USA TODAY VS Metafact

Which is odd, usually places actually post the response not just that someone refused. Does that mean it just didn't respond? It's really just pinknews and a weird usatoday.news site instead of the real usatoday.com site where I can find this after searching, and some twitter users linking it. Source: over 1 year ago

John Mueller from Google said they are. There was a Search Engine Journal article where he said they are able to catch most of them and make them not worth anything. We have tried web 2.0 vs standard link building and we noticed that Google does devalue a lot of web 2.0 links. We had a site with 1000 links and another with 13000 in the same niche but the 13000 was web 2.0 and the site with 1000 ranks higher on... Source: over 1 year ago

No source from usatoday.com actually proves any of this.... Nothing has been updated since she assumed office in 2019. This sub blows my mind. You all talk about how stupid any other sub is but just chew on and push anything that fits you. I can stop shaking my head at both sides and the amount of bullshit everyone just takes as facts. Source: over 1 year ago

App / URL: cnn.com, msn.com, usatoday.com (just these three to test, blocking obvious sections games, esports, mail, sports, etc). Source: almost 2 years ago

Hi everyone: That’s all I have time to answer today. Thank you for all the questions. Keep following our coverage at usatoday.com and email me with tips, questions etc at jmeyer@usatoday.com. Source: about 2 years ago

Just please ask someone with specific knowledge of these things before you embark on them. Check Wikipedia, it is very peer reviewed when it comes to science based information. Try out metafact as well. Remember just because something has someone with letters before their name (Dr) or qualifications under their belt, still check out the person, a vaguely connected qualification from 40 years ago doesn't hold a lot... Source: almost 3 years ago