Dofollow Links on Press Releases: Good or Bad?
-
Hello,
I know that Google says that you are supposed to make anchored text links nofollow on press releases, but what about just putting the site url itself (example.com) and making it dofollow?
Is that okay?
-
Well said as usual, Takeshi.
Hell I'm thinkin' about skipping the PR all together now and just sending this article out to some online publications instead... we'll see.
-
I've never heard of anyone getting penalized for a press release link. Ever.
That being said, Google has warned against dofollow links in press releases, and using anchor text links can put you at risk of Penguin. If you are just using your URL, you should be perfectly safe for now, but there is always the risk that Google may change things later.
The actual link juice that these links pass isn't very significant, so it may just be safest to nofollow the link, depending on your risk tolerance. If you want dofollow backlinks, there are much cheaper and effective ways of obtaining links that actually matter.
-
I appreciate what you are saying - so my gut feeling would be if you looked at it from the point of someone that never read this sort of thing then you would post it and not worry about no follow but your link would most likely be www.yourdomain.com, so I think this would be ok as it is more natural - though at the end of the day this is just my opinion and your choice as no one truly knows the impact. I would still think about looking outside the box and seeing how you can push the exposure of this article to gain you more authority online.
-
Excellent advice and I lean white-hat 99.9% of the time. I think this is a bit grey-hattish though.
The conspiracy theorist in me would say that Cutts would emphasize this even if it wasn't an actual target of their algorithm. I think at this point he has everyone scared and there's a chance that he could say this and not put anything into action. Maybe he'll come back and check it out again 3 months later and see if there has been progress made.. You know? Again, conspiracy at best.
The sites I'm referring to have incredibly thin content and a terrible link profile. Yet they're ranking on page 1 for pretty competitive keywords.. Best content I see on there is prweb or marketwire and it makes me go O_o
Thing is we do build links naturally and appreciate doing so. Our Press Release is actually news-worthy as far as our company goes (it's the release of a new service we've been developing) and if we never read any of this stuff we wouldn't think twice of just throwing a link to the relevant page discussing our new service offerings.. bah.
Nonetheless I think your points are sound and I'm leaning toward playing it safe as well.
-
"I see SO so many sites ranking with nothing but press releases and garbage article submissions... What does it all mean? I don't know. But I do know we are working on a press release to go out this week and I need to make a decision on this...hmmm"
Depends how safe you want to play it and how strong the content of your press release is! How many press releases have you done in the past with followed anchor text links? Do you have a strong well balanced link profile? I see sites that are still getting away with using this practice but they are in for pain when Google finalizes how it will deal with those abusing its latest guidelines - I don't think Matt Cutts and others at Google would empathize this if it wasn't worth taking note of! As with many manipulative practices those committing them don't suffer straight away but when they do get caught it is usually painful...
I would opt to play the long game and look at using your press releases as a way of attracting more attention that will lead to links and social shares rather than using them for direct followed links to increase authority..
-
"Remember the main aim of your press release is to gain your brand exposure"
WELL SAID SIR!
I really like this the most.
As for whether or not to nofollow, I'm entirely on the fence here. I know what Google says but I don't know what Google does. Tom Roberts, where are you? I saw your comment on the seland thread referenced here and am wondering if you went and built those thousand free PR links for your client??!
I see SO so many sites ranking with nothing but press releases and garbage article submissions... What does it all mean? I don't know. But I do know we are working on a press release to go out this week and I need to make a decision on this...hmmm..
-
I think that none keyword anchor text such as your websites URL is safer if you are going to have a followed link from a press release. Although I would be careful if you are creating a press release to gain authority from the link(s) in it with the recent changes by Google. Remember the main aim of your press release is to gain your brand exposure and even if the link from it are no followed if you do it well and what you have published is news worthy you are likely to pick up followed links and social shares from other sources indirectly anyway.
Always a good recap I think - http://searchengineland.com/google-links-in-a-press-release-should-be-nofollowed-like-advertisements-168339
-
I'd disagree. This is obvious depending on where you release it. The new guideline does state optimized anchor text and if you are just linking to your homepage, that is fine.
As long as you are not optimizing the anchor text, it would be alright if you just link to your homepage with just the URL.
-
Make it nofollow. They are pretty clear with their explanation
Got a burning SEO question?
Subscribe to Moz Pro to gain full access to Q&A, answer questions, and ask your own.
Browse Questions
Explore more categories
-
Moz Tools
Chat with the community about the Moz tools.
-
SEO Tactics
Discuss the SEO process with fellow marketers
-
Community
Discuss industry events, jobs, and news!
-
Digital Marketing
Chat about tactics outside of SEO
-
Research & Trends
Dive into research and trends in the search industry.
-
Support
Connect on product support and feature requests.
Related Questions
-
Increase of non-relevant back-links drop page ranking?
Hi community, Let's say there is a page with 50 back-links where 40 are non-relevant back-links and only 10 are relevant in-terms of content around the link, etc....Will these non-relevant back-links impact the ranking of the page by diluting the back-link profile? Thanks
Algorithm Updates | | vtmoz0 -
Is it bad from an SEO perspective that cached AMP pages are hosted on domains other than the original publisher's?
Hello Moz, I am thinking about starting to utilize AMP for some of my website. I've been researching this AMP situation for the better part of a year and I am still unclear on a few things. What I am primarily concerned with in terms of AMP and SEO is whether or not the original publisher gets credit for the traffic to a cached AMP page that is hosted elsewhere. I can see the possible issues with this from an SEO perspective and I am pretty sure I have read about how SEOs are unhappy about this particular aspect of AMP in other places. On the AMP project FAQ page you can find this, but there is very little explanation: "Do publishers receive credit for the traffic from a measurement perspective?
Algorithm Updates | | Brian_Dowd
Yes, an AMP file is the same as the rest of your site – this space is the publisher’s canvas." So, let's say you have an AMP page on your website example.com:
example.com/amp_document.html And a cached copy is served with a URL format similar to this: https://google.com/amp/example.com/amp_document.html Then how does the original publisher get the credit for the traffic? Is it because there is a canonical tag from the AMP version to the original HTML version? Also, while I am at it, how does an AMP page actually get into Google's AMP Cache (or any other cache)? Does Google crawl the original HTML page, find the AMP version and then just decide to cache it from there? Are there any other issues with this that I should be aware of? Thanks0 -
Link reclamation and many 301 redirect to one URL
We have many incoming links to a non existing pages of a sub-domain, which we are planning to take down or redirect to a sub-directory. But we are not ready to loose pagerank or link juice as many links of this sub-domain are referred from different external links. It's going to be double redirect obviously. What is the best thing we can go to reclaim these links without loss of link juice or PR? Can we redirect all these links to same sub-domain and redirect the same sub-domain to sub-directory? Will this double redirect works? Or Can we redirect all these links to same sub-domain and ask visitors to visit sub-directory, manual redirection? How fair to manually redirect visitors? Any other options? Thanks, Satish
Algorithm Updates | | vtmoz0 -
Member's Badge as Link Building to Homepage or Internal Pages?
Providing members and embeddable badge is a well known link building tactic. Is it better to have the badges from hundreds or even thousands of members link back to the homepage of a website, or a lot of different inner pages? The inner pages would the their individual's profile which sits under a category (such as a service and organisation by location). Member's websites would be related to the content of the website generally. What are the advantages of each? 1. Links to homepage make it easier to rank for competitive keywords on the homepage? If the types of websites were to vary a lot, say a carpet cleaning website and a web designer website, if they all linked to the homepage, would it cause some confusion for the link profile?
Algorithm Updates | | designquotes0 -
I think my inbound link anchor text looks un-natural to google - How to fix?
Hi all, For a bit of back ground see this question i posted recently: http://www.seomoz.org/q/lost-over-65-of-organic-visits-since-sept-please-help From the responses there and looking into my backlinks and my competitors i can see an issue with the anchor text on my inbound links... nearly all keywords and very very few brand names etc... From what i can gather (using open site explorer) the page in question has: 1100 inbound links from 900 domains These use 90 different anchor texts 106 of these links use my brand / website name in the anchor text These 106 links are spread over 18 domains (73 from 1 directory) About 5-10% of the links are from directories, the rest are from what i would describe as "proper websites" From my very limited knowledge of this, the issue is my brand / website should have a far higher ratio of links using it as the anchor text then any keyword... which as you can see from the above is not the case... If it wasnt for that 1 directory there would only be 33 links with my brand from over 1000... I need to start fixing this, but was wondering how to start... Below are a list of options i could try, i have no idea if these would help or hinder, any advice you could give on the potential affects of below options would be very helpful: Options (the below are hypothetical, i have no idea if i will be able to get it done - Just thinking out loud here): Get as many as possible of the "directory" links removed Remove keywords from 50-60% of links and replace with branding Or Try to add branding to 50-60% of the anchor texts something like [Brand] + [keyword] Forget about whats been done previously / changing it will not help in anyway / and focus on branding in anchor text for any future link building? Thanks James
Algorithm Updates | | isntworkdull0 -
Outsourcing of guest blog articles and usefulness of links from guest blogging
I'm not the greatest writer but want to do some guest blogging for links and traffic. Are there any businesses out there that write world class guest blog articles for subjects that match my business? Also, i've read that doing this for links is really moot because the blog posts get archived and become pagerank "unranked" thereby offering little link value after about a month or so. Once they get archived do they still get counted by google and does the anchor text and page rank still count? Thanks in advance mozzers! Ron
Algorithm Updates | | Ron100 -
Should I link to competitors?
Hi, I was wondering: we work in an extremely competitive market. There are 6 companies, offering the same service in my country: price comparison in a niche market. The competitors have hundreds of different websites, using iframe-techniques. Would it be helpful for me to link to those 6 competitors, in a piece of content about our company strategies, USP's and overview of the market? From a transparency point of view, i would prefer telling my visitors there are other competitors, which are undoubtedly performing very well, but we perform better on several aspects of the price comparison. On the other hand, my competitors benefit from the backlinks as well. Is my gain bigger than the gain of my competitors do you think? Has anyone tested this once?
Algorithm Updates | | Beekhuizen1 -
Localised Hosting is Good for SEO - But How Local?
Hi SEOmoz community, A UK based client will soon be opening an office in the USA. We have advised them to create a new website specifically aimed at the US market, primarily because the way you talk to your potential customers is slightly different than here in the UK. However, this has also raised the question of hosting. Of course we'll be advising them to host their new US site in the States, however does it matter where? For example, if their office is in NYC, would it matter if their hosting was based in Dallas? I.e. does Google rank sites hosted in a US city / state higher for localised searches? Interested to hear your thoughts - thanks for your time! Mark
Algorithm Updates | | RiceMedia0