Link profile heavy with press release syndication links caused drop at Penguin 2.0

[QubaSEO]

I'm wrestling with something that I'm hoping members of the community can provide input on....

I've working with an enterprise level client that is in the business of data capture and distribution.

I've diagnosed a clear drop of traffic on May 22nd, i.e a loss of search visibility post Penguin 2.0.

Their link profile is big! Discussions with internal stakeholders who have been with the company 10's of years confirm that no "link building" service providers have ever been hired and no over-zealous employee is ever likely to have tried to "do" link building internally. They are just one of those lucky companies that by their nature publish information that people want to link to and share.

As a first port of call I've grouped links by anchor text and can see groups of hundreds of matching anchors based on their brand URL and specific page titles. The matching anchors have resulted from big take up of interesting data that they have marketed via press releases. NOT for link purposes.

My question is this....

Does the community think or have evidence (or can point me toward any case studies) that show that Press release syndication alone could result in:

a) a penguin penalty   or...
b) a devaluing of press release type links during Penguin 2.0 that could have resulted in a loss of search visibility and give the impression of a penalty

Your thoughts are much appreciated!

[SamuelScott]

I hate to make it more complicated. But any website that scrapes content is surely looked down upon by Google. So, I would disavow links from those scraper websites as well just in case.

As you wrote, something surely happened to you after that Penguin 2.0 update. So, I would disavow anything that could even remotely raise a red flag. (Note: You can write a note to Google explaining the situation directly in the disavow file -- as in, it was not your fault.)

Still, I'm curious by the fact that you got hit despite the links being nofollow and/or having mainly brand-name anchor text. It might just be the sheer volume of links from release-distribution sites and scraper sites that caused it (if it was a LOT). Google's not always good at understanding context.

[MarieHaynes]

I don't think anyone will be able to say definitively whether press release links can cause Penguin trouble, but I can tell you that they are often flagged on a manual review as examples of unnatural links.  When I'm doing backlink audits I usually remove any press releases with keyword anchors.  I'll generally keep the brand anchors unless the brand is really similar to a keyword.

[QubaSEO]

Good point David. I will be digging into things further rather than taking things on face value!

[QubaSEO]

Hey Scott,

Thanks for taking the time out for a comprehensive response.

Because my clients press releases have contained interesting and insightful data the volume of the links have come from lazy publishers that have taken/scraped the press releases from newswires and then re-published them verbatim.... including the brand links that have been included in the bio sections. This has resulted in lots of brand links.

I think i've been looking at it from the point of view that a press release with a branded link rather than an exact match link is OK but as you say "press releases are meant to get coverage and not _to get links directly". _Maybe Google's problem is with the fact that my client included a brand link in their press releases where it wasn't necessary or providing any value. If the links had been to 'find out more' type info perhaps this is a different matter.

I've been reading a couple of posts by the guys at Branded3 (here and here. Thanks for sharing Stephen Kenwright) that touch on how brand links in press releases were flagged as problematic by Google. Which helps to confirm suspicions that it is the press releases that have brought the penalty.

[Kingof5]

Regardless of what these long-time employees say, try to get in touch with whoever was in this position before you and find out for sure if link building was done. If the company's that big, it wouldn't be surprising if link building was going on and most people had no clue.

[SamuelScott]

First, as I'm sure you know but others at your company may not know, press releases are meant to get coverage and not to get links directly. (The best, earned links come indirectly as a result of the coverage.) Having exact-match anchor text only makes it worse.

Google itself states here that "links with optimized anchor text in articles or press releases distributed on other sites" are a violation of its guidelines. As a result, Google suggests making them "nofollow" whenever possible. As a result, many press release distribution sites now automatically add "nofollow" to links in releases. Nofollow links with exact-match anchor text are less likely to hurt you, but I would not still risk it.

Matt Cutts, Google's head of web spam, says this (in a comment): "I’m not against doing press releases; press releases can be a useful part of getting traffic and building a brand. For ranking in Google, however, the main benefit of a press release is not direct links or PageRank from the press release directly; it’s primarily the people who decide to write an article and link because of that."

What I would do:

1. Collect a list of all the backlinks directly from press-release distribution sites. Disavow all of them -- especially those that have exact-match anchor text and/or are dofollow.

2. In the future, put out press releases on such websites only when you have something legitimately newsworthy to announce (i.e., you're not doing it just to get links). And make sure that all links on those sites are nofollow and use natural language (no exact-match anchor text).

3. Ideally, I'd skip release-distribution websites altogether -- how much coverage have you actually gotten as a result? I'd use a PR strategy of pitching actual reporters at actual publications directly instead. Good luck!