, though. Between getting the content removed and waiting for Google to realize that the content has been removed, success can take a month or two. In the meantime, the fresh, new, original content I publish fails to rank and often it never achieves PageRank. Nice job, Google!

Yep, that's right. People steal my content, Google gets confused, and Google reduces my site's authority and refuses to give me credit for anything.

Google's algorithm is horribly corrupt. Yahoo and Bing do not have this problem. My ranking does not change on other search engines when people steal my content. The article that is stolen ranks in the exact same place. It isn't bumped down a few spots, and it certainly isn't removed completely. The articles that haven't been stolen also rank in the exact same place. They are not bumped down a few spots, and they certainly aren't removed completely.

Why can't Google get this right? Is this intentional? Their lack of responsiveness to spam reports and reconsideration requests and their very very slow response to DMCA complaints certainly suggests so.

The idea that out-of-print but copyright-protected books could be made available is a wonderful idea on paper. There's a lot of good stuff that you just can't find anymore, and it's a shame. It would be great if these things could be made available in a way that both protects the rights of the people who created them AND provides them with an income stream for their hard work, dedication, and creativity.

However, I would certainly not trust Google with the responsibility for protecting the rights of the people who produced this content. Lord knows, Google's own employees were responsible for uploading copyright-protected content to YouTube. Google as a corporation has a very serious culture problem with preserving intellectual property rights.

In fact, Google has shown time and again that the only intellectual property rights they are willing to defend are the ones pertaining to their own patents. Everything else is fair game, and if they can make money off your content by getting it listed on some other site, you can bet they will do just that.

I've heard of this Mahalo site, visited it awhile ago and never came back because I thought it was a Yahoo Answers clone. I was pretty shocked to see this SEO Book article pop up in my RSS. I gave Mahalo another visit and typed in a few queries and was BLOWN AWAY to see 5 or MORE Google AdSense blocks listed on a single page (any AdSense user knows that 3 is the limit):

(From Adsense TOS)
"How many Google ads can I display per page?
Print

Currently, AdSense publishers may place up to three AdSense for content units on one webpage. You may also place a maximum of three link units and two search boxes on each webpage."

Actually, I've found it to be down right confusing to tell what's an ad and what's a link since there are so many ads on that site.

If Google refuses to do anything about this, then we have a huge problem here. The only resolve is if social networking search truly does overtake search engines. As webmasters, it's pertinent to get the word out about this scraper.

Is it just me or Jason is trying to "polish Aaron's shoes" by saying "great SEO guy"!

http://calacanis.com/2010/01/25/my-thank-you-email-to-aaronwall-for-the-...

Not long ago he claimed that all SEO are scammers, it appears that he changed his speech now, maybe hoping that people will go easy on him.

This is a plea to the SEO community: Never go easy on him!
He called all SEO spammers for his own profit and out of greed, so he could get some publicity. That's not good.

It's a shame that some people think that the only way to success is stepping, crushing others and taking advantage of everyone in their way. It's very sad...

I can't feel anything but sorrowful for him, people behave like this out of greed and insecurity.
When feelings like this dominate a person's mind no fortune or power will make them feel rich.
He'll always be a poor soul no matter the size of his bank account.

Spot on tinotriste.

Once a person is willing to stamp their name and face on a series of lies to make a Dollar then there is no cash pile large enough to make them happy. And over the years the lies just get bigger and bigger until everything collapses.

...in fact the first conversation I ever had with Matt Cutts was about the weirdness of how superior content pages on weaker domains are ignored for subpar content pages on strong domains.

Will google ever fix this? If broken = lots of money, probably not?