Did newspapers just destroy SEO?
We use a range of distribution networks for our clients and we all work very hard as a team to source quality partners for content, links and news. Like any good SEO agency, we also utilise press releases to push relevant stories regarding not only our clients but the agency as a whole. We were always aware that the really good press releases would be picked up by the local and national papers and (if we were lucky) this might even lead to a lovely link for us if published online. The only thing we had to be concerned about was the duplicate content issue….

However, the team received a memo from Dave N this morning regarding press releases and newspapers and the fact that we shouldn’t be in so much of a hurry to utilise this resource from, well right now really. There’s a very obvious crackdown on outbound links on newspaper sites from Google and if the results we are seeing are true this is not only affecting The Independent but also:
- The Express Group
- Mirror Trinity
- Johnson Press
- The Telegraph
amongst the nationals, but also many local newspaper sites (which are mostly owned by the nationals too of course). We understand that newspapers are currently being contacted by Google and being asked to remove links (especially those placed after the articles have been written – ie comment links and links that are placed for payment in articles weeks or months after it had gone live). As a company, we have been aware that placing links in articles once they have picked up PR is not an uncommon practice in the industry, and we also knew that it would probably come to no good which is why we stayed well away. However, we do have some legitimate links on these sites that were placed as part of a press release or an interview and these are slowly being removed through no fault of our own. So much for all the hard work eh?
It also leaves the agency in a very difficult position regarding press releases – do we continue to pour time and budget into drafting and distributing these if we are just going to be penalised for it? It will be interesting to see just how seriously the online press are going to take the Google threats and how much of an impact that is going to have on general rankings and traffic over the next couple of months.
Image courtesy of Flickr
57 Comments
Search Insights - http://searchinsights.wordpress.com
I’d imagine compliance with removing these links would be really slow, newspapers are hard pushed as it is however I have noticed in the past a lot of local online newspapers giving followed links to paid advertisers – I’d always assumed this was out of lack of knowledge rather than any attempt at spam though
MJ7 - http://www.mjdigital.co.uk/blog/
Knackers – another one bites the dust!
I suppose it will be interesting to see how much effect this really has on white hat SEO and online PR. I have no problem with Google policing the net and clamping down on dubious link building methods but let’s hope they don’t adopt their usual heavy-handed approach and just ban the lot!
Colin Bruce - http://www.geocast.com
So, Google creates pagerank and then asks papers to remove links in press releases. Before page rank existed these links would probably still be there. So by definition Google is asking, no, forcing papers to change the way they use the internet?
Justin Parks - http://www.justinparks.com
Woo! Thats a bit of a revelation but honestly, not totally unexpected. Im surprised the newspapers are investing in manpower to do this though, especially with the view many of them hold that Google (the internet) is actually destroying their industry.
In the long run though, it will probably help us as the SERPs will be a little cleaner. how it affects folks will all depend on how the messed about with sly tactics like inserting links after PR has been gained. Like you guys I have never bothered with it so basically, meh, its another episode for me to watch and see the outcome!
Tony Tellijohn - http://www.ackmanndickenson.com
Google is contacting newspapers asking them to remove links, or make them nofollows (which many probably are anyway)?
If they’re asking to have the links actually removed, isn’t this (yet another) example of Google trying to change the way the web has worked since…well, forever, just for their benefit?
Carla - http://www.bronco.co.uk
@Tony
Google are contacting papers and asking them to remove the link/s completely.
Linkbuildr - http://www.linkbuildr.com
No surprise here I guess…they’ll still let the largest corporations get away with it as well. Paid links have barely dropped off the radar, and they’re still working wonders for so many large sites.
This is business, eat or be eaten.
KeyboardWarrior
Hey Dave/Bronco/Carla.
Do you buy links? Or are you in that crowd that categorically say they don’t but do?
What if I’m a client and I want you to buy me links?
Fe, fi, fo fummmmm I smell a blogpost by a hypocrite person.
esoomllub - http://www.esoomllub.com
I’ve got a thought, why doesn’t Google just ask everyone to remove links, all links. 🙂 That will solve the problem of links for SEO purposes once and for all, because we will surely all comply.
Bill Hartzer - http://www.billhartzer.com
I would still put some time and effort into writing press releases. I don’t think that press releases will just vanish over night.
Rather than just pumping them out to news websites and use automated press release distribution methods, you might want to actually take the time to identify individual bloggers and writers/journalists that will be interested in receiving your press release(s) on a regular basis.
Rakeye
Has this been substantiated? Surely the papers wouldn’t give up a revenue stream just cos Google commands it?
Paul Carpenter - http://www.itsafamilything.co.uk
I still think “SEO killed the Daily Star” would have been a better title
Helen M Overland - http://www.searchenginepeople.com/
It sounds like it might be the newspapers who are being overzealous in complying with Google’s request – it makes sense for Google to request the removal of paid links (although the comment links have me scratching my head a bit), and the newspapers have gone overboard in removing all links instead.
Good to know though – thanks.
Carla - http://www.bronco.co.uk
@ Paul – not sure that the Star could technically be called a ‘newspaper’ though…..;-)
James
The newspapers in the picture are:
New York Times (7th September, 2008)
USA Today (4th September, 2008)
Christian Science Monitor (26th September, 2008)
What do I win?
No, seeing as you ask, I didn’t have anything better to do!
Gareth - http://www.seo-doctor.co.uk/
I knew this was coming, I’ve been contacted so many times recently from local newspaper networks looking to sell links.
Tommy - http://www.thomasgarciastudio.com
Hey guys,
This has been happenin over here for years now. We report them (though I personally dont bother now) and I guess Google stops them passin juice.
Look in the bottom left hand corner here: http://www.nypost.com/news/business
Its not new, they been doing it for years, same as Forbes.com and la whole bunch of others. Great brands buy these slots and rank well; though wheter its from these links, who knows.
I think the SEO community kinda destroys itself by outing each other at every operutunity. Its exactly what Google wants. There are severalk good firms in the US (conductor being an example) who argue that if a newspaper or other good brand wants to editorially give a link to another great brand it should be able to without fear of damage.
Google cant really ban the NyPost or Forbes as they are good brands and people expect to see them in the listings; plus the PR guys have been doing this for years and only just got wise to making their liunkbacks do follow with anchor text. They are paid links too, just indirectly.
I like this guys post about outing each other being a lot like collaberation http://www.hobo-web.co.uk/seo-blog/index.php/no-outing
Paid links is always gonna be a hot topic and if a customer wants to then of course I will. Its all about the risk Vs reward and making sure they are informed. If a good brand buys links to rank Google would be crazy to shoot them down anyway. One thing I would say is though if you guys at Naylor SEO Co are buying links you are mighty brave to be outing others!
Gandalf's Big White Hat
This is utter nonsense… Unless Google is offering significant compensation why on earth would traditional media bow to their commercial enemy? If anything trad media would realise that they finally have a hold over the single company that has destroyed their ad revenues.
I love the irony of bloggers creating these kind of rumour based stories to generate chatter… and this is an apparently ‘ethical’ way to soak up link juice!!
Building relationships with publishers, finding mutually acceptable commercial arrangements, focusing obsessively on relevancy and adding value to a user reading an article by creating links to additional related info is unethical… but bloggers banging on about the right and wrong of dealing in a market that Google has created by commoditising links, and at the same time driving huge amounts of links and tweets through rumour mongering is ‘ethical’
clap clap guys… round of applause
SearchCap: The Day In Search, May 27, 2010 - pingback
[…] Did newspapers just destroy SEO?, David Naylor […]
Kyle Alm - http://keepkalm.com
“I would still put some time and effort into writing press releases. I don’t think that press releases will just vanish over night.
Rather than just pumping them out to news websites and use automated press release distribution methods, you might want to actually take the time to identify individual bloggers and writers/journalists that will be interested in receiving your press release(s) on a regular basis.
Bill Hartzer | http://www.billhartzer.com
27th May 2010 @ 19:16″
This is the right approach. If your SEO is on auto-pilot you will crash into a mountain while Google effectively redraws the map in mid-flight by re-writing the search algorithm.
Everfluxx - http://twitter.com/everfluxx
Hi Carla, can you share your source? Or can any newspaper representative confirm that Google contacted them asking to “remove links” [sic!] from their website? Thanks.
Aaron Bradley - http://www.seoskeptic.com/
I’ve always considered it questionable that news releases distributed by the big PR sites (PR Web, PR Newswire, etc.) should be included in Google News. By definition, in fact, “press releases” are more closely allied with marketing than news (though, cynically, in this day and age where so much “news” is TV anchors regurgitating what’s been fed to them by corporate communications specialists, I guess it’s not difficult to see how this has happened).
So a bit of a case of Google being hoisted on its own petard. Give legitimacy and vastly improve the chances that a press release will garner links by letting the beasts into Google News – and then try to claw back that value once you realize it’s all going south.
For links appearing in actual newspaper articles this is a bit stickier. As with all paid links, there is the difficulty of determining if a link was purchased, or whether it simply appeared there organically, especially for links that were added post-publication. Ironically, I was complaining just the other day that newspapers seem never to link out. 🙂
Yoki
I don’t get it – why are they contacting the newspapers and asking them? Why not just ignore external links on pages of type x on domain y. Seems silly to contact them – they’re just telling people that this is really working.
Tim Dineen - http://www.exposureonline.com
Links are good for humans, too!! I hate reading a newspaper article online and not being able to click to the relevant website or at least somewhere to get additional information. Newspaper (and TV and Radio) website content sucks enough already, it’s just going to get worse if this type of behavior is followed and continues.
Newspapers + Links = Angry Google | One SEO Blog - pingback
[…] juicy links as well. It would appear as though these efforts may have been useless as more and more links are being removed at the request of Google. All of this because newspapers have been aggressively pushing the sale of […]
Google Still Busy Killing Off the Link Graph, One Link at a Time | KnowYourUser.com - pingback
[…] that newspapers are looking to sell SEO services, Google is rumored to be out and about asking them to remove links: We understand that newspapers are currently being contacted by Google and being asked to remove […]
Miss Zed - http://www.searchengineoptimisationworks.com
oh dear – and considering all the comments – this are quite some news… and i can just empathise with most – firstly, i can’t see newspapers to follow suit quickly – and if they get paid for links, even less – this move could just make those links becoming more commercial, with newspapers realising the revenue stream at that end… also – whats this whole ‘removing’ links thing? is this not the basics of the world wide WEB?
Karyn Fleeting - http://www.tinderboxmedia.co.uk
“I would still put some time and effort into writing press releases. I don’t think that press releases will just vanish over night.
Rather than just pumping them out to news websites and use automated press release distribution methods, you might want to actually take the time to identify individual bloggers and writers/journalists that will be interested in receiving your press release(s) on a regular basis.
Bill Hartzer | http://www.billhartzer.com
27th May 2010 @ 19:16″
LOL – I think Bill misses the point. Here (a digital PR agency) we do exactly as he suggests, and have a good track record getting links from national and local newspaper websites – links that aren’t paid for, and which weren’t added some way down the line. But from what you are saying, Carla, it sounds like these are for the chop too. What a shame.
Gareth Rees - http://www.clearseo.co.uk
Wow, interesting stuff, it’ll be interesting to see how they police this though. Newspapers are struggling enough as it is without wasting manpower on removing links. I’ve been building some great “natural” links within features in local newspapers for a current campaign and it’s brought us great results, I wonder how long they’ll last..
Oliver
Interesting can any of this be substatiated by either Google or the newspapers in question. I find it very hard to believe that either would have publicly or privately commented on this. I’m not personally an advocate of buying links, but one thing I do know is that I certainly wouldn’t be making comments like this about companies for whom litigation is a part of their business without having some pretty solid evidence to back it up?
Chis - http://www.pixeldistibution.co.uk
Firstly, as we are predominately a traditional PR agency, we sent out releases before Google and we will still send them out now.
PR is a tool that has been jumped on by SEO’s, it is being used as a means to an end that it was never intended for. Having said that who can blame us.
If Google decides to use a metric in their system and then, low and behold, that metric starts getting exploited it can’t then expect the web to change the way it works to fit it’s flawed system, nor should it be shocked it is being gamed. If it does, then I feel it is making a big mistake. They must stay fluid and adapt to the ever changing shape of the web. Something that I have always thought it has done well, this is also why this news shock me to a certain extent.
The web is alive, fluid and organic. It will continuously shape itself to fulfill it’s purposes (mainly to make people money).
Google is a website, just like any other millions of websites out there, they have no power to enforce change, albeit massive influence. This is why people will not like being told what to do. They will be happy to follow, but they will resit being lead.
Now I’m off to investigate this story further… does anyone have any information to the specific massages/threats sent to the press?
Is now time for Google to address their own problem? | Holistic Search Marketing | SEO Consultant | PPC Consultant - pingback
[…] to find a solution to a problem all of their own making? However looking at respected sites such as David Naylors tackling this issue already, it would seem that this is a problem already having far reaching […]
Gerry White - http://www.usablecontent.co.uk
its got to be said that papers have been dodgily selling links for a long time, and Google has been fairly leniant with them, they did know what they were doing … Or at least the company holding them did, the way in which you get non-user friendly links in unusual places…
The problem is that “my site” needs traffic, most would come from Google – however I need to feed the kids and the value of selling followed links is pretty high (compared to other streams) …
That said I think that Google (the companies whose entire fortune is built on selling links) should only be able to interject on followed links …
Lord Manley - http://twitter.com?status=@LordManley
It seems that The Independant are pulling comments to avoid this issue, but there is much more awry than the commenting. Directly purchased links are surely more likely to cause an issue for the newspaper sites?
See – http://www.independent.co.uk/travel/uk/pull-on-your-posh-wellies-and-go-glamping-1717031.html
Is that a stonking great paid link to holidays for directholidays.co.uk I see in the final paragraph? It hasn’t been nofollowed (and wasn’t there on the article last year when it was initially published).
David W - http://www.david-whtehouse.org/
@Lord Manley – I believe Google are likely to have a change history. One thing I am concerned about is that one of my clients previously had been mentioned in the Independent, a few months later after lots of chasing, I finally managed to get a link added to the article going to my clients’ homepage with the url as the anchor text. This is my opinion is a perfectly white hatted technique – but it might be seen as otherwise if Google investigate newspaper article change history.
Anthony - http://www.anthonyshapley.co.uk
@Lord Manley – Superb spot, I’ve seen a few other instances of these “Contextual” links popping up in old stories.
@David – I really wouldn’t worry about it. When it goes South, Google will just discount all links from the independent – as they won’t be able to tell the difference from links picked by Journalists and those placed at a late date.
I very much doubt they archive every time a change is made to a page for comparisons. It would require too much storage space. Also have to consider every menu/banner/code change. I doubt Google could easily tell them apart.
David W
@Anthony – thats the problem m8, if it gets discounted thats a big chunk of link juice lost for a small client.
Blogercise - http://www.blogercise.com
Doesn’t quite add up to me.
If Google don’t want to include these links wouldn’t it be a lot quicker for them to pop some lines into their code that exclude the links they don’t like? IF site is newspaper AND link is in content OR added months after page first seen THEN weight link low. They must be pretty good at that kind of thing by now?
This kind of artificial link manipulation doesn’t seem to help anyone, as others say above, who are they to dictate how the web works?!
Jorgen Sundberg - http://jorgensundberg.net
Well you can see their point, if press releases are turned into link building exercises it certainly dilutes the purpose.
Anthony Shapley - http://shapley.eu
Press Releases shouldn’t be a link building exercise – Google doesn’t want any “link building excising” rather a meaningful story/release with “SEO” as a consideration.
At Bronco at least Press Releases for our clients are a rare opportunity, we try to work with our clients so they get maximum benefit from there story. Stories aren’t ever released for the sake of it.
That said.. I know a lot of people and even some agencies solely depend on that kind of strategy. Might as well get in Google news and rely on the scraper websites.
Joe M. - http://sportsblonget.com
I highly doubt that Google is contacting anyone. It seems to be that Google probably just caught the newspaper in question selling links and heavily penalized it or they were heavily penalized for another reason and they just found out they were not supposed to sell links. Since last December Google’s algorithms have been changing a lot so unless you are able to provide a source this isn’t really news.
SearchCap: The Day In Search, May 27, 2010 | 123-sale.com Blogs - pingback
[…] Did newspapers just destroy SEO?, David Naylor […]
Julian - http://www.organic-coconut-oil.com/
I can confirm one of my competitors got knocked of the first page. Nice 🙂
BTW what happened to the mobile formatting of the blog. The current formatting makes it very difficult to read on the iphone.
Gary Holler - http://www.searchenginexperts.com.au
Yeah don’t buy this at all. Newspapers contacted about removing links? I doubt it. Newspapers round the world sell links both purposefully and without realizing. Huge paper groups in the US do it all the time. Mainly to big brands.
What source or paper gave you this doubtful info?
Plus people paying PR firms to issue rubbish statements in the hope of a link to a crap site is not that different to a good quality brand affording to pay for the editorial link if you think about it.
Gary Holler - http://www.searchenginexperts.com.au
The other thing i dont get with this story is that we all know paid links are wrong yet lots of agencies still use them.
But you pay Yahoo for a directory link, that passes juice and Google are cool with that. Why? Because its manually looked at?!
I doubt Newspapers would give out links without ensuring quality either {probably more so}.
Its this kind of two faced approach which makes SEO companies out each other at every opportunity whilst engaging in link buying themselves.
So what’s the difference Mr Cutts?
Buy a link from Yahoos directory, buy one from a Newspaper.
Ian Macfarlane - http://ianmacfarlane.com/
I see that the Independent took down that spammy link less than two hours after @LordManley posted it. That was pretty darned quick!
Bob
http://www.independent.co.uk/arts-entertainment/books/features/richard-dawkins-strident-do-they-mean-me-1796244.html
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/asia/kabuls-new-elite-live-high-on-wests-largesse-1677116.html
http://www.mirror.co.uk/celebs/news/2009/08/23/x-factor-s-danyl-johnson-fancies-cheryl-danni-and-simon-115875-21616725/
so are these editorial choices or just paid links !
paul carpenter - http://www.itsafamilything.co.uk
Haha – journalists can bleat about the integrity of the trade as much as they like but those are hysterical!
KeyboardWarrior
We all love a bit of outing
here’s one:
http://seobiography.wordpress.com
KeyboardWarrior
Haha – SEOs can bleat about the integrity of the trade as much as they like but those are hysterical!
Gordon - http://www.ecalpemos.org
No need for newspapers to remove comment links. Just make all links nofollow. Thats what most blogs do these days.
SEOP - http://www.measuredup.com/review/SEOP-Inc-Review-SEOP-Inc-www.seop.com-search-engine-optimization-23062
Great insights! I myself believe that SEO is here to stay. It’s just a matter of SEOs doing their best not to be affected by these new trends that is trying to destroy the industry.
Felix
Sooooo…..
this is just the kind of thing that needs substantiating evidence reaally isn’t it.
In other News Google is powered by the tears of tiny puppies
Felix
Suppression des liens sortants sur les sites d'information - pingback
[…] auprès des journaux américains et anglais sur leur politique de liens sortants. Sur le site de David Naylor, on dénonce Google faisant pression sur des journaux […]
Lisa - http://www.weddingcarshop.com/
I feel if everything is done within the limits then its fine. As far as the serious ness is considered, the online press are going to take the Google threats as seriously
g1smd
If newspapers are commanded to remove outgoing links from articles, where do their readers go for further information or to find the source of the story?
Google Search of course!
Freelance SEO Consultant - http://www.digitalmarcomms.co.uk
I think it’s just getting harder and harder in SEO – all the traditional doors are being shut or made narrower and new weighting is being applied to different factors all the time. I actually read somewhere today that links are going to start becoming less and less important in algorithm rankings, so don’t know whether that’s true or not? I suppose the rise of social media is going to spark a new generation of SEO best practise as more and more people use it.