![\"Black](\"https:\/\/www.aseohosting.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/05\/Black-hat.webp\")
Of course, even getting stuff past Google\u2019s radar doesn\u2019t change the fact that spun content will inevitably be of lower quality than anything produced organically.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
See, most content spinning applications replace words and phrases with synonyms. Unfortunately, they don’t grasp the English language well. They tend to produce garbled, nonsensical word salad. It’s rarely workable content.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
As an example, spinning the phrase \u201cthe quick brown fox jumped over the lazy dog,\u201d could easily result in something like \u201cthe express fawn fox plunged up the dull dog.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Moderately amusing, sure.<\/h2>\n\n\n\n
But workable in an online marketing context? Hardly. You might as well just hurl a thesaurus at your keyboard \u2013 you\u2019d probably end up with the same results.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Additionally, the quality of spun content is much lower. It won’t resonate with readers. Therefore, it won’t get many social media shares. It also won’t receive many incoming links. Social networks are very important for online marketing now. This might be the technique’s worst flaw.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Okay. So it\u2019s pretty obvious that automated spinning is bad, and you should never do it. But what about spinning an article manually? Is that alright?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Yes and no.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
If you\u2019re re-imagining it (or paying a writer to do so) in order for the content to appeal to a different\/new audience or from a different perspective, that\u2019s perfectly acceptable. <\/p>\n\n\n\n
It’s the same deal if you change a piece’s format. For example, you might republish a blog post as a video. Then again, I would argue these practices aren’t truly “content spinning.” They actually require the marketer to put in some effort.<\/p>\n\n\n\n