Sponsored post disclosure is two jobs that publishers often treat as one. The first is telling readers that a brand paid for the content, which is a matter of consumer protection rules. The second is telling search engines that the links in it were paid for, which is a matter of Google’s policies. A label at the top of the post does nothing for the links, and a rel attribute on the links tells readers nothing. If you sell sponsored posts, you need both, on every post, every time.
What Google asks for on paid links
Google’s guidance on qualifying outbound links is direct: “Mark links that are advertisements or paid placements (commonly called paid links) with the sponsored value.” A link in a post a brand paid for is a paid placement, whatever the post is called.
The same page explains where nofollow fits: “The nofollow attribute was previously recommended for these types of links and is still an acceptable way to flag them, though sponsored is preferred.” So older posts marked nofollow are not a problem, but new ones should use sponsored.
| Link type | Value Google asks for | Example on a publisher site |
|---|---|---|
| Advertisements and paid placements | rel="sponsored" (nofollow still acceptable, sponsored preferred) | Links in a sponsored post, paid banner links |
| User-generated content | rel="ugc" | Links in comments and forum posts |
| Your own editorial links | No qualification needed | Links you chose to include without payment |
The UGC row matters if your sponsored posts allow comments. Google says: “We recommend marking user-generated content (UGC) links, such as comments and forum posts, with the ugc value.” The two values can sit on the same site without conflict.
Why the link attribute is not optional
Google’s spam policies define link spam to include “Exchanging money for links, or posts that contain links”. The next part is what makes selling sponsored posts possible at all: “It’s not a violation of our policies to have such links as long as they are qualified with a rel=”nofollow” or rel=”sponsored” attribute value to the <a> tag.”
Read that as a publisher. The sponsored post itself is allowed. The payment is allowed. What turns it into link spam is a paid link left unqualified. That puts the risk on your site, not only the buyer’s, because you are the one publishing the link. Our post on buying backlinks covers the same policy from the buyer’s side.
Sponsored post examples: the markup and the label
A compliant sponsored post example has two visible parts: a label readers see before they reach the content, and an attribute on each paid link. In the markup, a paid link looks like this:
If you also want to signal that you do not vouch for the link, values can be combined, as in rel="sponsored nofollow". What matters is that sponsored, or nofollow on older posts, is present on every link the client paid for: in the body, in an author bio, and in any image link.
For readers, put the label at the top, in plain words, before the first paid link. Wording such as “Sponsored post: this article was paid for by the brand mentioned” leaves nobody in doubt. The legal requirements for that label are a separate subject, and our guide to affiliate disclosure covers what the rules ask for and the placements that fail. The same principles apply to examples of sponsored posts: a label buried in the footer, or worded so vaguely that a reader would not understand it, does not do its job.
Selling sponsored posts without selling risk
The awkward conversation comes when a buyer asks for a dofollow link. Some will say it outright; others will ask you to leave the rel attribute off “for this one”. A buyer asking for an unqualified paid link is asking you to break Google’s link spam policy on your own site, and the price they offer does not include that risk. Our post on nofollow links explains what a qualified link still does for the buyer, which is a better basis for selling than pretending it is something else.
A workable policy fits in four lines.
- Label every sponsored post for readers, at the top, in plain words.
- Qualify every paid link with rel=”sponsored”, with no exceptions on request.
- Price honestly. Sell exposure to your audience, not ranking power you are not allowed to pass.
- Apply the rule to edits too. A paid link added to an old post is still a paid link.
The last point catches publishers who would never sell an unqualified link in a new post but accept payment to insert one into an existing article. That is a niche edit by another name, and the policy treats it the same way; see our post on niche edits for why the “aged page” pitch does not change the risk. Put your policy on the page where you sell sponsored posts, so buyers who want something else rule themselves out before they contact you.
Auditing the sponsored posts you already have
If you have been selling sponsored posts for a while, the new ones are the easy part. The risk sits in the archive: posts published before you had a policy, links added by a client after publication, and author bios that nobody checked. Start with a list of every post a client paid for, from invoices or your sales inbox rather than from memory, because the posts you have forgotten are the ones most likely to be wrong.
For each post, check three things. Is there a reader-facing label at the top? Does every link to the client, or to anyone the client asked you to include, carry sponsored or nofollow? And has anything changed since publication, such as a link swapped at the client’s request? Fix what you find, and keep the list, so the next audit is a check against a record rather than another search. If your site is for sale one day, that record is also the evidence a buyer will want to see.
The limitation of this post is scope. It covers what Google asks of paid links, quoted from its own pages, and points to our separate guide for what readers must be told. It does not cover the legal rules in your country in detail, and it cannot tell you how Google detects unqualified paid links or what happens to a particular site that leaves them in place. Those are reasons for caution, not reassurance. The rule itself is simple enough to follow without knowing the enforcement details: label the post for readers, qualify every paid link for Google, and decline the requests that would require you to do otherwise. A publisher who does that consistently can sell sponsored posts for as long as readers are willing to read them.
Frequently asked questions
Should sponsored post links be nofollow or sponsored?
Google prefers rel=”sponsored” for paid links. Nofollow is still an acceptable way to flag them, so older posts marked nofollow are fine.
Is selling sponsored posts against Google’s policies?
No. Google says paid links are not a violation as long as they are qualified with rel=”nofollow” or rel=”sponsored”.
Does rel=”sponsored” count as disclosure to readers?
No. The attribute is invisible to readers. You also need a clear label on the post itself.
Which links in a sponsored post need the attribute?
Every link the client paid for, including links in the body, the author bio and on images.
The takeaway Label every sponsored post for readers and mark every paid link rel=”sponsored”. A buyer who wants dofollow is asking you to carry the policy risk.
