Okay, so here is a question based on my old-school journalism training/knowledge versus my modern web developer knowledge.
Does using primary sources for a linked URL versus a secondary source have any impact on SEO?
For example, I write a blog post about a major event of some kind. It’s reported in The New York Times which is a high quality primary news source. But a quick Google search on this even shows tons of smaller blogs reporting the same event with details and quotes and a link to that article in the The New York Times.
If I were to post a new post on my blog on that same event, would my SEO suffer if I use a secondary source blog as the link versus the primary source article from The New York Times?
From a traditional journalism perspective, citing the primary source is the way to go. But from a modern blog/SEO perspective does that even matter? I assume not only is The New York Times better regarded as a source, but the chances of the reference link going dead are far less when compared to some random blog that might disappear at some point in the future.