A standard method of introducing yourself and your new website is to contact others within your field and ask for comments and the possible exchange of links (other sites placing your web address on theirs). This is best done with a minimum of 50 posts or articles.
There are endless suggestions as to driving traffic to your website and the best are links from one site to another. Google and other search engines see links as a vote of popularity thus they are inclined to send you more traffic based on the number and relevancy of links.
Having others look at your site and offer observations can bring clarity. They see what you don’t.
I ran government websites for close to 20 years and asking for comments and links was always difficult and tedious but fruitful after a certain amount of time. This article is based on my outreach efforts for two personal websites.
Observations:
Sites that are directly administered by one person are far more likely than multi-administered sites to provide you with feedback.
For Http://MyLifeAudio.Com (personal and corporate histories and podcasts) personal historians were gracious with their time and the flow of information continues to this day. There was lots of exchange and extended conversations.
Developing my other site got an entirely different response. Efforts to promote Http://LeonardSipes.Com (public relations and social media for government, associations and nonprofits) were not nearly as fruitful. The majority were multi-person for-profit sites who seemed to feel that I was a competitor.
Are there lessons in my outreach efforts?
The bottom-line in the success of outreach efforts is the willingness of others to engage and learn. Personal historians (while promoting Http://MyLifeAudio) really wanted to exchange information; everyone was trying to explore the best methods of marketing and they were eager to engage. They were nice and accessible.
The social media, nonprofit and association administrators (promoting Http://leonardSipes.Com) simply were not interested. It’s interesting that those promoting conversations on the web via social media were the least likely to communicate. Association and nonprofit sites were equally non-responsive and often run by third-parties who did nothing beyond their contracts.
Conclusion:
It’s not my purpose to discourage site administrators from reaching out to other people. Contacting others to exchange information and/or links remains a necessary step.
It seems easier to reach out to professional groups with a vested interest in advancing their cause. Sites administered by one person were the most responsive. Professionally administered sites have no financial incentive to engage. The social media crowd were the antithesis of social.
It’s surprising that many do not check their e-mail or contact forms for weeks (or months) at a time thus responses are still coming in which contradicts the sense of “social.”
There are other (possibly better) methods of obtaining links which will be addresses in future articles.
The process of asking for links and comments is much easier when people are willing to engage as it was when the web was younger and we were all struggling to establish a presence.
Best, Len.
If you like this article, please comment, share or follow. Thanks!!!
Daily summaries of social media and news media related articles are offered through my Facebook page at http://www.facebook.com/LeonardSipes or via the Facebook button on this site. Thanks!!!
1 COMMENTS
Comments are closed.
Thanks for sharing your thoughts about links. Regards