Chapter 28: How to Earn Strong Backlinks

A climber and a small robot pulling themselves up to a summit on a chain

Last updated: November 1, 2026.

In the previous chapter we talked about what a backlink is, why it matters and why it shouldn’t be judged by numbers alone.

In this chapter, let’s move on to the harder part:

How do you earn strong backlinks?

I think the first thing to do here is make this distinction. Getting a backlink and earning a backlink are not the same thing.

You can pay a site for a link. You can get a link by registering with a directory. You can add your site address to a forum profile.

But if another site cites research you prepared, recommends a tool you built or references a newsworthy piece of work you did, then the backlink has really been earned. And I think that’s the side that’s more valuable in the long run.

Link building sometimes starts from the wrong place.

“We need 50 backlinks.” “The competitor has 300 referring domains.” “Let’s find 20 sites this month.”

These can all be measurable goals, but first we need to ask a different question:

Why would a website link to us?

If there’s no good answer to that, we’ll have to keep asking for links. But if we’re producing something that’s genuinely worth referencing, things change.

For example, these can give people a real reason to link:

  • Original research
  • Industry data
  • Statistics
  • A calculator
  • A free tool
  • A comparison table
  • A research report
  • A dataset
  • A map
  • An infographic
  • A detailed guide
  • An original test
  • A benchmark
  • A case study

I think this is where a good backlink strategy starts.

Competitor analysis is quite useful on the backlink side. With Semrush, Ahrefs or similar tools, we can see which sites a competitor gets links from.

But the goal shouldn’t be “Wherever the competitor got a link, let’s get one too.” First I try to understand why the link came.

For example, our competitor got a backlink from a university. Instead of immediately saying, “We should get a backlink from this university too,” we should look at:

  • Was it cited as a source in a study?
  • Did it sponsor an event?
  • Did it offer students a free tool?
  • Did it provide data for an academic study?
  • Is it just listed on a directory page?

Copying the domain without understanding the reason for the link isn’t a strategy.

You may see thousands of sites in a competitor’s backlink profile. But among them there may be:

  • Spam sites
  • Old directories
  • Footer links
  • Sites that sell links
  • Unrelated sites
  • Automatically generated pages

So competitor analysis isn’t a shopping list. It should answer this question instead:

“What kinds of content or activities earned the competitor links?”

For example, if the competitor’s most-linked page is a piece of industry research, that’s an important signal. Maybe we need to produce original data in that industry too.

The more systematic version of competitor analysis is a link gap analysis.

For example, you have three competitors. An industry site has linked to all three of them but not to you. That site could be a potential opportunity, because it’s already interested in your industry.

Here we can ask:

Why has this publication referenced our three competitors but not us?

Maybe it doesn’t know us. Maybe our content is lacking. Maybe our product isn’t on the list. Maybe the comparison page is out of date.

In that case, the right move may not be to send an email straight away asking, “Would you give us a backlink?” First we need to understand why we’re missing.

It’s an old method, but it still makes sense.

Imagine a website links to another resource. But the link now returns a 404. If our site has a more up-to-date, better resource that meets the same need, we can contact the site owner.

For example:

I noticed that resource X on your page no longer works. We’ve prepared an up-to-date guide on the same topic. Feel free to take a look if it’s useful.

There’s a benefit for both sides here. The publisher fixes a broken link. And we get a chance to earn a relevant backlink.

But again, the same point matters: the page we’ve prepared should really fill the place of the old resource. Suggesting an unrelated page just to get a link isn’t broken link building.

I think the line between backlinks and PR is increasingly blurring.

In digital PR, the goal isn’t just “Let’s get a story published about our company.” It’s to produce something newsworthy.

For example, these could be content that journalists and industry publications can use:

  • Research on e-commerce trends in Turkey
  • Data showing price changes in the industry
  • Research on user behavior
  • City-by-city analysis
  • An annual industry report
  • An interesting piece of company data
  • A fresh analysis of public data

When other publications cite your work, the backlink can come naturally. That’s why the nice thing about digital PR is this:

You’re not producing news for the link. The link comes because you produced something newsworthy.

7. Why is original data so valuable?

There are millions of pieces of content on the internet repeating the same information. But if you have data nobody else has, things change.

For example, an e-commerce platform could publish data on “At what times of day did people in Turkey shop online the most in 2026?” A real estate platform could prepare a report on “The change in rental home searches by city over the past year.”

At Filmler.com, a Turkish movie site, for example, users’ movie preferences, genre trends or seasonal viewing behavior could be turned into research once there’s enough data.

When another writer wants to use that data, it becomes natural for them to reference the original source. This is one of my favorite backlink methods. Because it creates both links and brand value.

Building a tool people actually use can also be a strong method. For example:

  • A VAT calculator
  • A loan calculator
  • A file converter
  • An SEO checker
  • An ROI calculator
  • A calorie calculator
  • A size converter
  • A price comparison tool

If the tool is really useful, people may link to it in their guides: “You can use this tool to calculate it.”

The nice part here is that the tool isn’t built just for backlinks. It also brings traffic. It also builds brand awareness. It can also create repeat usage.

9. Do infographics still work?

They used to be one of the classics of backlink strategy. You’d make an infographic, send it to hundreds of sites and say, “If you publish this, link to us.”

Today I don’t think such a mechanical approach is as effective as it used to be. But a visual built on good data that’s genuinely explanatory and shareable can still become a source.

So the problem isn’t infographics.

It’s producing worthless infographics just to get backlinks.

Sometimes your brand is mentioned on the internet but there’s no link.

For example, a news site writes, “According to research by İmza…” but there’s no link to imza.com. We can call this an unlinked brand mention.

In that case, you can reach out to the publisher and ask:

Could you add a link to the original page of the research for readers who want to see the source?

I think this is one of the most natural types of outreach. Because the site has already mentioned you. We’re not trying to build a new relationship. We’re completing an existing reference.

11. How should outreach be done?

Some of the worst backlink emails start like this:

Dear webmaster, I hope this email finds you well…

Then 300 words of automated text. And at the very end:

Please add our link.

I think this kind of approach works less and less. Good outreach should be as personal and well-reasoned as possible. For example:

In your 2019 article X, you linked to source Y. That source no longer works. We’ve prepared an updated 2026 version of the same dataset.

This is clear. It’s obvious why you’re writing. And it benefits the other side.

I think the most important rule of outreach is:

Explain why the other person should listen to you.

12. Guest posting

Publishing an article on another site isn’t a bad method. An expert can genuinely write valuable content for another industry publication and link to relevant sources.

The problem starts here: “Let’s send the same article to 300 sites and put three exact-match backlinks in each one.” At that point it turns into a link production operation rather than content production.

Seeing guest posting as a channel for expertise and reach is one thing. Seeing it as a mass backlink production machine is another.

You sponsored a conference. The organizer linked to your site along with your logo on its sponsors page. There’s nothing unnatural about that.

But sponsoring dozens of unrelated events just to get backlinks is a different matter. The key distinction here is:

Sponsoring is normal. Turning sponsorship into a hidden system for buying SEO links becomes a problem.

Now we come to the most debated topic.

Are backlinks bought? Yes. There’s quite a big market for it in the SEO industry.

But we need to make a distinction here. You advertised on a news site. Sponsored content was published. It contains a rel="sponsored" link. That’s advertising.

But a deal like “Pay 5,000 TL, we’ll give you a dofollow link and you’ll rise on Google” has a different purpose. That’s exactly where the risk of buying backlinks starts.

We hear this sentence a lot. Just because a method is common doesn’t mean it’s risk-free.

Especially in competitive industries, when a client sees the links competitors have bought, they may say, “They’re doing it, why aren’t we?”

But what we see from the outside is only the result. We don’t know:

  • Which of the competitor’s links are being counted
  • Which ones Google is ignoring
  • Which ones will cause problems later
  • What other strong signals the competitor has

That’s why copying a competitor’s bad practice isn’t a strategy.

On sites that sell backlinks, we very often see lists like this:

  • DR 70
  • DA 65
  • Traffic 20K
  • Price 5,000 TL

It’s presented a bit like a product catalog. But as we discussed in Chapter 27, DR and DA are not Google metrics.

Also, a high-DR site may:

  • Be publishing thousands of pieces of sponsored content
  • Be linking to hundreds of unrelated industries
  • Have lost its organic traffic
  • Have turned into a link-selling network

That’s why buying backlinks based only on metrics is a very superficial approach.

There’s no definitive checklist, but some signals can stand out:

  • It publishes content on every topic
  • Crypto, health, casinos, furniture and manufacturing on the same site
  • Most of the articles are sponsored
  • Every article has commercial anchor text
  • Organic visibility keeps falling
  • Content quality is very low
  • The only purpose of the articles is to give outbound links
  • There’s no real reader engagement
  • Thousands of unrelated pieces of content were produced in a very short time

A single signal isn’t enough to decide. But if several of them come together, you need to be careful.

18. What is a PBN?

A private blog network (PBN) is generally based on the idea of giving backlinks to a main site through a group of sites under the same control.

For example, old domains are bought. Content is put up on them. Then they link to the real site. The goal is to create the appearance, for Google, of independent sites referencing it naturally.

This is one of the black hat SEO methods. There may be examples where it works in the short term. But link networks aimed at manipulating rankings carry serious risk in the long run.

19. What is black hat SEO?

Black hat SEO doesn’t mean backlinks on its own. But it comes up a lot on the backlink side.

For example, methods like these may aim to manipulate ranking systems:

  • PBNs
  • Automated link building
  • Placing links on hacked sites
  • Spam comments
  • Hidden links
  • Mass footer links
  • Front sites
  • Artificial link exchanges

Some black hat methods can produce very fast results in a short time. The site may appear to rise sharply within a few weeks or months.

But the core problem I’ve seen for years is this:

A website that rises quickly with black hat methods can fall back down just as fast.

Because the rise isn’t built on a real brand, content, user value or sustainable authority. When the method is neutralized or detected by the system, the advantage gained can disappear very quickly.

That’s why a short-term graph alone isn’t a sign of success. We need to judge the value of SEO work not only by “How fast did it rise?” but also by “How sustainable is this rise?”

In client projects, I don’t think it’s right to build a strategy on methods that aren’t sustainable.

Two companies can genuinely be business partners. An agency can list the software it uses on its resources page. The software company can list the partner agency too. That’s normal.

The problem is excessive link exchanges done to manipulate rankings, like “You give me links from 20 sites, I’ll give you links from 20 sites.”

So:

Not every reciprocal link is spam.

But when it turns entirely into link swapping, the purpose changes.

21. Are directory sites bad?

No. There may be an industry directory your business really should be listed in.

For example, these can make sense:

  • A chamber of commerce
  • A professional organization
  • An industry association
  • A local business directory
  • An official partner directory

But registering with thousands of automated directories using “submit your site” software is something else.

Here again, the same question:

Do users actually use this directory?

Forums can be very valuable. Especially where there are real communities.

For example, a user asks, “How do I solve this problem?” Someone else links to your guide because it’s genuinely helpful. That’s very natural.

But buying a “1,000 forum backlinks package” and creating profiles and comments with bots is something else.

So forums aren’t bad. Spam is bad.

Links in social media profiles are usually not a strong way to pass PageRank in the classic SEO sense. But again, I don’t look at them only from that angle.

Social media can:

  • Help content get discovered
  • Get you noticed by journalists
  • Help bloggers find your content
  • Bring traffic
  • Build brand awareness

A piece of your research spreads on X or LinkedIn, and then dozens of websites cite you. The backlink didn’t come from social media. But social media may be where the backlink started.

24. Is good content enough without distribution?

Not always.

You published excellent research. But nobody knows about it. Then the chance of getting links is low too.

That’s the missing part of the sentence “Good content earns its own backlinks.” People need to see the content first. That’s why you need to think about distribution as much as content creation.

For example, you can use:

  • Getting it to the press
  • Sending it to industry experts
  • Sharing it on social media
  • Newsletters
  • Communities
  • Business partners
  • Existing customers

If your company news is genuinely newsworthy, distributing a press release can make sense. But publishing the same press release on hundreds of sites with exact-match anchor text to generate SEO links is something different.

Let’s do PR. But let’s not dress up SEO manipulation as PR.

In SEO tools you’ll often see metrics like “Toxic Score” or “Spam Score.”

You need to be careful here. These are the tools’ own risk models. Google has no official Toxic Score it uses to say “This backlink is 87% toxic.”

A link a tool calls toxic may really be spam. But automatically disavowing a link just because the tool shows it in red isn’t right. This matters especially when it comes to disavowing.

It’s normal to get links from sites you don’t want on the internet.

As a site grows, these may link to you:

  • Spam sites
  • Scraper sites
  • Automated directories
  • Duplicate content sites

There’s no need to panic about all of these. In most cases, Google can decide on its own which links to trust and which not to. So we don’t need to step in manually every time we see a low-quality backlink.

28. Is negative SEO possible?

The idea of trying to sink a competitor’s site by pointing thousands of spam links at it is called negative SEO. In theory, attempts like this have been made for years.

But just because you see thousands of spam links in your backlink report, it isn’t right to say, “Someone’s doing negative SEO on us, let’s disavow them all right away.” First we need to understand whether there’s a real risk.

29. What is the disavow tool?

With the disavow tool, we can roughly tell Google, “We don’t want these links to be associated with our site.”

An example for a domain:

domain:spam-example.com

But this is an advanced tool that needs to be used carefully. In other words, the disavow tool is not a “Semrush said toxic, let’s upload them all” tool.

30. When should you use the disavow tool?

In general, it makes more sense to consider it when these two conditions apply together:

  • There’s a significant number of spammy, artificial or low-quality links pointing to your site
  • They have caused a manual action or create a serious risk

Where possible, it’s also healthier to try to get artificially created links removed first. So you don’t need to prepare a disavow file just because you see a few low-quality backlinks.

31. What is a manual action?

When Google detects something that seriously violates its spam policies, it can apply a manual action to the site or to specific pages. You can see this in the Manual actions report in Search Console.

If you’ve built artificial backlinks in particular and received a manual action, the process becomes more serious. In that case, a process like this may be needed:

  • Identify the artificial links
  • Remove the ones you can
  • Disavow the ones that can’t be removed, if necessary
  • Then request a reconsideration

No. I think this may be one of the biggest time-wasters in backlink audits.

You discover tens of thousands of spam links. Then the team starts reviewing them one by one for weeks.

If you didn’t create these links, there’s no manual action and you have no clear history of artificial links, in most cases that kind of operation may not be necessary. That’s why you shouldn’t read the red warnings in SEO tools as a Google penalty.

I think “30 backlinks this month” is a bad KPI on its own. Because you can get 30 links and they can all be meaningless.

Better goals might be:

  • Number of new quality referring domains
  • Links from relevant sources
  • Links to important landing pages
  • Brand mentions
  • Editorial backlinks
  • Referral traffic
  • Organic visibility of the content earning backlinks
  • Digital PR coverage
  • Closing the link gap against competitors

In fact, sometimes one very good backlink can mean more than dozens of low-quality links.

You shouldn’t just look at “How many links did we get?” For example:

  • Which page got the backlink?
  • Did referring domains increase?
  • Did the target page’s visibility change?
  • Did referral traffic come in?
  • Did brand searches increase?
  • Did new publications start citing us?
  • Did the content we got backlinks to earn other links too?

These are the things to look at.

But be careful here too: a backlink came in and the next day the ranking went up three positions. We can’t say, “It was definitely the backlink.” In SEO, many variables change at the same time. I explain how I measure SEO success in Chapter 31.

There’s no single answer.

It’s different for an e-commerce site. Different for a SaaS company. Different for a local business. Different for a news site. Different for a B2B machinery manufacturer.

But I think the most sustainable common ground is this:

Producing something people will want to reference.

Sometimes that’s research. Sometimes a tool. Sometimes a really good guide. Sometimes news. Sometimes a product. Sometimes an event. And sometimes simply work done really well.

I roughly ask these questions:

  • Is this site related to our topic?
  • Is it a real publication or business?
  • Does it have real visitors?
  • Which page will the link come from?
  • Is the page high quality?
  • Why is it linking to us?
  • Does the link make sense from the user’s point of view?
  • Is the anchor text natural?
  • Is there a paid relationship?
  • Does it need sponsored / nofollow?
  • Does the site constantly sell links?
  • Could this link bring traffic?
  • Would we want to be seen here from a brand perspective?

I find the last question very useful:

If Google didn’t exist, would we want to be on this site?

If the answer is yes, the backlink has other value too. If the answer is no and the only reason is “DR 70,” you need to think again.

In short

There are dozens of ways to earn backlinks. But we can divide them into two groups.

On one side:

Giving people a real reason to reference you.

On the other:

Making it look to the ranking algorithm as if backlinks exist.

The second may look easier in the short term. The first takes more effort.

You need to do research. You need to build tools. You need to communicate with people. You need to do PR. You need to create real value.

But in the long run, that’s how a brand is built too.

I think the right question in link building is still this:

Not “How do I get links?” but “Why would they link to me?”

If we can come up with a good answer to that question, we’ve already solved a big part of link building.

And let’s close this chapter by slightly changing the sentence we ended Chapter 27 with:

A good backlink doesn’t look like a number you bought; it looks like a reference you earned.

Previous: Chapter 27: Why Does Google Trust Some Sites More? · Contents · Next: Chapter 29: Reading Google Search Console Correctly

This chapter was first published in Turkish on X (October 2, 2026).