Duplicate Content and Boiler Plates in Press Releases - Does it Matter?
-
Hi All,
We are in process of syndicating a few press releases on company news over the next few months. These aren't fluff PRs, they are actual news and can provide some value for linking opportunities (woohoo).
Anyway, we are a public company, so there are some relatively strict guidelines as to what content we publish. A great place to place some flexible links is in the boilerplate of a release. However, we can't change that content around too much on each PR.
So, question is, are there any negative implications on pushing out that kind of duplicate content on the web. Clearly, it's not our intention to spam whatsoever. But, I can see how the same type of content going out on the web multiple times in coming months good send off a negative signal.
Takes/thoughts?
-
Why the thumbs down when I said the same as Kate?:
"Ensure you have it on your site first"
-
Doubt it. Google has most syndicated press release services on a list of "don't allow these links to pass PageRank." I imagine for this very reason.
Being a big public company you don't really need to worry about penalties. Just ask yourself, "would I feel comfortable telling a search engine engineer what I'm doing to market my website." If you answered yes, don't worry about it. You're one reconsideration request away from getting out of the penalty if one were to ever arise.
-
Well, the information publicized is the kind of stuff that we have to disseminate to follow Wall Street regulation. Naturally, these things get picked up and placed on sites such as Yahoo Finance, CNN Money etc.
To my knowledge, we do syndicate through Business Wire but only after it is put on the company website first.
From an SEO standpoint, we are in need of quality links routing back to us. We have a plethora of inbound links. I am of course worried about any Panda penalties that could arise, but we aren't doing anything deliberately black hat. Our links that have been in these releases historically (prior to my arrival here in January), have all been links to social media or branded in the form of www.example.com. We also haven't seen any non-season changes in traffic.
So, lets say without syndication, reputable sites still pick up the release. In that case, should we still use proper linking?
-
I honestly think that "company news" has very tiny value compared with information about how to select products, how to use them, what can be done with them.
Nobody gives much of a crap about numbers, staff changes, store openings.... yawn... . Focus on evergreen content.
-
In my experience there are two kinds of public company news: either real-time "material information" (i.e. potentially market moving, monitored by regulators) or basically PR stuff that can be planned in advance. I'd deal with the two types differently. Wouldn't worry about widely disseminating the former in just about any manner, standard operating procedure, but would treat the latter differently as described above: establish on company website first, then press release, don't syndicate.
-
The point of press releases is to get the idea and news in front of writers to entice stories. They have since been bastardized into syndicated content on the web that does little for the end use or the company. I am with EGOL, don't syndicate releases like this. Use the stories to get the attention of journalists and writers.
If you must send them out, don't do so with the intention to link build. They are going to be copied over and over. Ensure you have it on your site first and try to get stories out of it, not just "coverage."
This is a longer and more involved process but it's the best one for everyone involved.
-
These aren't fluff PRs, they are actual news and can provide some value for linking opportunities (woohoo).
If I had content that is this good I would not be syndicating it. I would want it exclusive on my own site.
Links in press releases are a good way to get Penguin problems.
-
I would make sure if you also have the press release on your website that you have it on your site before you send it out to others. This makes you the source of the news.
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
-
If other people copy your content, is really GOOD or BAD for SEO ?
Hi MOZ friends. Last week, when i was following up the backlinks linking to my domain, i detect that a new website from an unknown administrator copies the content of an entire section of my website. The administrator of that webpage did not remove the internal links on the post, so i could find.
Branding | | NachoRetta
My website has a better domain and page authority and we focus every day on create new content, but when we found people that only copy content from another, i feel disappointed. But then I got to thinking that could be good that people copy our content, although they did not quote us. If they do not remove the links either by mistake or on purpose, we receive new backlinks. ¿What do you think about this? ¿Is really good that a website copy our content? If they remove all backlinks, Is risky that Google detects that the content owner is another? ¿What do you do in this cases?1 -
Linkedin: Inshares - Can I see who inshared my content?
Hi All, Just wondering... since the demise of Linkedins' Signal tool, is there a way to actually see who and where my content is being shared on Linkedin? Blog posts being published at the minute are getting inshares almost as soon as they're live and I want to know who's doing it. Any advice would be appreciated.
Branding | | SanjidaKazi1 -
Blogging/content strategy
While personal blogging & branding is pretty typical for those in a service/b2b industry, when it comes to CEOs/owners of retail businesses - not so much. We have a company blog right now that is heavy on company news and updates - and will be working towards being more informational/educational. But, in the meantime, it's difficult getting the ok to contribute to contributor based article/resource sites - such as http://smallbiztrends.com, since the business blog, by nature, is promotional. (our clients are both business & consumer) Assuming, we can generate enough content, my suggestion is to have the owner create a personal blog which will be purely information and educational, and use that blog to account for the owner's expertise and use those articles as means to get accepted as a contributor at highly prized sites. At the same time, we would still have a business blog that combines educations & company news/promotional. Does this seem like a sound strategy? or is it better to just build up the company blog as an educational resource. Will reputable sites be ok with an educational company blog?
Branding | | S.S.N0 -
Content Marketing for E-Commerce Sites
Let's have a real discussion about content marketing for B2B and B2C e-commerce sites. As an SEO/inbound marketer (these days, I'm not sure what to call myself other than my first name), it's part of my job to keep a pulse on what's going on in the online marketing community. My daily routine starts with checking several sites for news/discussion (Moz, Inbound.org, SearchEngineLand, etc). Anyone actively involved in the community knows the word "content" appears in more articles than any other word (ok, maybe there a few others). Want to increase brand awareness? Generate content. Want to drive more traffic to your site? Generate content. Want to build quality links? Generate content. Want to discover the Higgs particle before the physicists? Generate content (and distribute to the right audience, so not to the chemists - ok maybe to the chemists, they're a related audience). Content, content, content, we're told! Yes I did see the Rand's WBF from a couple months back about content-less marketing, but frankly his suggestions fall under the traditional model of advertising and word-of-mouth. We're online marketers baby, we're expanding and changing the traditional model - with content! Enough of content marketing about content marketing. Let's see some content marketing for the small B2C, mom n' pop client who sells gardening tools. Let's see the amazing infographic you made for your local pizzeria client that drove traffic to their site. Let's see the Q+A discussion thread you identified and contributed to as means to display 'market leadership' in your niche of home air purifiers. Look, I love the idea of content marketing to increase brand awareness and drive traffic. Displaying market leadership by answering questions and offering something beneficial to your target audience should be the way to grow business (along with having a good product/service, I guess). But it's much easier said than done. And to be clear, I never expected otherwise. The motivation for this post was to start a discussion about real-world, applied content marketing, not content marketing about content marketing. Let the conversation begin.
Branding | | b40040400 -
Should we create content for a competitor?
We've got an opportunity to create video content for one of the highest authority news sites in our region. It's a great opportunity for links - PR8, DMR 7.84, DMT 8.86 and also to build our brand. However the site is also one of our main competitors in the SERPs, and we would be providing content to them that serves some of our most important seasonal and year-round keyphrase targets. So my dilemma is whether it is better to create the content and get the links, keep the content for ourselves and aim to make our site the authority for those keyphrases, or place the content with another (less authoritative) site that doesn't compete in our space?
Branding | | GBC0 -
Has anyone had success with product page rel=author? Can I protect the content but dump the face on the SERPS?
Hi, Is there a way to get the benefits of rel=author for protecting site content but to disconnect that from the face photo on the SERPS? We added rel=author to our unique and individually written product descriptions and reviews. This has led to a decrease in click thru thus far. I suspect this is because when searching for a product to buy the user sees the face and thinks "review" or at least "not corporate". I don't nec. want to dump rel=author in the sea yet for our ecom pages, has anyone had success with product page rel=author? Four our keywords, we are the only company of 10 well known travel sites that have the face in the SERPS, far from improving our CTR, it has trashed it. Any ideas?
Branding | | xoffie0 -
List Quick and Dirty places to seo-tag images/content for new brands
I'm helping a new brand (service industry) to try to dominate the first page for their own name. They have a name that also exists in another state AND a negative Yelp review which (shows up #4, whilst they show up #1 on google unpersonalized search). Aside from Linkedin/Facebook/twitter, what are good places to Tag Images and have them show up under the search for this company's name. This is a picture/heavy industry (jewelry) and I'm looking to create profiles on several sites that would immediately show up if I tag the content properly. Are quora/pinterest good choices? I need to grab-bag as many properties as possible. Secondary question: would these properties on quora etc, respond well to exact-match anchor text links to shoot them past the negative yelp rating that is showing up #4 for their brand?
Branding | | ilyaelbert0
