This is a clear-cut canonical issue, right?

[Martin_S]

Hello,

A client is having one of their daily blogs published on a industry news site along with on their own site. This is a clear-cut case of having a canonical tag implemented on the client's site on each blog page, right?

Thanks

[GPainter]

I'll just go ahead and copy and paste a response from a q&a from yesterday

In short yes, canonical is great on site as it puts all the juice on one page however over multiple sites I don't think its as efficient. I've given you some helpful info so I'll leave it to you I hope something helps here

"As far as I'm aware and webmaster guide lines are the following is true :

"Can rel="canonical" be used to suggest a canonical URL on a completely different domain?

There are situations where it's not easily possible to set up redirects. This could be the case when you need to migrate to a new domain name using a web server that cannot create server-side redirects. In this case, you can use the rel="canonical" link element to specify the exact URL of the domain preferred for indexing. While the rel="canonical" link element is seen as a hint and not an absolute directive, we do try to follow it where possible."

canonical is for on page more than off site.

Supporting this Matt Cutts mentions that they prefer 301

So bit of truth in it"

• Good luck

[Martin_S]

Thanks,

I think you've answered this in that it's best just not to use duplicate content all together.

[GPainter]

It's always my preference sometimes its unavoidable (e.g e-commerce) but most of the time it's not too difficult to rewrite or come up with fresh content. Glad I could help.

[Martin_S]

yeah, I think it's best to suggest they rewrite their blogs before re-distributing now.