The Best HARO Alternatives, Ranked

Qwoted is the best all-around HARO replacement if you want quality placements and don’t mind paying for speed. Featured.com is the best free option and the closest thing to what HARO actually felt like in 2015. If you only have budget for one paid tool, start with Qwoted; if you have none, start with Featured.com and Source of Sources together and layer in a paid platform once you see results.

HARO does not exist anymore, and neither does its replacement. Cision rebranded HARO as Connectively in early 2024, added a paid tier, and then shut the whole platform down on December 9, 2024, as Cision itself confirmed. There is no single successor. The market splintered into a handful of platforms, each doing a slice of what HARO used to do in one inbox. Some are free email digests, some are paid marketplaces with vetting and matching, some are region-specific. This list covers the ones that are actually still running in 2026, verified against their own sites, not the dozens of “HARO alternatives” roundups that still link to dead platforms.

If your team is doing this kind of reactive outreach alongside a broader press strategy, it usually works best paired with structured media relations rather than as a standalone tactic. Source requests get you quick wins; they rarely build the kind of ongoing reporter relationships that drive sustained coverage.

1. Qwoted

Qwoted is a two-sided marketplace where journalists post requests and vetted experts pitch quotes directly through the platform, with journalist profiles, reporter preferences, and audience data attached to each request. Qwoted runs an actual vetting process for sources, which keeps the request quality higher than open email lists. The free plan limits you to two pitches a month and adds a two-hour delay before you can see new requests, which in practice hands the best opportunities to paying subscribers. The paid Professional tier runs around $99 to $149 a month for unlimited, no-delay access.

Best for: agencies and consultants who want the highest signal-to-noise ratio and are willing to pay for speed.

Pro: real vetting means fewer junk requests and better response rates from journalists. Con: the free tier is close to unusable competitively because of the two-hour delay.

2. Featured.com

Featured.com acquired the HARO brand from Cision in 2025 and relaunched it as a free, email-based service that sends journalist and publisher requests to your inbox up to three times a day, almost exactly HARO’s original cadence. Featured also runs a separate Q&A product where experts answer questions that publishers turn into full articles, and it has revived the Connectively name for that paid product line. For most people the free email feed is the useful part.

Best for: anyone who wants the closest thing to the original HARO experience for free.

Pro: no cost, familiar format, decent volume of requests. Con: response competition is heavy since it inherited a large chunk of HARO’s old user base.

3. Source of Sources

Source of Sources was built by Peter Shankman, the person who founded HARO in 2008, after he watched Cision run Connectively into the ground and then shut it. It’s a free email listserv, deliberately simple, sent up to three times a day with journalist queries. There’s no marketplace, no profiles, no paid tier. You reply directly to the journalist by email, the way HARO worked for its first decade.

Best for: people who want the no-frills, original HARO workflow with none of the platform overhead.

Pro: built and run by the person who understands what made the original work. Con: no filtering, matching, or vetting tools, so you’re back to skimming every email yourself.

4. SourceBottle

SourceBottle is a Melbourne-based platform connecting journalists and bloggers with expert sources, and it’s the strongest option if your target coverage is in Australia, New Zealand, or the UK. The free tier gives you ten keyword alerts and daily callout emails; a premium tier around $65 a month adds visibility features that put your profile in front of journalists directly.

Best for: brands and experts targeting ANZ or UK media rather than US outlets.

Pro: genuinely useful regional reach that US-first platforms don’t cover well. Con: thin on US and Canadian requests, so it’s a poor fit if that’s your primary market.

5. ResponseSource

ResponseSource runs the Journalist Enquiry Service, a UK-based tool where journalists submit enquiries by category and PR contacts get matched to relevant ones. It’s free for journalists and priced by category for PR users, starting around £625 per year per category, so you pay only for the sectors you actually work in.

Best for: UK-focused PR teams that want category-specific enquiry access rather than a firehose of unrelated requests.

Pro: category pricing means you’re not paying for noise outside your niche. Con: annual per-category pricing adds up fast if you work across several industries, and it’s a weak fit for US-only brands.

6. MentionMatch (formerly Help a B2B Writer)

MentionMatch, previously Help a B2B Writer, was built by a freelance B2B writer, later acquired by the content-marketing community Superpath, and rebranded. It routes B2B-specific source requests, from writers at outlets like HubSpot and Shopify, only to registered experts whose declared specialties match. It’s free on both sides, with publications capped at roughly three requests per week to keep quality high.

Best for: B2B SaaS, marketing, and fintech experts who find general platforms too noisy.

Pro: tight topical matching means almost every request you see is actually relevant. Con: narrow scope, useless if you’re not in B2B software or marketing.

7. JustReachOut

JustReachOut is a different model from the rest of this list. It’s not a request feed, it’s a searchable journalist and podcast database paired with an AI pitch-writing tool, built for proactive outreach rather than replying to inbound queries. Pricing starts at $147 a month for the Starter Outreach tier and climbs to $497 a month for Ultimate, with a done-for-you White Glove tier at nearly $2,000 a month.

Best for: teams that want to pitch journalists directly instead of waiting for matching requests to appear.

Pro: puts you in control of who you pitch instead of waiting for the right request to show up. Con: expensive relative to the rest of this list, and success still depends on your pitch quality, not just database access.

Free versus paid, in plain terms

The free platforms (Featured.com, Source of Sources, MentionMatch, SourceBottle’s base tier) get you volume. You’ll see more requests, but you’re competing with everyone else who also signed up for free, and you’re doing all your own filtering. The paid platforms (Qwoted, ResponseSource, JustReachOut) buy you either better matching, regional focus, or proactive control, at a real monthly cost. If you’re a solo founder or early-stage company, start free and add one paid tool once you know which kind of coverage actually moves the needle for you. If you’re already running structured PR, treat these as one channel inside a broader plan. Founders in particular tend to get the most out of source-request platforms when they’re paired with a consistent point of view, which is the core idea behind our founder-led PR playbook.

If you’d rather have someone else manage the pitching, filtering, and follow-up across these platforms, get in touch and we’ll walk you through what a managed program looks like.

How we ranked these

We verified every platform on this list is currently live and operating as of publication by checking each company’s own site, its pricing page where available, and recent third-party coverage of its launch or ownership changes. We excluded any tool that recent sources described as shut down, dormant, or rebranded into something no longer offering source-matching (including the original HARO and Connectively, both confirmed dead by Cision itself). Ranking order weighs request volume and quality, cost relative to what you get, and how narrow or broad the platform’s focus is, with the top spot going to the tool that delivers the best mix of quality and reliability rather than the one with the biggest name recognition.