Link profile heavy with press release syndication links caused drop at Penguin 2.0
-
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 penaltyYour thoughts are much appreciated!
-
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.
-
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.
-
Good point David. I will be digging into things further rather than taking things on face value!
-
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.
-
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.
-
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!
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
-
Best Link Building Strategies in Modern SEO
Hello, In light of all the updates and also in guest blogging being only for nofollow links now, what's some of the best strategies for link building for ecommerce sites? We're in an industry where the content doesn't get linked to very much. Thanks.
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | BobGW0 -
Disavow links leading to 404
Looking at the link profile anchor text of a site i'm working on new links keep popping up in the reports with let's say very distasteful anchor text. These links are obviously spam and link to old forum pages for the site that doesn't exist any more, so the majority seem to trigger the 404 page. I understand that the 404 page (404 header response) does not flow any link power, or damage, but given the nature and volume of the sites linking to the "domain" would it be a good idea to completely disassociate and disavow these domains?
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | MickEdwards0 -
Still Battling On With Link Profile Audit
I'm getting there, I can see the light! 🙂 I have covered one complete audit of the link profile and I am now going back over it looking at the links I had 'question marked' - I should have this completed by the end of this week and I will then focus on using DISAVOW for the links that I am really struggling with, the foreign sites that are in Chinese or Russian, the sites that have absolutely no 'contact us' information and have been privately registered (in WhoIs) I have come across this domain which links to our site about 8 times and although I cannot find any contact info I can't quite make my mind up, to be honest I would rather get rid of it BUT I'm trying to avoid taking the easy option of disavowing where I can; http://www.askives.com/ Fo anyone who has gone through what I am currently going through, please help me just this once and tell me 'should it stay or should it go'?! 🙂 Many thanks! Andy
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | TomKing0 -
Link idea? good or bad?
OK so my website ranks fairly well for keywords i would say 50-60 % are ranking in the top 3 my DA is 15 and PA is 28 I have a few other sites that i blog on that i own they have a DA of 11 and PA of 20 i was thinking of just guest posting on those using a keyword Anchor text that im not ranking for and seeing what that would do. I was thinking of creating a few other sites and just blog about random stuff for 3-6 months generate traffic and start guest posting redirecting links back towards me. Is this bad?
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | gslc0 -
Being penalized for unnatural links, determining the issue, and fixing the problem. What to do?
Hi all, A client has been penalised, having received the message in Google Webmasters last week, along with two more yesterday. It seems the penalty is for something specific: “As a result, for this specific incident we are taking very targeted action on the unnatural links instead of your site as a whole“. This is the first time I've had to deal with this so I'll be a bit layman about it The penalty, firstly, seems to be for the old domain, from which there is a re-direct to the current one. This redirect has been in place since Feb 2012 (no link building has been done for the old domain since then). In Webmasters, I have the old and new domains set up separately and the messages are only coming for the old (but affecting the new, obviously). I need to determine if it’s the old or new URL I’m being hit for, or would that even matter? Some questionable links I can see in WM: There is an affiliate for whom WM is showing 154,000 links (all followed) from their individual products listings to the client’s site (as a related product) but they’re linking to the new domain if that matters. Could this affiliate be an issue? There is also Updowner, which has added 2000+ links unbeknownst to me but apparently they are discounted by Google. I see a ton of recent directory submissions - right up until last week - that I am not responsible for. Could that be intentional spam targeting? I did also use a 3<sup>rd</sup> party link building company for Feb, March and April who ‘manually’ submitted the new domain to directories and social bookmarking sites. Could this be issue? For what kind of time-scale are penalties usually imposed - how far back (or how recently) are they penalising for? Ranking were going really well until this happened last Thursday. Will directories with non-followed links effect us negatively - one such one has over 2000 links. What is the most conclusive way to determine which are the poor, penalty-incurring links pointing to us? I know I now have to contact all the dodgy directories the site is now listed on to get links removed, but any and all advice on how to rectify this, along with determining what had gone wrong, will be most appreciated. Cheers, David
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | Martin_S0 -
Penguin Update and Infographic Link Bait
Is it still ok to use infographics for link bait now that the penguin update has rolled out? Are there any techniques that should be avoided when promoting an infographic? Thanks
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | eddiejsd1 -
Multiple links to different pages from same page
Hey, I have an opportunity to get listed in a themed directory page, that has a high mozRank of 4+ and a high mozTrust of 5+. Would it be better to just have one link from that page going to one of my internal product category pages, or take advantage of the 'sitelinks' they offer, that allows me to have an additional 5 anchor text links to 5 other pages? I've attached an example. sitelinks.jpg
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | JerDoggMckoy0 -
Would linking out to a gambling/casino site, harm my site and the other sites it links out to?
I have been emailed asking if I sell links on one of my sites. The person wants to link out to slotsofvegas[dot]com or similar. Should I be concerned about linking out to this and does it reduce the link value to any of the other sites that the site links out to? Thanks, Mark
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | Markus1110