19/06/2026
Your SEO agency would rather you didn't read this.
PR isn't coverage. It's SEO you didn't pay for.
Here's what actually happens when a journalist mentions your business and drops a link back to your site.
Google sees a high-authority publication vouching for you. Editorially. Not because you slipped someone fifty quid for a sponsored slot, but because a real journalist decided you were worth referencing.
That single link carries more weight than months of cold outreach to dodgy "guest post opportunities" rotting in your spam folder.
→ The Times links to you. Google notices.
→ A trade publication quotes you. Google notices.
→ A respected blog cites your data. Google notices.
Meanwhile, your SEO agency is invoicing you four figures a month to chase the same outcome through manufactured backlinks that Google has been getting wise to for years.
I'm not knocking SEO agencies. Plenty are brilliant.
But this bit quietly bothers me. A lot of founders are paying two separate invoices for the same result. One to PR, one to SEO. Neither team talks to the other. Neither realises they're rowing in the same direction.
Editorial links are the most expensive asset in SEO.
And good PR generates them as a byproduct.
The founders who clock this stop thinking about coverage as a vanity exercise and start treating it as infrastructure.
What's your take? Like & comment "Compound" if you'd rather your marketing budget worked twice as hard.