Is it a bad idea to have a "press" page and link to press mentions of our company?
-
We've recently been getting quite a bit of press.
Would it be wise to create a "press" page and link to mentions of us or would this devalue the links on the press pages as Google may think they reciprocal?
-
I agree with Scott and Takeshi, also give credit to people linking to you is a good way to enhance their value and so the one they're passin to you.
Maybe you can consider a dynamic footer with a slideshow of the mentions you receive in external sites, like you see in movie trailers. This will give you a testimonial like added value mentioning your backlinker without even having to link back to them.
-
Also, you could always "nofollow" the outgoing links if you were afraid of giving credit to them.
-
I think it's a good idea, and would be good social proof. Reciprocal linking is only a problem if Google thinks you are just exchanging links to manipulate your PageRank, which obviously isn't the case with news mentions.
If you absolutely don't want to link to them, at least create some testimonials using choice quotes from the news mentions. Or even better, create an image with the label "Featured On" or "As Seen On" and include the logos of all the places you've been featured.
-
I think a press page would be a good addition. It wouldn't harm your rankings to link out to quality news sites. You could summarize each mention/link with your own paragraph of text to give the links context.
Scott O.
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
-
Is it good or bad to add noindex for empty pages, which will get content dynamically after some days
We have followers, following, friends, etc pages for each user who creates account on our website. so when new user sign up, he may have 0 followers, 0 following and 0 friends, but over period of time he can get those lists go up. we have different pages for followers, following and friends which are allowed for google to index. When user don't have any followers/following/friends, those pages looks empty and we get issue of duplicate content and description too short. so is it better that we add noindex for those pages temporarily and remove noindex tag when there are at least 2 or more people on those pages. What are side effects of adding noindex when there is no data on those page or benefits of it?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | swapnil120 -
Google WMT/search console showing thousands of links in "Internal Links"
Hi, One of our blog-post has been interlinked with thousands of internal links as per search console; but lists only 2 links it got connected from. How come so many links it got connected internally? I don't see any. Thanks, Satish
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | vtmoz0 -
Why does old "Free" site ranks better than new "Optimized" site?
My client has a "free" site he set-up years ago - www.montclairbariatricsurgery.com (We'll call this the old site) that consistently outranks his current "optimized" (new) website - http://www.njbariatricsurgery.com/ The client doesn't want to get rid of his old site, which is now a competitor, because it ranks so much better. But he's invested so much in the new site with no results. A bit of background: We recently discovered the content on the new site was a direct copy of content on the old site. We had all copy on new site rewritten. This was back in April. The domain of the new site was changed on July 8th from www.Bariatrx.com to what you see now - www.njbariatricsurgery.com. Any insight you can provide would be greatly appreciated!!!
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | WhatUpHud0 -
Intra-linking to pages with a different Canonical url ?
Hello Moz Community! I'm hoping to get some advice around intra-linking practices and the benefits when a page that is being linked to has a different canonical tag than it's own URL. Confused? Allow me to elaborate. Scenario: Background: Ecommerce Company is trying to increase its organic ranking for key, broad terms in the cycling industry. Ecommerce company is trying to rank its category pages for a main term. To help this, the company focusing on increasing the quality of its intra-linking structure (the links and anchor texts that link to another page within the site). Example goal: to have it's Road Cassettes category page rank for 'Road Cassettes' Company's 'cassettes' main category page is here: /Components/Drivetrain/Cassettes/ And the company uses filtered navigation logic to drill down into 'road cassettes' specifically: /Components/Drivetrain/Cassettes/?page_no=1&fq=ATR_RoadBiking:True SEOs are instructed to include occasional links back to this page, with SEO friendly anchor text, to help strengthen it's authority for the main term. The Issue / Question: Main category URL: /Components/Drivetrain/Cassettes/ Road Cassettes category URL: /Components/Drivetrain/Cassettes/?page_no=1&fq=ATR_RoadBiking:True Road Cassettes Canonical URL: /Components/Drivetrain/Cassettes/ The canonical URL of the filtered Road Cassettes category is its main category URL. Will Company be able to effectively rank its Road Cassettes category URL for 'Road Cassettes' if the canonical URL is the main category? Should the canonical URL not be the main category? OR Will increasing the intra-linking to the Road Cassettes URL help the main category URL rank for 'Road Cassettes' - by passing all it's authority?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Ray-pp0 -
Effect of Removing Footer Links In all Pages Except Home Page
Dear MOZ Community: In an effort to improve the user interface of our business website (a New York CIty commercial real estate agency) my designer eliminated a standardized footer containing links to about 20 pages. The new design maintains this footer on the home page, but all other pages (about 600 eliminate the footer). The new design does a very good job eliminating non essential items. Most of the changes remove or reduce the size of unnecessary design elements. The footer removal is the only change really effect the link structure. The new design is not launched yet. Hoping to receive some good advice from the MOZ community before proceeding My concern is that removing these links could have an adverse or unpredictable effect on ranking. Last Summer we launched a completely redesigned version of the site and our ranking collapsed for 3 months. However unlike the previous upgrade this modifications does not URL names, tags, text or any major element. Only major change is the footer removal. Some of the footer pages provide good (not critical) info for visitors. Note the footer will still appear on the home page but will be removed on the interior pages. Are we risking any detrimental ranking effect by removing this footer? Can we compensate by adding text links to these pages if the links from the footer are removed? Seems irregular to have a home page footer but no footer on the other pages. Are we inviting any downgrade, penalty, adverse SEO effect by implementing this? I very much like the new design but do not want to risk a fall in rank and traffic. Thanks for your input!!!
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Kingalan1
Alan0 -
2 links from the same external page question
Hi, I have always thought if 2 links on a single page, both going to the same url wouldnt pass PR from both. I watched a Matt Cutts vid and he was saying in the original algo it was built in that both links would pass PR. So for example if I guest posted say 1000 words and this article had 2 links pointing to the same url would they both work? Cheers
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Bondara0 -
Does google detect all updated page with new links
as paid links? Example: A PR 4 page updates the page a year later with new links. Does Google discredit these links as being fishy?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | imageworks-2612900 -
Are External Links Really Bad for SEO?
I have a quality site with good PR and we have very few outbound links. We are always looking for good content since it is a blog, and I get frequent requests from "guest bloggers"–some of which actually provide really high quality & unique content. But, of course, to get their content I have to give them at least 1 link. I have always been taught that external links really hurt your site and that basically 1 outbound link cancels out 1 inbound link because they balance each other out. Is this true? I always wondered why we must get penalized for linking out to good sites? It makes me get very "stingy" with my outbound links, whereas if my site would not be effected, I would want to be more generous. Any suggestions & info would greatly help! Thank you, Afshin
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | applesofgold0