How Agencies Actually Earn Editorial Links (Not Just Pitch Them)

I Used to Pitch Links Like Everyone Else—Until I Realized We Were All Doing It Wrong

For years, I'd tell my agency clients the same thing everyone else did: "We'll create great content and pitch it to relevant sites." I mean, that's what all the guides said, right? Build relationships, send personalized emails, track everything in a spreadsheet. We'd get maybe a 3-5% response rate on a good day, and most of those were "Thanks but no thanks."

Then something clicked—literally. I was analyzing a campaign for a B2B SaaS client where we'd spent $15,000 on content creation and outreach, and we'd earned exactly 7 links. That's over $2,000 per link. And honestly? Three of those were from sites that probably wouldn't pass much authority anyway.

So I went back and looked at 2,347 outreach emails I'd sent over six months. The data was brutal: only 11% of emails were even opened, and of those, just 4.2% resulted in a link. That's a 0.46% success rate overall. I'll admit—I was embarrassed. We were spending client money on something that basically didn't work.

But here's what changed everything: I stopped thinking about "earning links" and started thinking about "earning coverage." The difference isn't semantic—it's fundamental. When you pitch a link, you're asking for something. When you earn coverage, you're providing something valuable enough that journalists and editors want to write about it. And that's when our response rates jumped to 18-22% on opened emails, with actual placements happening 12-15% of the time.

Why Editorial Links Actually Matter (And Why Most Agencies Get This Wrong)

Look, I know every agency talks about "high-quality backlinks." But let's be honest—most of them are still buying PBN links or doing sketchy guest post exchanges and calling it "outreach." Google's been clear about this for years: according to their Search Central documentation (updated March 2024), editorial links—the ones given by choice, not payment or exchange—are the only ones that consistently pass ranking signals without risk.

But here's what most agencies miss: editorial links aren't just about SEO. I mean, sure, they help with rankings. According to Backlinko's analysis of 1 million Google search results, pages with more backlinks still rank higher—that correlation hasn't changed. But the pages with editorial links specifically? They have 37% higher click-through rates from search results. Because when a reputable site links to you, it's not just telling Google you're trustworthy—it's telling humans you're worth clicking.

For agencies specifically, editorial links serve three purposes most overlook:

1. Client retention: When you get a client featured in Forbes or TechCrunch, they don't just renew—they refer. I've had clients stay with us for 5+ years because we consistently get them real press, not just SEO links.
2. New business: Prospects see those logos on your case studies and think "They can do that for us too." According to HubSpot's 2024 State of Marketing report, 68% of B2B buyers say case studies with third-party validation are "very influential" in their purchasing decisions.
3. Talent attraction: Good marketers want to work on campaigns that get real results, not just build link wheels. Our agency's applicant quality improved 40% after we started showcasing our editorial link work.

The problem is most agencies approach this backwards. They start with "What content can we create that might get links?" instead of "What do journalists actually need right now?"

What The Data Actually Shows About Editorial Links in 2024

Okay, let's get into the numbers. Because if you're going to sell this service (or do it for your own agency), you need to know what's realistic.

First, the landscape has changed dramatically. According to Fractl's 2024 content marketing research analyzing 1,200+ campaigns, the average cost to earn a single editorial link from a reputable publication (DR 70+) is now $1,200-$1,800 when you factor in research, content creation, and outreach time. That's up from $800-$1,200 just two years ago. Why? Because everyone's doing content marketing now, and journalists are inundated.

But—and this is critical—the value of those links has increased too. Ahrefs' 2024 link value study found that editorial links from publications with Domain Rating 70+ drive 3-5x more referral traffic than they did in 2022. People are actually clicking through more, not just linking for SEO.

Here's the breakdown from our own data at the agency:

Now, here's what most data studies miss: the relationship between content type and success rate. We tracked 847 pitches over 6 months and found that:

• Original research studies got placed 24% of the time
• Expert roundups got placed 8% of the time (down from 15% in 2022)
• "How-to" guides got placed 5% of the time
• Infographics got placed 2% of the time (seriously—stop making these for press)

Rand Fishkin's SparkToro team published research last month showing that journalists receive an average of 52 pitches per day. But—and this is key—they only open 23% of them. And they only respond to 7%. So your email needs to stand out in the first 3 seconds, or it's getting deleted.

The Step-by-Step Process That Actually Works (Not The Theory)

Alright, let's get tactical. This is the exact process we use for our agency clients, and it's what increased our placement rates from 3% to 18%.

Step 1: Stop Starting With Your Client

I know this sounds backwards, but hear me out. Most agencies start with "What's interesting about our client?" Wrong question. Start with "What are journalists in this industry writing about right now?"

Here's what we do: we use BuzzSumo (about $199/month) to find the most-shared articles in a client's industry over the last 30 days. Not just any articles—specifically ones from publications we want links from. We're looking for patterns: are they covering AI regulation? Remote work trends? Sustainability reporting?

Then we use Ahrefs (starts at $99/month) to see what those articles are ranking for. This tells us what people are actually searching for in relation to those topics. Only then do we look at our client and ask "What unique perspective or data can we provide on this trending topic?"

Step 2: Create Something Actually Newsworthy (Not Just "Valuable")

Here's where most agencies fail. They create "10 Tips for Better Email Marketing" and wonder why nobody links to it. That's not news—that's a blog post.

Journalists need one of three things:

1. New data: Original research, surveys, analysis they haven't seen before
2. New perspectives: Expert commentary on breaking news or trends
3. New solutions: Case studies showing how a problem was solved

Our most successful campaign last quarter was for a fintech client. Instead of creating "The Future of Banking" (yawn), we surveyed 500 small business owners about their banking pain points. The data showed something surprising: 67% were considering switching banks due to poor mobile experiences, but only 12% had actually done it in the last year because of "switching anxiety."

That's news. That's "Small Businesses Stuck in Banking Limbo" or "The $8 Billion Switching Anxiety Problem." We got coverage in American Banker, Fintech Times, and 14 industry blogs—all with links.

Step 3: Build Lists Like a Journalist, Not a Marketer

This is probably the biggest shift we made. Instead of searching for "marketing blogs" or "tech sites that accept guest posts," we search for journalists who cover our topic.

We use Hunter.io ($49/month) to find email addresses, but more importantly, we use Muck Rack ($5,000+/year for teams, but worth it) to see what each journalist has written recently. I'm talking last 2-3 articles. We're looking for:

• Do they cover this specific topic?
• What angle did they take last time?
• Do they quote experts? Use data? Tell stories?

Then we create a spreadsheet with 50-100 targets, but we only pitch 20-30 initially. Why? Because we're going to personalize every single email based on their recent work.

Step 4: The Email Template That Gets 35%+ Open Rates

Okay, here's an actual template we used last month that got a 38% open rate and 22% response rate:

Notice what's NOT here: "I think your readers would love..." "We created a comprehensive guide..." "Would you be interested in..." Those are asks. This is an offer.

We attach a 5-10 slide PDF with the key findings (designed to be journalist-friendly, not salesy), and we make sure the expert is actually available for interviews. According to Cision's 2024 Global State of the Media report, 73% of journalists say "expert availability" is a key factor in whether they cover a story.

Step 5: The Follow-Up That Doesn't Annoy People

We follow up exactly once, 5-7 days later. The template:

That's it. No third follow-up. No "Just checking in again." According to our data, if they haven't responded to the second email, a third email has a 0.7% chance of working and a 15% chance of getting you marked as spam.

Advanced Strategies for Agencies Ready to Level Up

If you're already doing the basics and want to get into the 20%+ placement rate territory, here's where we invest our time:

1. Create a "Rolodex" of Journalist Relationships

This isn't just "building relationships"—it's systematic. We use Airtable ($20/month) to track every journalist we've worked with, including:

• What topics they cover
• What types of stories they write (data-driven, expert commentary, case studies)
• Their preferred communication method (email, Twitter, LinkedIn)
• When we last contacted them
• What resulted (coverage, no response, not interested)

Then, every quarter, we send a "no ask" update to everyone in the database. Just a quick "Here are 3 trends we're seeing in [industry] right now" email with no attachment, no request. This keeps us top of mind without being transactional. According to our tracking, journalists we've emailed 3+ times with "no ask" updates are 4x more likely to respond to actual pitches.

2. Piggyback on Breaking News

When something breaks in your client's industry, you have a 2-48 hour window to provide expert commentary. We have "breaking news" templates ready to go, and we monitor Google News alerts for key terms.

Example: When the SEC announced new climate disclosure rules, we had a sustainability software client's CEO quoted in 8 publications within 72 hours. The key? We didn't pitch "Our CEO is available"—we pitched "Here are 3 immediate impacts on mid-market manufacturers based on our analysis of the 287-page document." Specific, timely, and helpful.

3. Co-Create with Publications

This is the holy grail. Instead of pitching completed research, we pitch research ideas. "We're planning to survey 1,000 remote workers about productivity tools—would [Publication] be interested in co-publishing the results? We handle the research, you get exclusive first access."

We've done this with Industry Dive publications, and it works because it's win-win. They get exclusive content without the research cost, we get guaranteed coverage and links. The placement rate on these pitches? 42%.

Real Examples That Actually Worked (With Numbers)

Case Study 1: B2B SaaS Client ($50K/month budget)

Client: Project management software for construction companies
Problem: Stuck at 15,000 monthly organic visits for 18 months, competing against Asana and Trello
Our approach: Instead of creating more "how to manage projects" content, we surveyed 400 construction project managers about their biggest pain points. Found that 71% said "change order documentation" was their #1 time-waster.
The pitch: "The $4.2 Billion Paperwork Problem Slowing Down American Construction"
Results: Coverage in Construction Dive, ENR, and 18 industry blogs. 27 editorial links from DR 50+ sites. Organic traffic increased to 42,000 monthly visits (+180%) over 9 months. Client renewed at 3x the original budget.
Cost: $8,500 for research, design, and outreach. ROI: 14:1 on first year contract value.

Case Study 2: E-commerce Agency (Their Own Site)

Situation: Our own agency needed to attract higher-value e-commerce clients
Approach: Analyzed 50,000 Google Ads accounts in the e-commerce vertical using our internal data (with permission)
Finding: Stores using dynamic remarketing had 23% higher ROAS, but only 12% of stores under $10M/year were using it
The pitch: "The $23,000/month E-commerce Mistake 88% of Brands Are Making"
Results: Coverage in Practical Ecommerce, Search Engine Land, and 9 marketing publications. 34 editorial links. Inbound leads increased from 3/month to 11/month, with average deal size up 40%.
Time investment: 60 hours over 3 weeks. Worth every minute.

Common Mistakes (And How We Still Mess Them Up Sometimes)

Look, I'll be honest—we don't get it right every time. Here's where we see agencies (including ours) stumble:

Mistake 1: Pitching Too Early

We had a client last quarter who wanted us to pitch their "industry report" based on 87 survey responses. I mean, come on. That's not statistically significant for anything. According to SurveyMonkey's research methodology guidelines, you need at least 400 responses for most consumer research to be credible, and 200+ for niche B2B.

We pushed back, they insisted, we pitched it anyway. Result: 1 placement on a tiny blog, 97 ignored emails. Lesson: If the data isn't robust, don't pitch it as research. Pitch it as "preliminary findings" or don't pitch it at all.

Mistake 2: Forgetting the Visuals

Journalists are busy. If you send them a 50-page PDF, they're not reading it. We now create:

• 1-page executive summary
• 5-10 slide "media deck" with key findings
• 3-5 quotable statistics formatted for copy-paste
• High-resolution charts (not Excel screenshots)

According to Canva's 2024 visual communication report, content with professional visuals gets 47% more engagement. For journalists, it's not about engagement—it's about "Can I quickly understand and use this?"

Mistake 3: Not Having the Expert Available

This one hurts. We pitched a healthcare client's research on telehealth adoption, got interest from Modern Healthcare... and the CEO was on vacation for two weeks with limited email access. By the time they got back, the journalist had moved on.

Now we have a rule: no pitching unless the expert is available for 48-hour turnaround on interviews for 2 weeks after the pitch goes out. It's in our service agreement with clients.

Tools Comparison: What's Actually Worth Paying For

You don't need every tool, but you do need the right ones. Here's our stack:

Honestly? You could start with just Ahrefs and Google News Alerts. The others make you more efficient, but they're not required. What's required is the process.

FAQs (The Questions We Actually Get)

1. How many links can we realistically expect per month?

It depends entirely on your approach. If you're doing original research and pitching it well, 3-5 quality editorial links per month is realistic for most industries. If you're just pitching guest posts or existing content, maybe 1-2. According to our data across 37 clients, the average is 2.8 editorial links per month per campaign, but the top 20% get 5-7. The key is consistency—one big research project quarterly can yield 10-20 links over 3 months as different outlets cover it.

2. What's a reasonable budget for this?

For an agency doing this professionally, you need to budget $3,000-$8,000 per month minimum. That covers tools, staff time for research and outreach, and potentially survey costs. According to Upwork's 2024 freelance rates, experienced PR specialists charge $75-$150/hour, and you'll need 20-40 hours/month for a decent campaign. The alternative is doing it in-house, but then you're trading salary for flexibility.

3. How do we measure success beyond just link count?

We track five metrics: (1) Editorial links earned (obviously), (2) Referral traffic from those links (Google Analytics), (3) Domain Rating of linking sites (Ahrefs), (4) Brand mentions without links (Brand24, $99/month), and (5) Impact on organic rankings for target keywords. The last one takes 3-6 months to materialize, but according to SEMrush's ranking factors study, pages with 3+ editorial links see 24% faster ranking improvements than those without.

4. What if our client isn't "interesting"?

Every business has something interesting if you dig deep. We had a client who sold industrial pumps. Sounds boring, right? But when we interviewed their customers, we found stories about pumps preventing environmental disasters, saving cities millions in infrastructure costs, even one used in an Antarctic research station. Data + stories = coverage. If you can't find anything interesting, you're not asking the right questions.

5. How do we handle clients who want to approve every pitch?

We include 2 rounds of revisions in our agreement, but the pitches go out from our email, not theirs. We provide weekly reports of who we pitched and what responses we got. If a client wants to micromanage, we show them data: "When we had a client who required approval on every email, response rates dropped from 18% to 4%. Journalists need timely responses." Usually that convinces them. If not, they might not be ready for real PR.

6. What about "digital PR" vs traditional link building?

Honestly, the distinction is mostly semantic. Good link building in 2024 IS digital PR. You're building relationships, creating newsworthy content, and earning coverage. The difference is mindset: link builders think about metrics (DR, traffic), PR professionals think about relationships and stories. You need both. According to Muck Rack's 2024 State of PR survey, 64% of journalists say they're more likely to cover a company if they have a relationship with someone there.

7. Can AI help with this?

For research and ideation, absolutely. We use ChatGPT Plus ($20/month) to brainstorm angles, analyze trends in journalist coverage, and even draft initial email templates. But—and this is critical—we never send AI-written pitches without heavy editing. Journalists can spot generic AI content instantly. According to our A/B testing, human-written pitches get 42% higher response rates than AI-written ones, even when the AI content is "good." Use AI as a tool, not a replacement.

8. What's the biggest waste of time in editorial link building?

Building massive media lists you never use. We see agencies spend days compiling 500-contact lists, then send generic pitches to all of them. Better to build a 50-contact list with deep personalization. Also: following up more than twice. The data shows sharply diminishing returns after the second follow-up, and you risk damaging relationships.

Your 90-Day Action Plan

If you're starting from zero, here's exactly what to do:

Weeks 1-2: Pick one client or your own agency. Identify 3 trending topics in their industry using BuzzSumo or Google Trends. Choose the one with the biggest gap between what's being written and what data exists.

Weeks 3-4: Create original research. Survey 300-500 relevant people (SurveyMonkey, $1,200-$2,500). Analyze the data for surprising findings—not just confirmation of what everyone already thinks.

Weeks 5-6: Build your media list. Target 50 journalists who have written about this topic in the last 90 days. Personalize each entry with notes about their recent work.

Weeks 7-8: Pitch in batches of 10-15 per day. Use the template above. Track everything in a spreadsheet or Airtable.

Weeks 9-12: Follow up once. Report results to client/team. Analyze what worked (which angles, which journalists, which timing).

Expect to spend 15-20 hours/week if you're doing this alongside other work. By day 90, you should have 5-15 quality editorial links and a repeatable process.

Bottom Line: This Isn't Easy, But It's Worth It

Look, earning editorial links is harder than buying them or doing guest post exchanges. It takes more time, more creativity, and more patience. But here's what you get in return:

• Links that actually drive traffic: Not just SEO value, but real visitors
• Client retention: Clients who get featured in press don't leave
• Higher margins: You can charge more for this than for technical SEO
• No Google penalties: Editorial links are the safest links you can get
• Portfolio pieces: Real case studies with real publications

The agencies that will thrive in 2024 and beyond aren't the ones with the best technical SEO—they're the ones who can consistently earn press for their clients. It's the difference between being a vendor and being a partner.

I'll leave you with this: we recently lost a pitch to an agency that promised "500 links in 90 days" for $5,000. Our proposal was "15-20 quality editorial links" for $12,000. The client chose them. Six months later, they came back to us because Google had deindexed 60% of their site due to spammy links. Cost them $250,000 in lost revenue.

Sometimes the expensive way is actually the cheap way. And sometimes what looks like "not enough links" is actually exactly what you need.