Linking newspaper website content to outside sources always seems to throw up some challenges for journalists starting out in the online world so I thought I’d blog some tips and, of course, links on the subject.
While every blogger, online journalist and community editor knows that linking is currency as far as building, nurturing and keeping audience is concerned, newcomers to the online world often find it counter intuiative to “keeping” users.
In my experience the objections are;
1. Users might leave our site and never return.
2. We know everything there is to know on this subject so why would anyone need to go elsewhere.
3. It will make us look stupid if we’ve “missed” something.
And I know this experience is commonplace. Looking back at the comments left on the slideshow on regional newspaper activity I did back in May, linking was one of the hot topics for those responding.
At his blog, fellow links fan Craig McGinty points out that the BBC have taken on board the possibilities of linking with a project called BBC Topics which intends to include the best of external websites.
But even here, a quick look at the current Topics page for Gordon Brown only manages one authoritative external source – the Number 10 website. Seems there’s a leap of faith still required here then!
I’ve recently produced the tips listed at the end of this post as part of my ongoing training work and would be glad of any further contributions or experiences in establishing a linking culture.
But, seeing as I don’t have all the answers on this subject (and, given the topic it would be ironic not to!) here’s some links to the best I’ve come across so far;
* Links as news, links as reporting.
* How and where to hyperlink in a news story.
* What is links journalism.
* Linking and SEO presentation.
My tips on linking
* It is advisable to restrict linking to credible/trusted sources and include a disclaimer on your site making it clear that your organisation is not responsible for external sources.
* When checking on external links, be aware that it is very easy for a private individual to change a web page from innocuous one to something more risky in response to the traffic your newspaper is now providing thanks to their improved Google rank.
* Links should be to the specific piece of information being mentioned. For example, if you are writing about a government consultation into children’s play, don’t just take the user to the general link for the department for education: http://www.dcsf.gov.uk instead take them to the actual consultation document: http://www.dcsf.gov.uk/publications/fairplay/ This sort of deep-linking makes it easy for the user who will come to trust you as the most authoritative source of information on a topic.
* Bear in mind that if you had to register for a site in order to see the information, the user will have to do the same so provide instructions.
* It’s important to open links in a new window so that the user can remain with your site and to make it more obvious that the two sites are different.
* Decide a consistent style for the display of links commonly grouped together at the bottom of the story or elsewhere on the page.
* Blogs have made it commonplace to find links within the body text of the article. The same circumstances apply as above. The advantage is that users easily identify with the context of the link because the word, or words, are highlighted and underlined. The disadvantage to this approach is that users unaccustomed to online may find it a halting experience to click onto a new window part way through an article.
Oh, and finally, in answer to those three objections this post started with; 1. users will be more likely to return if the site is known to provide a comprehensive starting point, 2. unlikely that we know everything. No really, there’s some bright cookies who don’t work in newspapers and 3. you haven’t missed anything if you spotted it to link to it.
Dim Sum Digital 
Good common sense stuff here (as usual).
There is a lot of lip service paid to linking. Something I hear a lot is “we want to make our site the first port of call”. When examined more closely this all too often means “We want to make our site the *only* port of call”. “First port of call” implies many other ports of call.
Why does Google work so well? Because it is a “go away” site (I would normally use a stronger term 🙂 ). You come to Google, it shows you what you (think) you want then says – now go away! And we do. And we come back. Because we know it will give us another place to go to. And come back from.
I would go a step further. We should link to our direct competitors. It is “safe” to link to the BBC, they are competitors but not on a local level. Link to the other papers stories as they occur. If you do, readers will come to you first because they will know that from you they can get to *every* local or regional aspect of the story. Which is why they will come back to you. Become a local Google. Tell them to GO AWAY! safe in the knowledge that they will come back. If no other local news outlets do the same you have a monopoly and will have first-comer advantage. If the other papers do it to then they will be sending viewers to you which increases page hits all round. It is a win/win situation.
The only disagreement I would have with Sarah is on the opening of new windows. I would argue that this is more of a problem for users than would first seem apparent. When a new window opens it often opens exactly in the same position as the old one, covering it and making it difficult for new users to understand that the back button on the new window will not work. This happens very often. The more sophisticated users will of course know that there is another window, but that same sophistication will also allow them not bo confuse the linked to site with yours.
LikeLike
Good common sense stuff here (as usual).
There is a lot of lip service paid to linking. Something I hear a lot is “we want to make our site the first port of call”. When examined more closely this all too often means “We want to make our site the *only* port of call”. “First port of call” implies many other ports of call.
Why does Google work so well? Because it is a “go away” site (I would normally use a stronger term 🙂 ). You come to Google, it shows you what you (think) you want then says – now go away! And we do. And we come back. Because we know it will give us another place to go to. And come back from.
I would go a step further. We should link to our direct competitors. It is “safe” to link to the BBC, they are competitors but not on a local level. Link to the other papers stories as they occur. If you do, readers will come to you first because they will know that from you they can get to *every* local or regional aspect of the story. Which is why they will come back to you. Become a local Google. Tell them to GO AWAY! safe in the knowledge that they will come back. If no other local news outlets do the same you have a monopoly and will have first-comer advantage. If the other papers do it to then they will be sending viewers to you which increases page hits all round. It is a win/win situation.
The only disagreement I would have with Sarah is on the opening of new windows. I would argue that this is more of a problem for users than would first seem apparent. When a new window opens it often opens exactly in the same position as the old one, covering it and making it difficult for new users to understand that the back button on the new window will not work. This happens very often. The more sophisticated users will of course know that there is another window, but that same sophistication will also allow them not bo confuse the linked to site with yours.
LikeLike
Good common sense stuff here (as usual).
There is a lot of lip service paid to linking. Something I hear a lot is “we want to make our site the first port of call”. When examined more closely this all too often means “We want to make our site the *only* port of call”. “First port of call” implies many other ports of call.
Why does Google work so well? Because it is a “go away” site (I would normally use a stronger term 🙂 ). You come to Google, it shows you what you (think) you want then says – now go away! And we do. And we come back. Because we know it will give us another place to go to. And come back from.
I would go a step further. We should link to our direct competitors. It is “safe” to link to the BBC, they are competitors but not on a local level. Link to the other papers stories as they occur. If you do, readers will come to you first because they will know that from you they can get to *every* local or regional aspect of the story. Which is why they will come back to you. Become a local Google. Tell them to GO AWAY! safe in the knowledge that they will come back. If no other local news outlets do the same you have a monopoly and will have first-comer advantage. If the other papers do it to then they will be sending viewers to you which increases page hits all round. It is a win/win situation.
The only disagreement I would have with Sarah is on the opening of new windows. I would argue that this is more of a problem for users than would first seem apparent. When a new window opens it often opens exactly in the same position as the old one, covering it and making it difficult for new users to understand that the back button on the new window will not work. This happens very often. The more sophisticated users will of course know that there is another window, but that same sophistication will also allow them not bo confuse the linked to site with yours.
LikeLike
A good post and something I’ve wondered about for ages as a journalist and a PR person.
On the journalist side, I’ve been told they aren’t included because you don’t want people to leave the site or you don’t want to refer to the competition and you can hardly link for some stories and not other – or just link to stories on your own site.
I think it’s nonsense and luddite thinking. Link elsewhere, be honest about where you saw the story. If it’s a lift, it’s a lift. A lot of people suss this out now anyway. A good exclusive – if genuine – is still an exclusive anyway. In which case, you want people linking to you.
(also journalists moan that it’s more work to either include weblinks either at the end of the story or embedded as proper H REF links)
On the PR side, should press releases be sent out with the proper HTML code or just as raw text? Again, more work – and would it be appreciated?
LikeLike
A great set of tips on using links on a site, but I would agree with Mark on forcing the opening new windows on users, why try and control the way people use their own computer?
There is also a school of thought that says search engines recognise websites who link out to related sites from their own pages, seeing sites who do this as offering a resource.
As for press releases, I prefer to receive simple text emails with clean, full website addresses.
You also improve your chance of getting through spam filters as well as make it easier for your message to be read on hand held devices.
LikeLike
A great set of tips on using links on a site, but I would agree with Mark on forcing the opening new windows on users, why try and control the way people use their own computer?
There is also a school of thought that says search engines recognise websites who link out to related sites from their own pages, seeing sites who do this as offering a resource.
As for press releases, I prefer to receive simple text emails with clean, full website addresses.
You also improve your chance of getting through spam filters as well as make it easier for your message to be read on hand held devices.
LikeLike
A great set of tips on using links on a site, but I would agree with Mark on forcing the opening new windows on users, why try and control the way people use their own computer?
There is also a school of thought that says search engines recognise websites who link out to related sites from their own pages, seeing sites who do this as offering a resource.
As for press releases, I prefer to receive simple text emails with clean, full website addresses.
You also improve your chance of getting through spam filters as well as make it easier for your message to be read on hand held devices.
LikeLike