When a publication mentions your business, it's already telling readers something about you. Check whether there's a link and where it goes. Then you can decide whether the reference needs a new link, a correction, or no change at all. Start with the current page.
For example, you find an article about your product that links to an old product page. There is a link, but it sends readers to the wrong explanation. Show the publisher the old destination and the current replacement so they can see exactly what needs fixing.
Match your request to what's on the page
If the destination is broken or outdated, check that your replacement works and describes the item in the article. Then give the publisher the article URL, the existing destination, and the proposed replacement. They can verify the change without having to search your site.
If the product is named without a link, think about what the reader needs next. A specification page might complete the reference. Your homepage might leave them searching again. If the article names a technical guide or study, consider linking to that specific resource.
A working, relevant link may need no change, though the surrounding description could still be factually wrong. If the page doesn't mention you at all, you're proposing a new inclusion. Read its selection criteria before making that request.
Make sure the observation still applies
A monitoring report shows the page as it was collected. The publisher may have added a link or changed the destination since then. Opening the live page could resolve the whole task before you send anything.
Check the dates too. Discovery is when the page entered the collection. Publication is when the story went online. An article from last year could be discovered this morning. Keep that distinction clear if your message refers to recent coverage.
For the old product link, check the destination in the current article even if the report looks fresh. Your correction needs to address what readers can follow now.
Decide whether another link would help
A mention alone doesn't give you a reason to contact the publisher. It could be a short list of names where another link adds little. The publication might also have a policy against vendor links. Read those conditions before preparing a request.
If the mention is unfavorable, read the criticism. A factual error gives you something to investigate and potentially correct. Adding a link to the same criticism may do nothing to address the concern your business actually has.
A strong request explains how the destination helps someone reading that passage. The publisher doesn't need to share your interest in increasing your link count to understand that reason.
Leave time to read what you find
Choose a review schedule that gives you time to inspect newly discovered material. For each candidate you plan to pursue, keep the current article, checked destination, and proposed change together. A colleague should be able to see exactly what you'll ask the publisher to do.
Follow the unlinked-mention walkthrough to work through the list. Brand Unlinked Mentions gives you candidate pages, while brand monitoring helps you review the wider coverage.
See how OppAlerts fits your work.
Tell me what you are working on and what you need to find out. I can walk you through the relevant reports and explain what OppAlerts can help you do.
You can explore the demo first, or use this form to ask about a task or arrange a demonstration with me.