- Joined
- Oct 1, 2015
- Messages
- 21
- Reaction score
- 3
Hi everyone,
I'd like to have a partly theoretical and partly practical discussion about citations from a slightly different perspective. There are a ton of articles out there that list "the most important citations," depending on the opinions and experiences of the writer. My personal favorite is from Whitespark. Most of them take a moment to remind us of the importance of duplicate suppression as well.
That all sounds great, but we continuously have conversations about the best way to handle all of the citations. I had a conversation with another local specialist this morning who mentioned that she had a local team who manages all citations manually. That is really fantastic, and I think that most of us would agree that that is the best option. However, it isn't possible for many of us. Some here are freelancers who handle every aspect of their clients' online marketing efforts. Others may simply not have a large enough local team to manage so many citations across a huge number of clients. So we find vendors to take care of some of this for us. Darren Shaw's Slideshare from Mozcon Local would lead some of us to believe that Moz Local is the best way to go as a basis, and then add local- and industry-specific citations to the best of our judgement.
I would agree with that last statement if it weren't for one small hitch: very few clients come on board with a totally clean slate. In fact, even though I use Yext to handle a ton of citations and suppress duplicates, I still do a local audit to find duplicates that Yext has either missed, or doesn't handle. The duplicate suppression, while imperfect, is a strong selling point for Yext IMHO.
So here's the discussion: If an SEO wants to manually handle citations, or even use a more basic vendor like Moz Local, but has somewhat limited resources, then how deep would you recommend delving? For example, we would all likely take as much time as we need to claim, verify, and update GMB's, as well as deal with the duplicates, but what if you found a duplicate on a site that wasn't high priority? Would you take the time to try to clean it up? Would you stop at YP? BOTW? HotFrog? Or would you fight to the bitter end, and try to get rid of duplicates on nobodycaresaboutthissite.com?
I don't truly believe that there is any such thing as 100% consistency in citation management, so I'm just curious to hear your thoughts.
I'd like to have a partly theoretical and partly practical discussion about citations from a slightly different perspective. There are a ton of articles out there that list "the most important citations," depending on the opinions and experiences of the writer. My personal favorite is from Whitespark. Most of them take a moment to remind us of the importance of duplicate suppression as well.
That all sounds great, but we continuously have conversations about the best way to handle all of the citations. I had a conversation with another local specialist this morning who mentioned that she had a local team who manages all citations manually. That is really fantastic, and I think that most of us would agree that that is the best option. However, it isn't possible for many of us. Some here are freelancers who handle every aspect of their clients' online marketing efforts. Others may simply not have a large enough local team to manage so many citations across a huge number of clients. So we find vendors to take care of some of this for us. Darren Shaw's Slideshare from Mozcon Local would lead some of us to believe that Moz Local is the best way to go as a basis, and then add local- and industry-specific citations to the best of our judgement.
I would agree with that last statement if it weren't for one small hitch: very few clients come on board with a totally clean slate. In fact, even though I use Yext to handle a ton of citations and suppress duplicates, I still do a local audit to find duplicates that Yext has either missed, or doesn't handle. The duplicate suppression, while imperfect, is a strong selling point for Yext IMHO.
So here's the discussion: If an SEO wants to manually handle citations, or even use a more basic vendor like Moz Local, but has somewhat limited resources, then how deep would you recommend delving? For example, we would all likely take as much time as we need to claim, verify, and update GMB's, as well as deal with the duplicates, but what if you found a duplicate on a site that wasn't high priority? Would you take the time to try to clean it up? Would you stop at YP? BOTW? HotFrog? Or would you fight to the bitter end, and try to get rid of duplicates on nobodycaresaboutthissite.com?
I don't truly believe that there is any such thing as 100% consistency in citation management, so I'm just curious to hear your thoughts.