Link Relevancy in Digital PR - How Much Does it Matter?

This feels like a debate that is as old as link building itself, although arguably, SEOs have only really "worried" about the relevancy of the links they build since around 2012 and the Penguin update which specifically targeted low-quality SEO tactics (note, not just links!). Since then, it's been clear that low-quality SEO tactics are far riskier and whilst many will still work, deploying them for a brand isn't something that should be done lightly. 

Link relevancy is a funny one to me because I see it debated a fair amount. In fact, it was this tweet from Mark Rofe (now running Christmastrees.co.uk) which triggered some of the thought processes here which I originally shared in The Link Building Newsletter in October 2020. Most debates seem to treat relevancy as something which is almost binary:

• Either a link is relevant or it's not
• Either you need relevant links or you don't

In truth, like many signals that Google can use related to links, I think that there are many layers to it and what Google can do with those signals. So, let's talk about some of those layers as they relate to digital PR which essentially, is one way of describing using content to generate links from top-tier publications.

Relevancy of links (anchor text)

Let's start with the link itself and specifically, the anchor text. For a long time, you stood a good chance of ranking well if you built enough links with anchor text that contained your exact target keywords. If you wanted to rank number 1 for car insurance, you just built enough links with the anchor text car insurance. Like now, the competitiveness of the SERPs played a big part, but the technique was sound and relatively low risk. 

Then, as mentioned above, Penguin came along and bulldozed its way through a bunch of spammy SEO tactics. Whilst not completely proven, my experience at the time was that websites with far too many commercial keywords in their anchor text got hit big time. 

Did this mean that as a signal, anchor text was dead?

No, not at all. Google just turned the dial down for this particular signal related to links and turned up their sensitivity to this potentially being marked as spam. Run any kind of test today and you'll see that anchor text is still a signal, it's just less clear where the dial is sat and what is "too much" from Google's perspective. Saying that anchor text doesn't matter is wrong even recently, Google has confirmed that it helps give them context as to what a link may point towards.

Chances are that if you do digital PR, you probably do not have control over anchor text anyway, that's kind of the point - it's under the editorial control of the journalist or writer that you're working with.

A more common variation of digital PR that may lead to the control of anchor text is when you place a comment from a spokesperson into a news article. In this scenario, you may well be asked to provide copy that includes a credit link.

If you're in a position where you do control it or can nudge it in a certain direction, then you need to understand the bigger context here - the link profile of the website that you're working on. If they already have a lot of commercial keyword anchor text in their profile, then adding more without adding more branded or neutral anchor text could be a problem - assuming you're building lots of links! Likewise, if it's a new domain and has a very small link profile, you don't want to fill it with commercial anchor text from day one. 

Overall, this is one part of the puzzle and it matters, but don't look at it in isolation, there is a lot more to consider.

Relevancy of the linking page (content)

We also need to consider the relevancy of the page itself where the link to your domain is placed. If the anchor text is car insurance, but the content surrounding the link is about coffee beans, then this doesn't exactly fit.

Personally, I think the best way to think about the relevancy of a linking page is to join the dots between the page itself and what it is linking to - is there a natural step between the two for a user to take? 

For example, if you've launched a piece of content that shows how natural Christmas Trees are more sustainable and good for the environment than plastic ones, the page linking to this should probably include topics such as:

• Christmas
• The environment
• Sustainability
• Climate change
• Christmas tree buying guides
• etc

You get the point.  

If the opposite is true, then not only is this a red flag to Google about the legitimacy of the link, but you're very unlikely to get any traffic from this link which is a benefit that link builders often forget about. 

If you don't have this connection and build a link on a page where people aren't likely to click through, does that make the link worthless? 

Honestly, on its own, I don't think so. But we'll come back to this shortly. 

Relevancy of the domain

This is where things get a little more complex because we're not just talking about the relevancy of the page itself, what about the domain as a whole? Is this something that Google could take into account when deciding how much value to pass across the link?

Let's consider a couple of examples:

• You're a sofa retailer and you get a link from a health and fitness website because they've written a blog post about developing a bad back with certain types of sofas.
• You're an artificial grass retailer and you get a link from an office supplies website because it can be used in meeting rooms.

Whilst there may well be good reasons for the link itself (you can easily join the dots above for a user) will these links mean as much because the overall relevancy of the domain is very different from yours? There is a likelihood that the majority of pages on the domain are topically different from your domain, does that count against you?

Another example is where you get a link from a website such as the BBC or CNN who obviously cover a huge amount of topics aside from yours. Does the authority that they can pass outweigh the potential relevancy issue?

Relevancy of your content

Finally, what about the relevancy of your content? Is it a piece of content that ties in with the brand itself and makes sense for them? As link builders, many of us at some point have created some content for a domain which was a bit of a stretch in terms of relevancy, but we knew would get links. The days of doing this over and over aren't quite gone yet, but I personally think their days are numbered. Having said that, like most signals when it comes to link building, I don't think that one or two irrelevant content pieces amongst a sea of relevant content are a problem.

Ultimately, I think that the focus for us as link builders should be to create content that strikes a balance between link-worthy and "making sense" for the domain. The content needs to resonate on some level with potential customers of the business and its product. If you can do this (it's not always easy) then you're not only playing a safer game when it comes to Google, but you're creating content that has value way beyond the links that you build. 

What kind of value? Here are just a few ideas:

• The content could rank for relevant keywords in its own right, driving relevant traffic from search
• People who click through from the links you build stand a chance of remembering and engaging with the domain in the future
• Other channels such as paid retargeting or email marketing can be connected to the content so that potential customers could be led into those channels too

It is also far easier for a Googler to devalue content that has clearly been created just for links and has no other value or relevancy. Whilst I personally don't think that Google does this manually a lot, I do think that they do it if it's being done en masse. If it's being done en masse, then it's more than possible for algorithmic filters to detect a problem too.

Bringing this all together - the value of relevancy

The point I really want to make here is that deciding on whether you need relevant links or whether they work or not isn't a binary decision. There are many factors at play and I've only outlined a few key ones here. There are others such as the competitiveness of your industry and what's "normal" in that industry, for example. 

In the end, I think the answer lies in a couple of things:

• The link profile of your domain and ensuring that there is a good balance of different relevancy signals
• Building links and creating content that makes sense for your users will always add more value
• One aspect of relevancy isn't likely to be a deal-breaker on its own, it's the combination of different signals that matters

 Agree? Disagree? Let me know in the comments.

This article was originally published in the October edition of The Link Building Newsletter.