Content People Link To: How to Test an Asset
Content people link to is material that other authors find it useful to cite: it contains something that is not found elsewhere. No format guarantees links, and Google’s documentation makes no promises such as “a study will bring links”. But it does describe what useful, original material looks like, and that sets the basis for a check: is it worth investing in the asset at all. Below: the criteria from Google’s starter guide, formats where you may have your own contribution, and a test to run before publishing.
What the documentation says about useful material
The starter guide states that creating content people find compelling and useful will likely influence your site’s presence in search results more than any of the other suggestions in the guide. Attributes of such content:
- the text is easy to read and well organized: broken into paragraphs and sections, with headings;
- the content is unique: don’t copy others’ content in part or in its entirety; create it from what you know about the topic, and don’t rehash what others have already published;
- the content is up to date: check previously published content, update it or delete it if it is no longer relevant;
- the content is helpful, reliable and people-first: for example, expert or experienced sources help.
In the material on helpful content, the first of the content and quality questions is: does the content provide original information, reporting, research or analysis; next come a substantial, complete or comprehensive description of the topic and insightful analysis beyond the obvious. The same material says Google has no preferred word count. That matters for an “ultimate guide”: length is not a value in itself.
Formats where you may have your own contribution
| Format | Your own contribution | Risk |
|---|---|---|
| Research, survey, data analysis | primary source: only you have the data | without a methodology and sample there is nothing to cite |
| A complete reference on a topic | a systematization not found elsewhere | a large volume of retold third-party material |
| A free tool or calculator | constant practical use | needs maintenance and updating |
| Data visualization | a clear way to show your own data | without text and alt the meaning is lost for people and search |
| Templates, checklists, calculations | a ready working result | common knowledge is not cited |
What “gets links more often” depends on the niche, and Google has no data on it. Any ranking of formats is authors’ observation; test it on the pages of your site and your competitors’ that have already gathered links (competitor link analysis).
If the asset is an image or visualization
The help page on image search names alt text the most important attribute: Google uses it along with computer vision algorithms and the page contents to understand the subject of the image, and for an image link it serves as the anchor; it should be informative, without keyword stuffing. Placing the key numbers and conclusions of the visualization also as text nearby is practice, not a documented requirement; it helps both readers and those who cite. More in the lesson on image SEO.
A test before publishing
- Contribution. What is in the material that only you have: data, a calculation, a tool, experience? If there is no answer, it retells the known (content uniqueness).
- Addressee. Who will want to cite it and when: a journalist, a review author, a teacher, the owner of an adjacent site?
- Verifiability. Can the data be checked: methodology, sample, date, sources?
- Readability. Are there headings, a clear structure, conclusions up front?
- Freshness. Who will update the material, and how?
- Your own link. Would you yourself cite such material from another site? If not, question the contribution.
How to promote without breaking policies
Good material does not replace telling people about it: Google advises telling people about your site and being active in communities. How to do that without violations is covered in the lessons on link acquisition tactics and digital PR; the line with link spam is drawn in the spam policies. Do not put distracting advertising on the page: the starter guide directly advises not to get in the reader’s way.
How to assess the material you already have
Take the pages of your site that are being linked to now and compare them with the rest by the points of the test: how do they differ. This is more reliable than any general rankings. Pages that fail the test and bring no traffic should be checked with the lesson on the content audit; the general quality criterion is in the lesson on helpful content.
Checklist
- The material has its own contribution: data, methodology, a calculation or a tool.
- The text is structured, easy to read and free of errors.
- The data can be verified; methodology and date are given.
- Visualizations come with
altand a text summary. - There is a plan for updating the material.
- Promotion runs through communities and publications, with no unqualified paid links.
Mistakes
- Treating volume as a guarantee of links: Google has no preferred word count.
- Releasing a “study” without a methodology.
- Retelling others’ material as a “complete guide”.
- Relying on a format (“infographics are always cited”) instead of testing on your own data.
- Publishing and forgetting: outdated material stops being useful.
What next
Next comes the link analysis module: we start with competitor link analysis, to see which materials in your niche really attract links and what to build on. How links affect the assessment of pages is covered in the lesson on link equity.