The problem we are solving

A retrieval system deciding whether to use your announcement in an answer needs four things: to know when it was published, to know who said it, to find claims specific enough to be checked, and to identify which organization the document concerns.

A conventional press release fails on most of those. It opens with three lines of positioning before reaching the news. It describes the company as a leading provider of innovative solutions, which is unverifiable and therefore unusable. It attributes its quotation to the company rather than to a person. And it carries no structured markup, so every consumer has to infer what it is about.

None of that was a mistake. It was optimized for a distribution model — the wire blast — that stopped producing value over a decade ago. The habits outlived the reason for them.

What we change

The opening passage is rebuilt to stand alone

Assume the first forty words will be extracted and quoted without anything around them. They must contain who, what, where and when, and be true and complete in isolation. This is the single highest-leverage change available and it costs nothing but discipline.

Adjectives become facts, or they leave

“Leading regional installer” is unverifiable. “Installed 1,400 units across Colorado since 2019” is checkable. Every unverifiable claim is either converted into something specific or removed. If a claim cannot survive being made specific, it should not be in the document.

A human gets named

A quotation attributed to a named person with a stated title is citable in a way that a statement from “the company” is not. It also improves the writing, because people say things and organizations emit statements.

Dates are made explicit

When it happened, when it takes effect, and when this was published — as separate, stated facts rather than one ambiguous dateline.

Structure becomes assertion

Article type, publication and modification dates, publisher identity, issuing organization and the entities the document concerns, all stated in structured markup rather than left to inference.

It gets one permanent address

One canonical URL on a stable domain. Where a release also appears elsewhere, that copy points back here, so there is never ambiguity about which version is authoritative.

The part that matters most · see all eight items →

Entity linking, and why it is not a link

Everything above improves a single document. This improves how every mention of your business relates to every other one, and it is the item with the largest effect on whether an AI assistant can name you confidently.

A retrieval system encountering your company name has a problem: is this the same business as the one on that directory listing, the one with those reviews, the one with that LinkedIn page? Names are ambiguous. Addresses change. Descriptions differ. Where a system cannot resolve the ambiguity, the safe behavior is to omit you and name somebody it is surer about.

The sameAs property resolves it by assertion. In the structured data attached to your release, we state that the organization named here is the same organization as the one at each of your verified addresses. Not a suggestion, not a hyperlink — a machine-readable claim about identity.

Why this carries no risk sameAs is not a hyperlink. It transfers no link equity, appears in no link graph, and cannot be construed as a link scheme. It is metadata describing identity, which is exactly what search engines and AI systems ask publishers to provide.

What we can declare

Your primary website
Your Google Business Profile
Your LinkedIn company page
Your Facebook or other social profiles
Industry registries, trade body listings and licensing records
Any directory where your business is genuinely and accurately listed

We only declare addresses you actually control or are genuinely listed on. Asserting identity across addresses that are not yours is both useless and dishonest, and we will not do it.

One condition Entity linking only helps if the information at those addresses agrees. If your website says one address and your Google profile says another, declaring them as the same entity surfaces the contradiction rather than resolving it. Fix the inconsistencies first — we will flag them during review if we spot them.

Before and after

Typical revisions
As submitted	Why it fails	As published
“A leading provider of innovative solutions”	Unverifiable; cannot be cited	“Founded in 2012, serving 400 accounts across six states”
“Available in select markets”	Answers no question	“Available in Denver, Boulder and Fort Collins from 1 October”
“The company said”	No attributable speaker	Named spokesperson with title and direct quotation
Three paragraphs of positioning, then the news	Extraction takes positioning	News in the first sentence, positioning later or not at all
No structured markup	Everything left to inference	Article, organization and entity markup
Copies at four hundred URLs	No authoritative version	One canonical URL, everything else pointing at it

What this does not do It does not buy you links, rankings or guaranteed pickup. Links in paid announcements carry sponsored attributes, which is what search engines expect and what honest publishers do. What you get is a document a retrieval system can find, parse, attribute and quote. That is valuable. It is just valuable for different reasons than the wire industry spent a decade claiming.

Submit a release See pricing