In a online publishing context is content still king?
At last week's SIPA UK Congress there was a debate on whether "Content is still king" when publishing online. Our panel were split on the topic. What are your views?
Clarification added July 14, 2008:
I'd also like to add a link to this post from the search engine optimisation world which I thought was interesting.
http://www.cornwallseo.com/search/index.php/2008/07/13/content-content-content-why-it-gets-me-excited/
Clarification added July 14, 2008:
OK - some great answers so far. Most believe that content is still king but we have also had votes for community, solutions, SEO, context and delivery in the royal family. I'll keep the debate going till the end of the week - please continue to contribute.
Good Answers (42)
Chris L
Editor in Chief at Econsultancy and internet entrepreneur
Best Answers in: Internet Marketing (1)
Hey Rory,
Actually, here in 2008, I think *context* is king. Content underpins everything, no question, but it is what you wrap around it (largely based on who that content is aimed at) that makes all the difference.
This means targeting, recommendations, related content, all tailored specifically at your audience, based on what they are reading. It doesn't mean run-of-site / network advertising, or blanket promotions across all your website channels.
Content in itself won't get you to the top of Google - you need other things to happen to make that work, though it's not all about linkbait, social media tactics, or creating articles for Google rather than your readers. The role of a solid technology platform is underplayed - you can have as much content as you want but bury it in a rubbish Flash website and Google (which has just started indexing Flash, alas) won't be able to find it easily.
I'm still a big believer in the 'content is king' mantra (it's worked very well for us) but nowadays the tools are there to get real insight into the mindset of your audience. You can and need to do more for every visitor / subscriber and for your bottom line. Certainly this is where we're heading...
Cheers,
c.
Content is not king, promotion is. You can have the best, most engaging content in the world but if nobody knows about it, its worthless.
Henry P
Online publisher; strategy and development, editorial and content management, marketing, data integration and CRM
Certainly - content is the how and why your site or pages are found and for publishers giving the visitor reason to return.
If you have no content you will not attract any audiance.
No matter if you are providing information on-line or off-line
what is a job board with no jobs or a content page with no news
The great tension in the online world is that content potentially is everything. The nature of the net is that you don't need 'promotion' in any conventional sense but the problem is too many people still think all content should be free. If we do not pay the content creators then we won't get any new content, or very little that is worth having. Only quality, original content deserves to be king but is that what people want?
I was on the panel and said it was not. Nothing like a bit of controversy. The way publishers define content needs revision. To give some context - news and increasingly analysis are commoditised. It has not been enough to just put magazine content online and call it a website/web service for some time, but the pace is picking up. Look at www.ragan.com and network.nature.com to see what the future might look like.
Another panel member suggested that solutions, not content is king. Becoming part of someone’s workflow should be the goal. And to achieve this takes more than great articles. Publishers need to produce solutions: networks, data products, videos and user-generated content to grow their business in the long-term. It’s about more than connecting buyers and sellers, it’s about connecting audiences (communities?) and helping people do their jobs better. Yes, it's still content and perhaps it is still king, but not content as we know it.
Online, content is all you've got. The production values that could get publishers through good and hard times in print aren't available online. A 'relaunch' online is majorly reliant on new functionality (read: content) for customers to come back after the first visit.
I agree with John, that promotion is an essential part of the mix, but this is reliant on the content itself. Customers need to engage with your content, and to do that they need to find as much relevant content to them, as quickly as possible, to spark their interest. Marketing will get the customer to the site, content will get the page impressions that drive the revenue.
Content IS king, but only because content leads to conversation and conversation leads to action and action leads to value creation.
Content = where the conversation starts. Content = ideas Content = the metadata through which we connect
It's where the value creation begins.
Links:
Content is still King, but that's also an over-simplification.
A site without content is like a shop without merchandise. Great promotion might bring people to your shop but if the shop is empty or merchandise scarce and uninteresting or disorganized...you have nothing.
Nevertheless, content alone is just noise or visual overload for users if it doesn't engage the user or if it's indescriminately displayed without format!
Take user-generated-content as an example. Youtube already has the market for "any-and-everything-content", covered. For the past two years online media outlets like CNN, MTV, The BBC and others have been featuring user-generated-content but in a highly specific format relevant to their brand image and professional content. They cross-reference user-content with their own news stories and promotions. Take CNN's iReport as a perfect example.
In addition to relevant, formatted and engaging content, content dispersion via mobile devices and IPTV creates user sticktuitvness and is another way to get current users, engaging and attracting potential new users.
When it comes to Content the following old adage applies, "it's not what you have but what you do with what you've got that matters".
"The way publishers define content needs revision."
This is true.
But, what is truthier is the definition of content is constantly being redefined by social tribes who you do not even know exist. Small goups of fanatical influencers constantly change the landscape.
Yes, Content is King. But the Pope runs the Services.
I believe the 'Content is King' maxim as espoused by the traditional media world is dead but the King is dead, long live the King. Confused you will be!
What I mean is content is still important but the context, relevance, delivery and access have all become as important in today's media world.
As publishers we talk about the triangle of publisher, advertiser and reader but if we were honest the old model paid scant regard to the reader when the magazine was free and instead cow towed to the advertiser. Even the Editor would sit in his/her ivory tower and propagate their opinions without any fear of feedback - monologue publishing.
Thanks to the dialogue age of the internet and forums like this feedback it is suddenly something we're not short of but Publishers and Editors are now debating its merit - is UGC any good. Yes, if it gets an audience. Personally I can't stand the reality/celebrity media world but it seems to be very popular amongst the Gen Y brigade and they are the business people of tomorrow.
So, back to my point all content is king if it is in the right context, relevant and easily accessible. We should seek to accept content from anywhere in our communities and the smart publishers/editors will the contextualise it, ie check it and then put it in the right place and keep the dialogue going to really create a community.
In fact, 'Community is King' and content, context, delivery and access are all its Queens!!!!!
John Whitaker
VP Online Development, dmg world media
Content is everything. We live and work in an information intensive world. Whether it be news, news analysis, data, research, music, prose, special interest, etc. content defines who we are, informs us and enables us to make choices both professional and personal.
Even in the SEO profession content is king. Your web site won't rank high if the content on your site isn't relevant. You can build your site to be SEO friendly and employ many traffic building tactics, but if the site's content has no value the site traffic declines.
Content is still king. But SEO is definitely a member of the court. However, some journalists are afraid that "optimizing" their content dethrones it. Ironically, it reinforces content's power. The analogy that I've used with media companies is this: If you don't want to optimize your articles, images and videos, then you don't want to sell your newspapers or magazines on newsstands -- where people might find them, buy them, and read them.
Vicki O
Marketing Manager, Dealer Specialties
Best Answers in: Business Development (2), Professional Networking (1), Web Development (1)
Content is king!! We live in an information rich, want-to-know world where information provides us with knowledge. Knowledge is power. The power is our ability to control "on-demand" requests to educate ourselves. On-demand comes in various "forms" which are mentioned in these posts. The "forms" are tool choices to get to the information. Ultimately it's the information people want. The tools are just preferences in how to get there.
More than ever. I'll echo what Mr. Daisley wrote but would add if your content isn't good the community. No amount of promotion will make it any better, you might get views, but you won't get conversions.
CONTENT IS KING! This is my motto when I am SEOing for clients.
Rather than get into theory, here is a perfect example. AaronGleeman.com (MN Twins diehard blog writer) enjoys seeing his web site rank well in Google for the keyphrase "Jennifer Aniston's butt" It is a strange keyphrase, yet he continues to post this in his blog at least once a week and sure enough, he is found #2 ranking in Google for this keyphrase. So, yes FRESH CONTENT is KING.
2nd link shows Google Results.
Links:
Matt M
VP, Publisher & Head of US - Content, Marketing, Sales and Ops
Best Answers in: Travel Tools (1)
Content is NOT king... if king is even applicable today (President or Warlord seems more appropriate, at least from a US perspective).
Why is content NOT king? Simply because content without context is a commodity. What is King? How about Community? The answer to all your questions is out there, you just need to be part of the right community these days to get it. Develop a strong community and you are invaluable - without it, without the context that community brings (e.g. the validation and verification) how do you even know if the content is accurate?
Clarification added July 14, 2008:
Content is just an ingredient in the successful deployment of a media business... Content + Context = Community.
Rory
"Content is dead - Long live UP TO DATE, RELEVANT and AVAILABLE content".
In other words, in my experience clients are demanding that the content that we deliver is:
- as up to date and accurate as possible (obviously)
- relevant to what they are tring to do and helps them to solve an underlying business issue (and that may include blending our content alongside client proprietary and other third party content - so that the user can have a true "single view" of a company or sector, for example)
- delivered in the most efficient (and cost effective) way. That may be via a web-based application, mobile device or integrated into an internal application such as a CRM system, intranet or portal
Good question - and I shall watch the debate unfold with interest.
Victor
I would submit that the question should be phrased differently. The quick answer is that Content isn't king. Look at Drudge, Huffington Post, etc... Those sites get tons of traffic but they have very little original content. If you are a content producer, you have to go MAX SEO. That means daily and weekly making you sure you are using the best SEO practices for your content. Things like changing headlines. Getting affiliated content providers to link to you, etc...
Isn't the maxim "Content is King" a tactical bit of disinformation, a sleight of hand or simply a red rag to a bull? I'm not convinced it has ever described the state of the publishing industry very well nor effectively signposted the way ahead. I've always been under the distinct impression that it's both a bluff and a blag; a way to edify ones own successes whilst simultaneously rubbing your competitors face in the proverbial mess which one may have only narrowly avoided.
Being resolute that "Content is King" is a bit like driving a four directional signpost into the ground with a fifth pointing at the moon. It's a zero-sum statement that points you in a direction but does not tell anyone how to get there.
Great publishers, whether large media companies or bloggers, have never been purely about "great content". It's simply the public face of their business. It's the 'selling high' of 'buying cheap' from the original disparate network of sources.
Underpinning all content, broadcast or print, has been "content strategy" and that is to target the right audience with the right information at the right time. In the online publishing context, i would re-state this idea as targeting niche markets with niche specific information among the nooks & crannies they hang out.
Great content satisfies the thirst for knowledge in the same way that a beer refreshes on hot day. It brings a new perspective, but it's a combination of timely elements that drives emotional attachment and repitition that publishing needs to drive loyalty and readership.
Content has currency in the communities it circulates, but it's value & relevance is uniquely determined by each node. Content's value is generated from where it is the exception to the rule. In the networked online world, content is more like a smoke signal on a a clear day, unexpected but necessary to alert those nearby of what is ahead.
So in my view successful publishing businesses are fundamentally aligned to the 'actors-on' over the 'creators-of'. I would say that for most traditional publishing businesses moving online, transmissions that do not pay close attention to the questions of "who will?" or "why now?" is like Emperor Nero fiddling whilst Rome burned.
(Hope that is readable... Apologies for the meandering tropes & mixed metaphors!)
Vin C
Adjunct Professor of Visual and Interactive Communications, Syracuse University
I love that shibboleth, "Content is King." It has a nice ring to it and makes those who own content feel warm and safe.
However, we all live in digital republics. Perhaps content is king, but that's as relevant nowadays as Elizabeth II is to the workings of Parliament or Juan Carlos II is to the workings of the Cortes.
Magisterial content is a great to have, just as having gobs of money is, but neither necessarily leads to online success and can easily be wasted. (Didn't Encyclopeadia Brittanica go bankrupt not long ago?) What's more important is how content is provided online. The content itself needn't be royal or perfect, so long as it's provided online in a way that people can make easily use of it. During a TV interview earlier this year in the U.S., Wired magazine editor-in-chief Chris Anderson noted that YouTube and Wikipedia are successful not because each individual video or listing on those services is perfect, has high production values, or is backed by a renowned brand, but because each is "just 'good enough' to be readily used."
The average guy is as important as Elizabeth Windsor in a digital republic if he's more capably used online. So too for content.
I suspect we could do with a different analogy, especially as not all content is equally regal. Some content in the 'must have', 'couldn't do my job as well without' category is top of the pile, but much content is either in the news category or 'nice to know' area and is significantly down the value chain. A better analogy might be one from football, and the question better asked, is the content premier league or from a lower division!
I believe content will always be king otherwise all of the promotion, marketing, and sales would be irrelevant without content that keeps people engaged and coming back for more.
Marketing across multiple platforms is key to keeping content exciting and engaging. If the content is fresh, updated regularly, and most importantly, trusted and accurate, then it won't loose it's appeal to the masses in your vertical space.
At ABM most of our Publishers realize the importance behind their editorial staff whether it's in print, online or in person keeping their brands and their perspective content as trusted entities. It only makes good business sense building a trusted community among the vertical you provide content for so that they'll continue to return to your business as the expert in your field and your business will grow virally.
All of this sounds very familiar I'm sure to many of you, but here is some food for thought: Now social media is getting into the act of segmenting vertically on Facebook and Ning and even here on LinkedIN, something that B-to-B publishers have found value in for years at ABM.... I smell another vertical push in content.
my opinion.
I'm going to go with Matt and Louise on this and say that content is no longer king. Sure it's important but with so many sources of information available neither content nor delivery can claim to be key - there has to be a balance. With poor delivery it doesn't matter how good the content is as nobody will be reading it. At the same time i receive about 8 daily financial news bulletins every day and only 2 or 3 of the most succinct and informative get opened.
As Louise says the golden ticket is really finding a way for content to become part of a person's daily work flow. Integrating to the point of necessity - and that involves being the source of a community.
No. Application is. Meaning, a successful web service lets you do things, not read/listen/watch things.
I agree with the sentiment of many of the other respondants content is the most important thing, it needs to be both engaging and informative.
However, as someone else has written unless the content can be found it's fairly worthless. This is where the discussion may split, from a professional perspective it seems at the moment as if Google is puting at least as much emphasis on relevant links as content when making its listing choices. However, there does seem to be some evidence that pages with too much reliance on links over content soon slip down the listings.
Google does however still recognise the value of good new content and is very quick to reindex sites that have lots of new copy. Posts on our blog (link below) have been known to get into Google results within 15 minutes of posting.
Links:
Yes, I think content is still king, I think that in addition to this, customers want to feel more a part of the services they subscribe to, so building your content site based on an online community model will become increasingy important over time.
Content is king - without something to say how can people converse. But publishers will have to realise that not all content is "theirs". Think about events (which most publishers run). Arguably (and our audience research tells us this) the main reason to come to some events is to network. The real value is created in the margins and by the participants not by the "broadcast" of the keynote speaker. The role of the publisher in the 21st Century is to manage that dialogue - to create the network to allow it happen and to manage that network in a way that creates real value -- ie will someone pay for that "content". That relevant content is increasingly becoming deeper and deeper and I'm now going to read the thread on SEO since I would certainly challenge the role of Google-like searches in such networks. Creating narrow / niche networks means being very sensitive to the needs of the community NOT trying to appeal to the masses.
If you are inclined to say content ain't king, then your probably a peddler of derivative or 'me to' content (or working in marketing).
If your content is original, entertaining of informative, it will - by you merely obeying the basic rules of W3C markup - do really well, stellar even.
But, good and original content is very expensive or time & resource consuming.
Websites that harness user created content, like Google's search, Flickr, YouTube, Wordpress, Facebook's friend feed and yes even LinkIn's Questions and Answer section, are much better placed as they have both the content but none of the downside of the input required.
Traditional publishers can however use their content as a platform from which to generate free high quality content, as the UK Guardian has done with their Comment is free site (Cif), where the comments below the original content is often more enlightening and informative than the original, and amplifies the original traffic many times over.
Links:
Clarification added July 17, 2008:
I'd like to add, that if your content is really unique and compelling, then good SEO and marketing becomes superfluous. The web is ultimately made up of people and if what you have is good, they will inform their friends of it.
Circa 2002 Vodaphone UK had a website called Vizzaviz. It was backed by an add campaign that included allot of above the line advertising and even TV.
At the time I managed Lycos UK mobile, who targeted exactly the same demographic. But on our site had killer interactive 'content'. One could send 5 free SMS's from the site to a phone per day. We had 800,000 montlhy unique visitors, Vizzaviz never had more than 100,000. We never advertised.
It's when your content is not immediately and demonstrably superior when marketing and SEO becomes crucial.
