PRweb & PRnewswire
-
Hi Guys,
Looking for thoughts on press release websites in terms of link value. Recent press releases on both these sites have recently appeared in OSE with DA's of 93/98 and PA's of 47/48 - great stuff.
Given we can control anchor text and include links these are great opportunities to combine anchor text vs branded links, include citation and co-citations all from within the main body of the release too depending on the PR package you subscribe to.
So are these link opps as valuable as they appear or could they be devalued based on the fact they are sat on these PR sites? Might Google view them as no more important than links from ezinearticles? Are they frowned on even more as they might be considered paid links?
Further to this, if they aren't as high value as their DA/PA suggests then might an extra filter in OSE to account for this be useful?
Interested to hear your thoughts
Cheers
James -
For what it's worth and to update my previous response, see this from Search Engine Land. I think the URL is self-explanatory:
-
Matt Cutts on press releases, as quoted by SearchEngineLand:
Interesting bit:
Matt clarified that the links in the press releases themselves don’t count for PageRank value, but if a journalist reads the release and then writes about the site, any links in that news article will then count.
-
Hi James,
We have used PRWeb for the last 10 years to release some quite compelling press releases that have worked quite well for our client’s in announcing new services or updates to existing services.
Your question are they valuable then yes initially and a well written press release supported by a good SEO and social media campaign can prove beneficial. As for a long-term linking campaign I don’t feel it is beneficial – the press releases are picked up as static content and placed mainly as is on a variety of websites that for the most part are not indexed by Google.
There is a very good article by Tim Grice about the very subject: Are you wasting your time with online press releases?
Thanks
Vincent
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
-
International Blog Structure & Hreflang Tags
Hi all, I'm running an international website across 5 regions using a correct hreflang setup. A problem I think I have is that my blog structure is not standardized and also uses hreflang tags for each blog article. This has naturally caused Google to index each of the pages across each region, meaning a massive amount of pages are being crawled. I know hreflang solves and issues with duplication penalties, but I have another question. If I have legacy blog articles that are considered low quality by Google, is that counting against my site once or multiple times for each time the blog is replicated across each region? I'm not sure if hreflang is something that would tell Google this. For example, if I have low quality blog posts: blog/en-us/low-quality-article-1
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | MattBassos
blog/en-gb/low-quality-article-1
blog/en-ca/low-quality-article-1 Do you think Google is counting this as 3 low quality articles or just 1 if hreflang is correctly implemented? Any insights would be great because I'm considering to cull the international setup of the blog articles and use just /blog across each region.0 -
301ing Pages & Moving Content To Many Other Domains
Recently started working with a large site that, for reasons way beyond organic search, wants to forward internal pages to a variety of external sites. Some of these external sites that would receive the content from the old site are owned, admin'd and/or hosted by the old site, most are not. All of the sites receiving content would be a better topic fit for that content than the original site. The process is not all at once, but gradual over time. No internal links on the old site to the old page or the new site/url would exist post content move and 301ing. The forwarding is mostly to help Google realize the host site of this content is not hosting duplicate content, but is the one true copy. Also, to pick up external links to the old pages for the new host site. It's a little like domain name change, but not really since the old site will continue to exist and the new sites are a variety of new/previously existing sites that may or may not share ownership/admin etc. In most cases, we won't be able to change any external link pointing to the original site and will just be 301ing the old url to the contents new home on another site. Since this is pretty unusual (like I wouldn't get up in the morning and choose to do this for the heck of it), here are my three questions: Is there any organic search risk to the old site or the sites receiving the old content/301 in this maneuver? Will the new sites pick up the link equity benefit on pages that had third party/followed links continuing to point to the old site but resolving via the 301 to this totally different domain? Any other considerations? Thanks! Best... Mike
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | 945011 -
Implementing AMP pages on WordPress blog
Hey Moz Users, Has anyone tried using the WordPress plugin for AMP pages on their blog yet? Here's the link to it: https://wordpress.org/plugins/amp/. The implementation seems pretty straightforward but since there will be an AMP and a mobile friendly version of the posts on my blog I'm worried it will create a lot of duplicate content issues. I've seen a lot of articles pointing to a rel canonical tag that can be used to fix this situation. Not sure if I'm going to have an AMP version of all the posts on my blog, so this seems like it would be a pain to place the tag manually on specific pages with the AMP version only. Has anyone tried this plugin and what have you done to fix this duplicate content issue? Thanks
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | znotes0 -
Ecommerce, SEO & Pagination
Hi I'm trying to workout if there's something wrong with our pagination. We include the rel="next" and "prev" on our pages. When clicking on page 2 on a product page, the URL will show as something like - /lockers#productBeginIndex:30&orderBy:5&pageView:list& However, if I search site:http://www.key.co.uk/en/key/lockers in Google, it seems to find paginated pages: http://www.key.co.uk/en/key/lockers?page=2 I have a feeling something is going wrong here, but haven't worked massively on Pagination before. Can anyone help?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | BeckyKey0 -
Site architecture: Deep drop menus & flat hidden menu?
I hope this makes sense. I am creating a site that will have normal drop down menu structure that will be about 3 levels deep: site.com/category/topic/sub-topic . I also want to add content that will be set up under a hidden menu, but with a sidebar module (placed on the relevant pages that are set up under the drop down) with links to other custom pages that will be relevant to the drop menu pages, but i'm hoping that the flat structure pages will show better for search: site.com/content-page The reason I am asking is because I have seen a competitor do this for a personal injury law firm and they show everywhere (throughout California) for vanity search -"city car accident lawyer". When you go to the site, they have a personal injury drop down that is 3 layers deep, but when you click down the layers, and look at the URL, they are all "flat" site.com/car-accident-lawyer, not site.com/personal-injury/accidents/car-accident-lawyer. Is having a hidden menu a problem? Is this strategy problematic in any way? Hope that makes sense. Thank you for any direction. BB
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | BBuck0 -
Yoast & rel canonical for paginated Wordpress URLs
Hello, our Wordpress blog at http://www.jobs.ca/career-resources has a rel canonical issue since we added pagination to the front page and category-pages. We're using Yoast and it's incorrectly applying a rel-canonical meta tag referencing page 1 on page 2, 3, etc. This is a known misuse of the rel-canonical tag (per Google's Webmaster Blog - http://googlewebmastercentral.blogspot.ca/2013/04/5-common-mistakes-with-relcanonical.html, which says rel-canonical should be replaced with rel-prev and rel-next for page 2, 3, etc.). We don't see a way to specify anywhere in Yoast's options to correct this behaviour for page 2, 3, etc. Yoast allows you to override a page's canonical URL, otherwise it automatically uses the Wordpress permalink. My question is, does anyone know how to configure Yoast to properly replace rel-canonical tags with rel-prev and rel-next for paginated URLs, or do I need to look at another plugin or customize the behavior directly in my child theme code? This issue was brought up here as well: http://moz.com/community/q/canonical-help, but the only response did not relate to Yoast. (We're using Wordpress 3.6.1 and Yoast "Wordpress SEO" 1.4.18)
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | aactive0 -
Google Ranking Generally in Germany - Keywords & Umlauts
Hi Mozzers, I was hoping i could get some advice/opinions on a website ranking problem i have been working on, in particular one of the pages. This is our German language website which is hosted from Germany and a flaunt German speaking member of staff from our German office moderates the text content of the website for us.Our website seems to get good traffic ,visitor navigation and conversions. One of the keywords i focus building around is Schallpegelmessgerät which is one way of basically saying Sound level meter in German. The keyword uses an umlaut which i cannot use in the URL, but google is picking up and putting into the snippets, but apart from that our on-page optimization is good according to the moz tool. I have been trying to improve our content and we post many blog articles around the topic/keyword but google.de seems to choose not to even display this on the first couple of pages and sometimes ranks our blog articles around the third page. We are even been outranked by some low quality cheap online shop websites some of which with low quality content and low page and domain authorities. I had accepted this but after looking at bing.de and doing a search i find our page in the top 5 results, i understand that google and bing's algorhythms are different but just struggling to get my head around it all. Here is our website & page - http://www.cirrusresearch.de/produkte/schallpegelmessgerat/ Any advice on this situation would be greatly appreciated, thank you very much for reading this James
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Antony_Towle0 -
"Starting Over" With A New Domain & 301 Redirect
Hello, SEO Gurus. A client of mine appears to have been hit on a non-manual/algorithm penalty. The penalty appears to be Penguin-like, and the client never received any message (not that that means it wasn't manual). Prior to my working with her, she engaged in all kinds of SEO fornication: spammy links on link farms, shoddy article marketing, blog comment spam -- you name it. There are simply too many tens of thousands of these links to have removed. I've done some disavowal, but again, so much of the link work is spam. She is about to launch a new site, and I am tempted to simply encourage her to buy a new domain and start over. She competes in a niche B2B sector, so it is not terribly competitive, and with solid content and link earning, I think she'd be ok. Here's my question: If we were to 301 the old website to the new one, would the flow of page rank outperform any penalty associated with the site? (The old domain only has a PR of 2). Anyone like my idea of starting over, rather than trying to "recover?" I thank you all in advance for your time and attention. I don't take it for granted.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | RCNOnlineMarketing0
