commit: eecb0f2 - 932 (2014-08-01 02:33:53 -0400)
Good article, but an extremely misleading title... Doesn't mention anything at all about how he got a link from The Guardian? Feel a little mis-sold...
I gave the author this feedback as well. It's a pretty good post, but the title is completely misleading. Clickbait title gone wrong.
Misleading titles seems kinda shortsighted. This being said, I like the post a lot better than the title. I really think we need to move beyond "How I got a link from X" posts. It makes all of us focus on small tactics instead of strategies that will help us in the long term.
"N.B. The End! Client confidentiality means I couldn’t talk specifically about how I got the Guardian link, but drop me an email and I’ll happily reveal all!"
Ha, what a joke. Classic example of poor link-baiting.
I also hate these sort of "hey, check out my latest link guys" posts. Woop de doop. Congrats on doing your job?
I got a link on http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology (see "our pinboard links" section at the bottom of the left nav).
Guess how I got it:
1) I wrote an interesting blog post: http://www.happier.co.uk/blog/apple-ripping-off-everyone-apart-from-americans-average-iphone-5-international-mark-up-32-samsung-s3-11-3153
2) I tweeted their tech journo the link.
Hey presto a link on the Guardian.
lol i wrote the seomoz article he references in the post. i thought the name sounded familiar!
Was actually thinking of that article Larry.
The difference here has to be the methodology your post goes into. It really is a case study, not a general guide, which is where I think it succeeds.
I know the answer to this. You pay a PR agency ~$4500 and you get 2-3 mentions of stories from your site and at least 1 link.
Sorry the link wasnt clickable first time
Great! Head over to login and use your credentials there