WebProNews

I think what happens is that many businesses hire companies who do not want to spend the real time and effort it takes to achieve great inbound links. At the same time, 95% of the internet is simply rehashed information, so it is very difficult for webmasters to want to link around.

The best way to build links is to create link-able content, and every good SEO and Marketer knows this. The best way to leverage content and links is to make the user feel as though they want to follow through and buy products and services, without being pushy. Since the new age of SEO is entirely about Web Analytics, conversions and sales (and not necessarily high rankings) it makes sense to say that the better performing SEO's are finding great links, but are also creating viral campaigns aimed at ultimate conversions and not necessarily targeted anchor text.

Karen -nothing like a reply ten months later, eh?  As I stated, (indiscreet) reciprocal linking is dead.  What you are doing is NOT indiscreet, it's relevant, and thus your approach is NOT dead.   Every week of my life I research and compile lists of target sites for clients.  Included are sets of targets where a recip will be required.  Some of my clients embrace them, others, especially larger corporate clients, shy away from them.  Their choice. Regardless, targeted recips are fantastic.  Go get them.  I always have and always will.  I am obviously pro recip. See my article here from SearchEngineLand titled Link Building's Cult Of Reciprocity.

OK, that said, what is dead is any link building tactic that does not first take into consideration the uniqueness of the content you are seeking links for.  Any link building approach that anyone can use for any site regardless of subject, is not just dead, it's silly. 

The biggest problem with these kinds of messages is threefold:

1. They are not entirely accurate. Google has and will continue to reward links; even ones created by manipulation. SEOs have simply gotten smarter about the kid of manipulation that is occurring.

2. They do not seperate what I would call ehtical reciprocal linking from 'let's game the search engines' linking. There is a big difference between the two - intention - and it is easy to spot when Google guages link build speed etc.

There is, and never will be, an issue with a website building, by hand, quality reciprocal links that they have editorially reviewed.

3. Links, and how they are assessed, change daily.

"Ward says many link building practices are doomed to fail because they are manipulation-based. That goes for (indiscreet) reciprocal linking, article syndication, press releases, paid links, and yes, even link bait." This is paranoia at its best! My three sites that are in the jewelry, software, and information technology markets and do very well in rankings and are almost solely promoted with relevant reciprocal links. Been doing it for 9 years and will continue to do so. I dont give a rats ass what this link expert or a search engine says. I will link exchange with whatever sites improve my site visitor's experience.