Our Blog
Archive for the ‘Content Strategy’ Category
Last month, just before the holidays, an article appeared on the enormously popular Top Rank Online Marketing Blog.
The article is called “Content Strategy and the Dirty White Lie About SEO.”
Its author, renowned SEO expert Lee Odden (CEO, TopRank Online Marketing), asserts that content strategists have “inherent biases” against SEO as a valid practice, and that “most consultants” (read: content strategists) lack “holistic perspectives.” He writes that, if you-the-client listen to content strategists—specifically, those who recommend “slicing website content in half") for the sake of having less content—you will often end up with recommendations that are “a gross disservice to clients.”
Here’s context:
The reality is, that the “less is more” argument with content strategy works great when you don’t have to worry about where the traffic to the great content will come from. This is part of the “dirty lie about SEO”: That great content attracts its own audience and that SEO ruins content.
I really struggled with whether or not to write a response to this post. It’s full of generalizations and misinformation. For example, to say that content strategy as a discipline unilaterally teaches that “great content attracts its own audience and that SEO ruins content” is, well, weird.
But, if you know me, you know how I go off the rails when an industry thought leader writes something that marginalizes or misrepresents content strategy.
In reality, if you, the online marketing professional, are committed to doing great work—work that’s results-oriented, measurable, sustainable, and well-integrated with the rest of your organization’s content initiatives—then the content strategist should be your best friend.
What does a good content strategist really care about?
A content strategist’s primary role in any project or organization is to create and maintain a “holistic perspective” of current and future content states.
A content strategist knows that, in the research and discovery phase of projects that involve marketing content, current marketing initiatives—including SEO, social media, and the like—must be considered prior to making recommendations.
A content strategist counts on content audits to understand content location, ownership, and purpose (e.g., “raise visibility in search results") prior to making recommendations.
In fact, there’s a section of my book (p.72-73) called “Search Engine Optimization: The Missing Link.” (Ironically, it follows a section called “Source Content: You Have to Start Somewhere,” which encourages readers to make the most of the content they already have, not slice it in half). In it, I write,
If there are SEO or other search-related efforts underway, be sure to capture them in your analysis document. They’ll play an important role in informing your content strategy recommendations.
Eh?
But, yeah. Some content strategists think SEO is dumb.
I should say here that I can’t argue with all of Lee’s comments regarding content strategists: I, myself, know many CSes who are suspicious and, yes, even dismissive of SEO as an important part of content planning and creation—let alone as an actual practice. These folks either have had bad experiences with bad SEO practitioners, or they loathe the kind of content that is so keyword-packed it’s unreadable. (Good SEO practitioners loathe that, too.)
However. That reality does not warrant Lee’s accusation that content strategists don’t recognize “the importance of attracting readers to the content and being accountable to the marketing performance of that content.” It’s simply not true.
Whether the content strategy is focusing on marketing content, internal communications, in-the-cloud content, or any other kind of content, our work is driven by business results, every time. If it’s not, then it’s not content strategy; it’s a pointless exercise in content planning and execution, no matter where you sit in an organization.
Debate is good, except when it’s bad.
The generalizations Lee makes about content strategists in his post are only serving to set fire to the bridge content strategists are working so hard to build between themselves and marketers (and UXers, and technologists, and so on). His post ends up being a rallying cry for SEO, social media, and content marketing professionals to ban together and defeat the content strategists who are spreading “dirty white lies” about their professions.
Listen. We don’t need to live in separate clubhouses with our own secret handshakes, here. I think everyone agrees that doing better business online is our shared goal, no matter who you are or how you’re contributing. And just as the “best content marketers [Lee] knows” are capable of incorporating SEO best practices within a content strategy, all smart content strategists are not just capable but committed to collaborating with those content marketers to ensure their shared efforts are well-integrated and successful.
I’ve said it before, I’ll say it again: debating the question, “What matters more, SEO/social media/UX/IT/content strategy/etc.?” is a stupid waste of time. Instead, let’s ask, “How can we collaborate across our practices to make our businesses more successful, to make the Web a better place for our customers?”
Those answers will help inform actual work. Because it’s the results of that work that matters most of all.
Talk back to me.
What are your experiences collaborating across disciplines? If you were successful, why? If not, what would you have changed? (No generalizations, attacks, or condescension, please.)
Posted in Content Strategy, Uncategorized
I’ve noticed a bit of a trend lately in content strategy blog posts. A lot of them only talk about the content side of content strategy—what content is needed, why it’s needed, who it’s for, what format it should be in, etc.
A whole lot of them are missing a really important component of content strategy: Governance. Specifically, the importance of:
- Getting everyone to agree with the core purpose—and structure—of the site, and the messages it needs to convey
- Empowering someone (or a small group of someones) to make long-term and day-to-day decisions about content
These things are just as important, if not more important, than the content itself.
Content strategy – governance = face-hating
Consider this made-up story of what can happen without governance, even with the best of intentions:
Once upon a time, a Content Strategist arrived at work, coffee in hand, eager to continue the challenging—yet fulfilling—task of overseeing his employer’s website content. Months before, he developed and implemented a content strategy for the site. It included a lot of really great stuff, from content objectives to an editorial calendar, and everything in between.
All of these things had helped to dramatically improve the site’s content. Content drafts required less editing. Calls to action were more compelling. Customer service was getting fewer calls from people who couldn’t find what they were looking for.
With all of these positive results, the Content Strategist was surprised—jaw-droppingly aghast, even—when he opened the site and found something on the home page that didn’t fit with the content strategy. Even worse, he knew nothing about it.
It was an interactive, Flash-based “Letter from the President,” full of company pats on the back, corporate speak, industry jargon, and nothing of value to site users. And, it clearly cost a lot of money to produce. Like half of the annual content creation budget.
The Content Strategist exclaimed, “Ellllgghhhh. Who did this? I hate his face.”
Once he determined that it was the Director of Executive Communications who was responsible, the Content Strategist grabbed his Editorial Specialist colleague for moral support and marched to the Director’s office. The following heated conversation occurred. It might sound familiar.*
Content Strategist
"Did you order the interactive Letter from the President?"
Director of Executive Communications
"You want answers?"
Content Strategist
"I think I’m entitled."
Director of Executive Communications
"You want answers?"
Content Strategist
"I want the truth!"
Director of Executive Communications
"You can't handle the truth!
Son, I serve the most powerful person in this company. The person who signs our paychecks.
Who’s going to keep the CEO happy? You? You, Mr. Editorial Specialist?
I have more responsibility than you can fathom.
You weep for the home page and curse the CEO’s office of communications.
You don't know what I know. That interactive Letter from the President saved jobs.
And my existence, while grotesque to you, appeases the person who approves your budget.
But deep down, in places you don't talk about at content meetings, you need me in the CEO’s office.
I haven't the time or inclination to explain myself to someone who needs my protection but questions the way I provide it.
Better just to thank me. Or sit in a meeting with the CEO and indulge her every whim.
Either way, I don't give a darn what you think you are entitled to!"
Content Strategist
"Did you order the interactive Letter from the President?"
Director of Executive Communications
"You're gosh darn right I did!"
And so the Content Strategist bowed his head and left the office, with no recourse to fix the situation.
Hindsight is 20/20
The Content Strategist learned a lot from this experience. Rather than agonizing in his defeat, he took a more proactive approach. One that allowed him to salvage all the great stuff in his content strategy and prevent such a thing from happening again.
To gain alignment with the CEO’s office, he scheduled a meeting to discuss a few things with the Director of Executive Communications, including:
- Why content strategy is important to the business
- The content strategy document he uses to guide content decisions
- A proposal for establishing governance that includes stakeholder alignment, content planning processes, and a decision-making model
- Recommendations for how the interactive Letter from the President could be re-purposed to meet business goals and user needs
- A request to present the same information to the CEO to get her buy-in and support
The meeting was a success. You see, the Director of Executive Communications knew the interactive Letter from the President was a bad idea. But, with nothing compelling to stop him from following his marching orders, he found it easiest to please his boss rather than push back.
If you’ve ever been in a similar situation, you know that it’s pretty hard to say no when you don’t have anything formal or documented to back it up. Get some governance—and get more control.
*Adapted from the film A Few Good Men
Posted in Content Strategy, Web Content
Hello, December … hello, chaos. Take the usual 9-to-5 and everyday commitments, and add all the extras that come with the winter holidays: Weeks filled with social gatherings. Packages to wrap, address, and send. Air travel. And of course, the list of gifts to hunt down and buy. It’s enough to make an introvert like me cry into his figgy pudding.
Or it would be if I let it. A couple of years ago, I decided to trim my holiday activities. Most notably, I suggested to my family that we forego gifts, and to my yuletide joy, they agreed.
Now I glide through the holidays with less dashing through the snow, more relaxing by the fireplace. Yes, we gave up gifts, but we all got something we really want: more time and less stress.
Give more with less
So what does this have to do with content? Publishing more stuff, more often, is easier than ever with today’s tools. But do audiences need it all? Do they want it all? Or are they getting a lot of pink bunny pajamas instead of the Red Rider BB gun they really want?
Perhaps there’s something to be gained by following one of the guiding principles of minimalism: choose the essential.
Part of a content strategy should be determining what not to publish—what to cut from the website, what to trim from the page. This means focusing (again) on the essential content people really want and getting rid of the excess. Why? Because it gets in the way.
Some stakeholders may resist such cuts, given the nearly unlimited space available online. But letting go can lead to greater gains in the end.
Google’s gift
For example, take Google. Back in the day, Google attracted attention for its famously minimal home page design. While a competitor crammed more and more on to its home page—and tried to be all things to all people—Google gave audiences something truly valuable: an oasis of simplicity amid the increasing clutter of cyberspace.
That clear focus helped users get to what they really wanted: search results for their particular need. Things turned out okay for Google. Meanwhile, (for multiple reasons) that competitor is struggling.
That’s not a new example, but I was reminded of it recently when Gmail streamlined its home page. I noticed the change immediately. At first, I couldn’t put my finger on why, but the site just felt calmer and cleaner (even more than usual). The difference is subtle, but when I compared the before and after it became clear how Google’s trimming helped:
- Focus the message. The same benefits are there, but fewer distractions (visuals and words) mean the benefits can stand out.
- Focus the user’s attention. Fewer distractions also help users scan quickly and get to where the real action is: account sign-up or sign-in. Behind which Gmail starts making money with paid ads.
(Screen images from Google's Gmail Blog)
Ready to reduce?
If clutter and excess are weighing down your web content, it may be time to trim. Help the good stuff emerge stronger so your audiences can find and use it. Here are a couple of places to start:
- Site metrics. Do the metrics show long-forgotten pages or whole sections of your site that are no longer generating traffic? If so, maybe it’s time to retire that content.
- User profiles. Knowing what audiences want is hard. They’re not homogenous—what they want changes, and there are a lot of circumstances involved. Still, revisiting user profiles and comparing content to what users want is worthwhile. If the profiles are out of date, maybe it’s time to invest in some new user research. With a clearer idea of what audiences really want, you can cut content that doesn’t make the wish list.
- At the page level. Google’s post states that they cut 250 words in streamlining. Chances are your web editor would love an invitation to do the same.
Fa-la-la-la-la
Cutting back can produce some unexpected benefits, including clearer focus and happier audiences. Users may be joyful about less quantity, more quality. When looking at content for places to trim, there’s a refrain that runs through my head (and oh boy, do I wish I could say it’s, “You’ll shoot your eye out!”): Give users what they want. Cut the excess. Choose the essential.
Posted in Content Strategy, Editorial Strategy, User Experience, Web Content
(Dramatization.)
The best way to properly take care of your content is to give it an owner. With ownership comes responsibility. With responsibility comes reward. That reward? Content that helps you achieve your business goals.
An example of ownership: my dad’s truck
My dad takes meticulous care of his truck. He changes the oil on a regular basis and performs regular tune-ups. He keeps an ear out for funny sounds that the engine might be making. He washes it. All of the time.
He needs to do this because he depends on it. It does the work he asks it to do—hauling things, towing things, etc.
It’s also a source of leisure for him. Every fall, he puts a truck camper on the back and goes far out West for a couple of weeks with my mom.
Not only is this truck getting them from one place to another, but it’s also serving as their lodging whilst in the mountains where the deer and antelope play.
If he were to neglect that truck, ignore regular servicing, and pay no mind to its proper operation, he and Mom may end up stranded on some mountain pass with a wild grizzly bear. (See dramatization in photo above.)
His mindful ownership minimizes that risk.
Content needs ownership
Now, keep in mind, things can be owned—and not cared for. This often leads to less-than-stellar (or even catastrophic) results. I’ve seen it happen with trucks. We sometimes see it with content.
Organizations are beginning to recognize the need for useful, usable content that will help them accomplish their business goals.
But, what they often fail to recognize is the need for staff resources and processes, which are required for the responsible ownership of that content. Or, they assign ownership to the content, but don’t tie ownership to website goals.
These organizations don’t look beyond that very instant the “publish” button is pushed. They might even think (and say) things like:
- “The web is like a filing cabinet that never gets full.”
- “Someone might look for that content, so keep it on the site.”
- “Just get the content up there, we’ll deal with it later.”
- “We’ll have an intern keep an eye on the content.”
- “We haven’t touched it since 1999.”
Without ownership, and the maintenance and monitoring that go with it, content suffers. Goals become much harder to accomplish. Which puts us perilously close to having our content stranded on a proverbial mountain pass, with the grizzly bear of ineptitude pacing outside.
Have your content serviced every 3,000 miles
The best content owners do far more than just ensuring content makes it to the website. Regular service intervals apply to both Dad’s truck AND effective content.
Mindful content owners make a regularly scheduled habit of:
- Monitoring content performance against goals and benchmarks
- Ensuring ongoing relevance of content to business goals
- Verifying the accuracy of content
- Maintaining usefulness and usability of content for those using it
Content (or truck) owners acting as good stewards will be able to use their content (or trucks) to do what their goals demand. People visiting their websites will be instructed and entertained, and they will accomplish tasks. Or take vacations with truck campers. Without fear of grizzly bears.
Follow Clinton on Twitter
(Truck image from Dad, incorporating bear image from Flickr user tiredofh2o (CC: by-nc-sa 2.0))
Posted in Content Strategy, Editorial Strategy, Web Content
When it’s time to blog, I focus on one of two things: (1) something that entertains me or (2) a common question I hear when talking with organizations about collaborating on a content strategy project.
And you know what? Now is no time to try and change a creature of habit. Here’s the latest in my Q&A series.
What experience does Brain Traffic have in [fill-in-the-blank] industry?
I can appreciate where this question is coming from – clients have a desire to speak the same language. From our perspective, having worked in a specific industry can certainly help – but it isn’t a requirement for a successful content strategy effort.
Our team has experience across a wide range of industries, including consumer goods, education, health care, non-profit, pharmaceuticals, retail, and more. We don’t focus on any one particular industry or market.
Why not?
Because our business model is to stay focused on what we’re good at – Brain Traffic expertly helps people effectively use content to achieve their business goals.
We count on our clients to do the same and bring their unique industry insight to the project. With both of us bringing our expertise – regardless of what previous experience we have in your industry, or what previous experience you have in ours – the result can be a smash success.
Other consultancies will work to specialize in a few industries and tout that experience as a great reason to work together. And this is where Brain Traffic has a different opinion. Instead of focusing on knowing the same things as our clients, we hope to bring something different to the relationship – our leadership in content strategy – blending client expertise with our own.
Yeah, but how does that really work?
It’s simple. We do a Vulcan Mind Meld.
Well, not exactly. But close.
The first thing we do for any project is to dig into the existing content assets and ecosystems. We immerse ourselves in the current situation and opportunity. We ask thoughtful questions that may not be as obvious to someone living and breathing a particular topic every single day. It’s during this rigorous discovery phase that we gather the important knowledge on which to base our content strategy recommendations.
Is everyone comfortable with this approach? Nope. Does it work for our clients? Absolutely.
Posted in Brain Traffic, Content Strategy, Web Content
There’s an increasingly loud debate happening around content strategy. Many people, including people I very much admire, are seriously frustrated that much of the current conversation focuses strictly on Web content.
Their position is that content strategy—in order to actually have any positive, long-term effect on an organization—must consider multiple types of content across multichannel platforms, and that the Web is only a part of that ecosystem. Some context:
Now, of course content doesn’t begin and end on a website. If an organization only pays attention to the problem of content at the Web project level, they’re failing to deal with their actual “content ecosystem.” Social media. Marketing. Technology. Internal communications. Technical communications. Media. Do you know a company where these roles are even remotely aligned on how to create, deliver, and govern their organization’s content? Because I sure don’t.
So. If I believe all this, then why did I write a book that has helped make “content strategy” synonymous with “Web content”?
The answer is pretty simple: Because it was a good place to start.
CONVERSATION OPENER VS. CONVERSATION KILLER
Every time people ask me what I do, this is how I respond: “You know how, on your company’s website, most of the information is hard to find, or inconsistent, or totally irrelevant, or just really bad?”
And, every single time, they say, “Oh, yes, it is. It’s so embarrassing. I’m so frustrated that no one is fixing it.”
Then I tell them that’s what I do: I help fix bad content. And they say, “Oh, wow, I wish my boss would call you. You must be REALLY BUSY.”
Now, imagine if I responded like this: “You know how, in your company, the content lifecycle is totally undefined and ignored, and content is constantly getting produced in silos, and no one is fully accountable for all the messy stuff that goes along with it, and the problem is just getting worse because no one gets that content requires strategic consideration and dedicated resources?”
This person would likely fake an incoming call so they can run far, far away from me.
This is pretty much the reaction our clients and colleagues have been having for years. The latter explanation, while possibly more accurate about the scope of content strategy, freaks people out. It turns content into a hot potato. It's not working.
CONTENT + STRATEGY + WEB = LIGHT BULB
My publisher initially wanted me to call my book The Content Strategy Handbook. But I didn’t think that was a good idea, as I didn’t know the first thing about how to architect an all-things-considered content strategy. What I knew was how to create a strategic plan for creating, delivering, and governing content for websites. So that’s why I called it Content Strategy for the Web: to cover my ass.
Well, that’s part of the reason. I also knew that pointing to Web content as a big problem was something people would relate to, if not at first then fairly quickly.
Just like the way I describe my work, the phrase "content strategy for the Web” allowed me to introduce the practice as a solution to an immediate and unrelenting pain point so many of us share. I could explain content strategy’s basic principles using constraints (website vs. company-wide content lifecycle) that make it seem achievable.
I also knew from experience that focusing first on Web content strategy often ends up being a very sensible, non-scary starting point for the much larger discussion that inevitably arises: “This isn’t just about our website. This is about the way content moves throughout our organization and the way we manage our content assets.”
THIS IS WHERE I REVEAL MY GRAND MASTER PLAN
Here's the deal. I never had any illusions about writing The End-all-be-all Content Strategy Bible. I’m not the person to do that. What I had was an very big desire to get the conversation rolling. In order to do that, I had to convince my reader of a few very basic points:
- Content isn’t copywriting.
- Content is very, very complicated.
- Content requires strategic consideration.
- Content requires care and feeding.
- Content is a critical business asset.
Nowhere are these truths more evident than on a website.
So. That’s why I wrote about Web content. And that’s why I’ll keep writing and talking about Web content.
As for the argument that content strategy can’t be discussed as something that’s “just for the Web,” I firmly disagree. Content strategy can be practiced as a Web-focused discipline, and with terrific results. In fact, I’ve built an entire business around it.
And, yes! We’re REALLY BUSY.
Follow Kristina on Twitter
Posted in Content Strategy, Uncategorized
If you grew up in a certain era, you probably remember fiddling with the dial on a car radio, trying to tune in a station. When you found the signal: hooray, music! And in between? Noise. Sometimes, web content can seem a lot like the static you hear between stations.
Is your website broadcasting loud and clear? Even if your content is terrific, presenting it the wrong way can make it seem like static. Let’s look at what you can do to make your signal heard.
Even good content can be noise
When we talk about web content, we talk about messaging and audiences—what your site is trying to say, and who you’re saying it to. If something is clearly off-topic or doesn’t apply to any of your audiences, it’s noise. Most people who work on content will accept that verdict, if grudgingly.
Where things get a little touchier is when something is only marginally relevant. Or relevant to the wrong audience. Or not clearly focused. The information you needed yesterday may be noise today. Perfectly good content will be noise to somebody.
The bottom line: When you’re looking for information, everything that’s not what you need at this very minute is noise.
Noise gets in the way
When there’s too much noise, it’s hard to find the signal. With that car radio, we all had days where we got fed up with the static and popped in a cassette.
Sometimes content is labeled vaguely, and this only compounds the problem. If people can’t tell at a glance whether something is what they’re looking for, you’re probably making them work too hard. And if you make your audience work too hard, they’re likely to wander off and find a site that gives them more help.
If your site has too much static, they’ll pop in the cassette—and, for that visit at least, you’ve lost them.
Boosting the signal
So, how can you break through the noise and get the most out of your content?
Segmentation. We often recommend segmenting content by audience, if your audiences can self-identify, like “Patients” and “Doctors.” (Or sometimes you may need to organize your content by task, or by where the content falls in the purchase cycle.)
Prioritization. Understand your audiences and their tasks, and decide what your website is trying to do. Then make the site structure— and the page structure—reflect those priorities.
Clear labeling. Specific and accurate link text, page titles, and headings are essential. They’re like the numbers on that radio dial. Without them, your audience is just fiddling around hoping to stumble upon something worthwhile.
In many cases, improving your signal-to-noise ratio doesn’t mean deleting a lot of your content. It means finding a better way of organizing and presenting what you’ve got.
Chances are, you’ve got the information people are looking for. Put a good clear signal out there, and they’ll keep tuning in.
Posted in Content Strategy, Information Architecture, User Experience, Web Content
Web content problems, that is.
How do I know this? Because 99% of companies do.
In fact, I'm going to bet that you have one or more of these problems:
- You have great ideas for awesome content…but you're not sure how to create and sustain it.
- You have a fabulous new website design…that breaks as soon as you start uploading content to it.
- You thought someone else would be creating the content…except, funny, they thought YOU were creating it.
- You're wearing your underpants on the outside…wait, what?
I know. It hurts. But I have good news: there's a cure. Web content strategy offers a long-term, sustainable fix to these problems and more. And wait! I have even better news! Brain Traffic content strategist Meghan Casey wrote a terrific article that shows you how!
Meghan's article, 4 Web project problems content strategy can solve, kicks off an entire week of content strategy articles on the terrific UX online mag, Johnny Holland. We like it. We think you will, too. Enjoy!
Posted in Content Strategy, Project Management, Uncategorized
A recent Brain Traffic Twitter exchange with @dmnguys introduced me to the world of Paper.li. Since then, I’ve been trying to figure out whether I like the service or not. One thing’s for sure: it’s no substitute for curation.
WHAT IS PAPER.LI?
According to their website, Paper.li is an online service that “organizes links shared on Twitter into an easy to read newspaper-style format.” You can create these “newspapers” to aggregate content for Twitter users, lists, or hashtags. Paper.li automatically generates these feeds into a homepage that emulates the feel of a traditional newspaper’s website.
WHAT I LIKE ABOUT PAPER.LI
As Mathew Ingram writes on Gigaom.com, Paper.li is “a great way to catch up on interesting links my network has found — especially if I have been away from Twitter during the day and am wondering what I have missed.”
I’ve only been using Paper.li for a couple short days, but I can already agree that this is the main benefit of a service like this. Other things I like about Paper.li:
- View by topic—If you want to see things only related to Technology, you can do that without paging through your full Twitter feed.
- View by media—Gives you a snapshot view of videos and photos, without clicking a link first.
- Create multiple newspapers—You can create up to 10 “newspapers” to follow the people, hashtags, and lists you’re most interested in.
- No follow required—You can follow any Twitter list on Paper.li without actually following it from your Twitter account.
WHAT I DON'T LIKE ABOUT PAPER.LI
This list is meatier than the “What I like” list. Sorry, Paper.li.
Daily Tweets, without context—If you want to share your Paper.li site on your personal Twitter stream, you can click the “Promote It” link below the masthead. This requires you to sign up for daily promotional Tweets, and won’t let you do a one-time promotion of your page. Sure, you can go in and “manage” the papers you are promoting to turn off the daily Tweets—but that’s a bit laborious.
Additionally, Paper.li Daily Tweets provide absolutely no context for the content that appears on your Paper.li page. This absence of context is exactly what drew me to Paper.li in the first place.
Here’s the @BrainTraffic / @dmnguys exchange that inspired this post:
The fact that the Paper.li daily gets “no input from us” doesn’t bother @dmnguys. Automatic generation of a Tweet absolves them from providing context. But as a user and an indirect subject of their Twitter stream, the Paper.li Daily Tweet ended up confusing instead of enlightening me.
Without the proper context around the “featured” Twitter handles and why they are being featured, the Daily Tweet doesn’t provide any value to followers. At least, not in my book.
Not all “stories” translate—Paper.li attempts to replicate the first paragraph of the links shared by your Twitter community. This lead-in doesn’t always translate well, so you end up reading a bunch of nonsense until you click the link. For instance, Kristina posted a link to some favorite articles the other day.
Her Tweet said:
Paper.li translated her Tweet as follows:
Um … WTF?
Not customizable—Because Paper.li automatically generates the sections of my daily “newspaper,” I have no say in what appears as my lead story. Also, I can’t hide or rearrange any of the topical sections.
No central dashboard—I created two Paper.li dailies, but am unable to access them without a direct URL. I expected Paper.li to keep a list of my previously created “newspapers” somewhere, especially after I’m logged in to the site. (In case you’re curious, the two papers I created are: Angie King Daily and contentstrategy Daily.)
PAPER.LI IS NOT CURATION
Granted, nobody said it WAS curation. But my experience with Paper.li just proves the importance of curation over aggregation. Without an editorial eye overseeing the publication of my Paper.li page, the content loses value. I actually prefer just paging through my Twitter stream over trying to make sense of the no-context, automatically generated list of junk that displays on my Paper.li page.
But I can’t blame Paper.li for trying to meet a need. It just wasn’t MY need. Probably because I’m not a robot.
Posted in Content Strategy, Editorial Strategy, Uncategorized, User Experience, Web Content
As a Brain Traffic employee, people often ask me questions like, “How do you learn to be a content strategist?” or “How do I get good at content strategy?” My answer isn’t groundbreaking: You need to be well-educated on content and strategy. Then, you need to practice combining the two. A lot.
Which leads to the real question: Where do you get practice doing content strategy if it’s not part of your current job? In my opinion: Everywhere.
Start seeing content strategy in everyday life
By far, the best way to practice content strategy is to start recognizing when other people are doing it (or obviously not doing it).
Research, such as last weeks’ Ofcom Communication Market report, confirms the obvious: We all knowingly consume a boatload of content. So, you can start there. Next time you open a web site, download an app, or see a billboard—ask yourself questions like: What message are they trying to communicate? How does this piece of content fit into their greater communications plan? How do they hope I’ll react?
But don’t stop with stuff that is explicitly media-related. When you go to the grocery store, start thinking about why they labeled the aisles the way they did or content design behind nutrition labels. Decide whether the admittance form at your doctors’ office makes you feel welcomed, annoyed, or scared and why.
Draw parallels to Brian May (or your other interests)
Another way to practice is to draw parallels between content strategy and something you already know a lot about. Lots of people draw on their knowledge of related fields like IA or business strategy. But great stuff can come from unexpected places, too.
For example, a few weeks ago, my close friend sent me a link to an NPR interview with Brian May (astrophysicist, university chancellor, author … Queen’s lead guitarist). She sent it because we share a soft spot for Queen and a billion Highlander-related jokes (“There can be only one!”).
I already knew quite a bit about Brian May, but when I listened to the 40-minute long interview, I got a lesson in content strategy (despite the poor interviewer).
Here are some examples:
(click to enlarge)
Once you start, you can’t stop
Once you start seeing content strategy everywhere, thinking strategically about content becomes a habit—and you’re practicing during all of your waking hours (whether you want to or not). With that habit established, it becomes a lot easier to find answers to your own critical content strategy questions.
So, now, if you’ll excuse me, I'm going to go look for some content strategy parallels in May’s Ph.D. thesis: “A Survey of Radial Velocities in the Zodiacal Dust Cloud.” (Or, maybe I’ll just play air guitar on “Stone Cold Crazy” instead.)
“Looking Brian May” image courtesy of flickr user Icemanfr75 (cc: by-nc-nd)
Posted in Content Strategy, Uncategorized
