<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Where Do You Want Your Social Media Press Releases to Live?</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.adamsherk.com/public-relations/social-media-newsroom-locatio/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.adamsherk.com/public-relations/social-media-newsroom-locatio/</link>
	<description>News media. Audience development. SEO and social media marketing</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sat, 31 Jul 2010 06:02:10 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Rapidmint.com &#187; The Most Overused Buzzwords and Marketing Speak in Press Releases</title>
		<link>http://www.adamsherk.com/public-relations/social-media-newsroom-locatio/#comment-1480</link>
		<dc:creator>Rapidmint.com &#187; The Most Overused Buzzwords and Marketing Speak in Press Releases</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 19 Jul 2010 06:26:23 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.adamsherk.com/?p=217#comment-1480</guid>
		<description>[...] Where Do You Want Your Social Media Press Releases to Live? [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] Where Do You Want Your Social Media Press Releases to Live? [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Adam Sherk</title>
		<link>http://www.adamsherk.com/public-relations/social-media-newsroom-locatio/#comment-13</link>
		<dc:creator>Adam Sherk</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 01 Jun 2009 14:23:22 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.adamsherk.com/?p=217#comment-13</guid>
		<description>Thanks for your input Maggie. I agree that hosting SMRs off-site is better than not doing them at all, and that using a third-party service brings other benefits, especially for organizations that may not have the resources to build and maintain their own newsrooms.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Thanks for your input Maggie. I agree that hosting SMRs off-site is better than not doing them at all, and that using a third-party service brings other benefits, especially for organizations that may not have the resources to build and maintain their own newsrooms.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Maggie McGary</title>
		<link>http://www.adamsherk.com/public-relations/social-media-newsroom-locatio/#comment-12</link>
		<dc:creator>Maggie McGary</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 31 May 2009 14:29:03 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.adamsherk.com/?p=217#comment-12</guid>
		<description>I work for an association and have used PitchEngine and have to say that I slightly disagree with you about the SEO implications. We recently did a release to announce the winners of a video contest we did to raise awareness of Better Hearing and Speech Month. The contest was hosted on YouTube, and therefore the videos lived on YouTube. The other stuff included in the release--links to us on Twitter and Facebook--those things, too, live off our site and therefore SEO implications aren&#039;t really a factor. Given that our goal was to raise awareness of Better Hearing and Speech Month, attracting traffic to our site was, in this case, of secondary importance.

I do agree  that it&#039;s much better to strengthen your own domain than boost someone else&#039;s; however, if resources or technical limits keep you from being able to create and host SMRs on your own domain, I think hosting your SMRs somewhere else is better than not doing them at all. 

One thing I will say, though, is that PitchEngine only archives releases for 30 days for free, so, unfortunately for us--and illustrating your point--the release won&#039;t be viewable to anyone after today. Granted, we could pay to subscribe and the release would be viewable, but certainly that&#039;s a vote for hosting your own content--you want it to be accessible for longer than 30 days.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I work for an association and have used PitchEngine and have to say that I slightly disagree with you about the SEO implications. We recently did a release to announce the winners of a video contest we did to raise awareness of Better Hearing and Speech Month. The contest was hosted on YouTube, and therefore the videos lived on YouTube. The other stuff included in the release&#8211;links to us on Twitter and Facebook&#8211;those things, too, live off our site and therefore SEO implications aren&#8217;t really a factor. Given that our goal was to raise awareness of Better Hearing and Speech Month, attracting traffic to our site was, in this case, of secondary importance.</p>
<p>I do agree  that it&#8217;s much better to strengthen your own domain than boost someone else&#8217;s; however, if resources or technical limits keep you from being able to create and host SMRs on your own domain, I think hosting your SMRs somewhere else is better than not doing them at all. </p>
<p>One thing I will say, though, is that PitchEngine only archives releases for 30 days for free, so, unfortunately for us&#8211;and illustrating your point&#8211;the release won&#8217;t be viewable to anyone after today. Granted, we could pay to subscribe and the release would be viewable, but certainly that&#8217;s a vote for hosting your own content&#8211;you want it to be accessible for longer than 30 days.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
