Last updated · reviewed by the Essentras editorial team
journalist request platforms and PR software / Head to head
Source of Sources (SOS) vs Connectively
Both are low-cost routes to earned media. Neither guarantees a placement, an outlet or a link.
Pick Source of Sources if you have the time to personally pitch reporters for free and can accept no guarantee of placement or outlet. Pick Connectively if you want an ongoing, low-cost subscription channel with keyword alerts and media-list tools, and can accept its 2.8/5 Trustpilot rating and no publication guarantee either.
Source of Sources (SOS)
Peter Shankman's free email digest connecting expert sources directly to journalist queries, a solo-run relaunch of the original, pre-monetization HARO format.
Connectively
A journalist/publisher Q&A platform where subject-matter experts answer live media queries for a chance at press mentions; owned by Featured (Featured.com), which also owns HARO.
Essentras
A catalogue of named publications, each showing its own price, turnaround and link policy before purchase.
Why Source of Sources and Connectively buyers end up looking at a third option
Essentras fits a buyer who needs a specific outcome, a confirmed placement on a named outlet by a set date, rather than a pitching queue with an uncertain result. You see the outlet's price, turnaround and dofollow or nofollow policy before you pay, and you get a confirmed URL afterward. It is not a replacement for either tool: it cannot promise a ranking or an AI citation, and it is not a newswire for regulated disclosure.
The outlet is named before you pay
You pick the publication from the catalogue and see it before the order is placed. No shared query pool decides where your quote ends up.
The link policy is stated per outlet
Each listing shows dofollow or nofollow next to price and turnaround. You know before purchase, not after the article goes live.
No seat, no term, no renewal date
One placement is a valid order. There is no minimum, no retainer, no notice period and nothing that auto-renews in 12 months.
Source of Sources (SOS) vs Connectively, side by side
| Source of Sources | Connectively | Essentras | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Entry price | Free ($0) | $0/mo (Free plan) | Per outlet, published |
| Pricing published | Yes, free only | Yes, all tiers | Yes, per listing |
| Minimum commitment | None | Monthly auto-renew (paid) | None, per order |
| You choose the outlet | No | No | Yes |
| Link policy | Not applicable | Visible on Pro tier only | Shown before you pay |
| Turnaround | Posted within hours | No published SLA | Published per outlet |
| Guaranteed placement | No | No, ToS disclaims | Yes, confirmed URL |
| Reporting | None | Monthly (Lite+) | Order confirmation only |
| Contract term | None, unsubscribe anytime | 30-day notice to cancel | None |
| Who it's built for | Experts with time to pitch | Ongoing DIY pitching habit | Single-outcome buyers |
Published list pricing, checked 4 October 2026 on each vendor's own site. Vendors change pricing and add-ons without notice, and quote-only vendors negotiate per deal, so confirm at the source before you buy. Anything we could not verify is marked, not estimated.
The decision, in three lines
Pick Source of Sources if
Pick Source of Sources if you have genuine expertise, spare time to monitor up to 3 emails a day, and want free shots at top-tier outlets with no cost and no guarantee. It suits solo experts more than teams, since there is no seat model, no filtering and no reporting.
Pick Connectively if
Pick Connectively if you want an ongoing, affordable subscription channel to answer live queries, with keyword alerts and, on paid tiers, link-type visibility and media-list tools. It suits a consultant or small team building a long-term pitching habit who can tolerate no publication guarantee and a 30-day notice to cancel.
Pick Essentras if
Essentras fits a buyer who needs a specific outcome, a confirmed placement on a named outlet by a set date, rather than a pitching queue with an uncertain result. You see the outlet's price, turnaround and dofollow or nofollow policy before you pay, and you get a confirmed URL afterward. It is not a replacement for either tool: it cannot promise a ranking or an AI citation, and it is not a newswire for regulated disclosure.
Where Source of Sources genuinely wins
If the goal is organic-feeling quotes in top-tier outlets that no paid vendor can promise (the New York Times, the Washington Post, the Wall Street Journal), and the buyer has real subject-matter expertise plus the spare time to monitor up to three emails a day and write fast, personal replies, SOS is the genuinely better choice: it is free, it is live today, and an earned quote in a masthead like that carries a kind of authority a purchased placement does not claim to replicate. It also wins outright for anyone with zero marketing budget, since Essentras requires payment and SOS requires only time.
Where Connectively genuinely wins
For a solo expert, consultant, or small in-house marketer who wants an ongoing, cheap channel to build a pitching habit and occasionally land earned (not purchased) mentions across a wide, unpredictable set of outlets - and who has the time to answer queries regularly - Connectively is the better buy. At $11-59/month (billed yearly) it costs far less than a single Essentras placement, offers effectively unlimited submission volume on the Pro/Business tiers, and adds media-database and journalist-discovery tooling a one-off placement purchase doesn't include. It's a reasonable tool for building a broad, ongoing mentions/backlink profile over time; it is not a fit for anyone who needs one guaranteed result on one named outlet by a set date.
Measured, not asserted
The numbers behind this page
Every comparison on this site rests on two things we recompute rather than claim: the live catalog of what we actually sell, and a running study of what answer engines actually say. Both are linked below so you can check them.
Corpus figures recomputed 5 October 2026. Catalog figures are live.
How we compared
Both sides were compared on the same 10 dimensions, using published list pricing read off each vendor's own site on 4 October 2026. Where a vendor publishes nothing, the cell says so rather than carrying an estimate.
- 01Is every tier priced in public, including the largest one, or does the top plan route to a sales call?
- 02Can you know which outlet will publish before you pay, or only after a journalist picks your pitch?
- 03What renewal day looks like: minimum term, notice period, and whether fees already paid are refundable.
- 04Whether cost scales with attempts or with results, and what you have bought in a month where nothing publishes.
- 05Whether the link policy, dofollow or nofollow, is stated before purchase or left entirely to each publisher.
Deliberately excluded. Features neither side documents publicly, and any claim that rests only on a single review or a vendor's own case study.
Essentras sells services in this category, so this page is not a neutral review. Every competitor figure is published list pricing you can check on the vendor's own site, and the case for choosing a competitor over us is stated on every entry rather than left out.
FAQ
Source of Sources (SOS) vs Connectively, FAQ
Is Source of Sources the same as HARO?▾
Not quite. Peter Shankman created the original HARO in 2008; Cision later owned it and rebranded it as Connectively in 2024, then shut down the HARO brand itself on 9 December 2024. Featured.com acquired HARO in April 2025 and revived Connectively as a standalone paid platform in June 2026. Source of Sources is Shankman's own, separate, free project reviving the original pre-monetization format; it has no ownership tie to Connectively.
Does Connectively own HARO?▾
Yes. Connectively is owned by Featured (Featured.com), the same company that acquired HARO in April 2025. Its legal operating entity is Terkel, Inc., doing business as Connectively, headquartered in Scottsdale, Arizona. Featured's own site states it revived Connectively in June 2026 as a standalone paid platform, and HARO's own site cross-promotes Connectively, consistent with common ownership.
Is either platform free?▾
Both have a free tier, but a free tier that includes a paid option on top of it is not the same as a free-only service. Source of Sources has no paid tier at all: every feature is free, funded by optional donations. Connectively's Free plan caps you at 3 answers and 1 bylined article a month; more volume, keyword alerts and reporting require upgrading to Lite, Pro or Business, starting at $19/mo.
Does either one guarantee a placement?▾
No. Source of Sources connects you to a reporter's inbox; what happens after you reply is entirely up to that journalist. Connectively's own Terms of Service explicitly state it does not warrant that a submitted answer will be published, or be published in a timely manner. Both sell access to a query, not a confirmed outcome, which is the structural trade-off against buying a named placement outright.
Which one has more reach?▾
Source of Sources claims 20,000+ journalists, broadcasters, bloggers and brands on its homepage, a figure that is not independently verifiable. Connectively does not publish a standalone user count; its parent, Featured, cites 100,000+ users across Featured's platforms without breaking out Connectively alone. Neither figure has third-party confirmation, so treat both as vendor claims rather than audited numbers.
What do reviewers say went wrong after the HARO-to-Connectively move?▾
Trustpilot reviewers, mostly from 2024, reported that query relevance and volume dropped sharply after the migration, with one estimating volume fell to roughly 5% of legacy HARO. Reviewers also described a rise in low-effort or AI-generated submissions, lost answers and contact data during the migration, and workflows that were free under HARO becoming paywalled. Connectively's claimed Trustpilot profile currently shows 2.8/5 from 7 reviews.
Is there a guaranteed-placement alternative to pitching?▾
Yes, though it is a different model, not a cheaper version of the same one. Essentras sells a confirmed placement on a named outlet at a published, per-outlet price, with the link policy and turnaround shown before you pay and a confirmed URL delivered afterward. It suits a buyer who needs a single result, not an ongoing pitching habit, and it cannot promise a search ranking or an AI citation either.
Other comparisons in this category
Same decision, different pairings. Each page carries the published price for both sides.
Head to head
Alternatives
Priced outlets, not pitch quotas
No membership, no circuit you cannot inspect, no quote form between you and a number.