Posted February 28, 2011 1:01 pm by with 1 comment

Tweet about this on TwitterShare on LinkedInShare on Google+Share on FacebookBuffer this page

When Google set its sights on removing content farms from search results, everyone expected Demand Media to be the biggest loser. But according to a data set provided by Sistrex Demand Media’s biggest offender eHow, not only didn’t take the bullet, they actually gained in a few areas.

So who did take the hit? Sistrex compared one million keywords before and after the change and announced that the top three biggest losers were, ezinearticles and Suite 101.

WiseGeek’s owner told the Wall Street Journal:

“We got unfairly lumped with a lot of players that had much lower-quality content. We’re not perfect, but I vouch for the quality of our content.”

The quality of their content might be acceptable, but one look at their pages and you’ll see why they got dinged. There are up to five lines of adsense ads in between each paragraph of text. Mahalo and Examiner also landed on the top 25 losers list and they’re less heavy-handed with their ad placement.

Skimming the list, which you can find here, it does appear that every other website that pays their writers in partial pennies for traffic took a hit.

Now, to be very clear, at least one name on the list, Answerbag, gets some or all of its content from Demand, so technically, they lose on that level. But, Sistrex says that overall, Demand’s eHow gained in value and in keywords.

The only thing more interesting than Sistrex’s chart, are the comments at the bottom of that page. I’m particularly fond of the one that says this proves that Demand Media is not a content farm and the one that professes that Demand Media has no soul.

What do you think? Is there a big conspiracy behind all of this or is it simply proof that you can’t use a mathematical equation to determine quality content?


  • What I found quite interesting about this update was the correlation between search results in Bing & Yahoo as soon as sites dropped from Google. We had 2 content-thin sites drop off Google, only to be dropped off Bing & Yahoo 2 days later. Coincedence? I think not…