Dethroning King Content: Why Context Should Be Just as Important

“Content is King.”

It’s a phrase PR professionals, marketing gurus, journalists and editors hear every day.

Coined by Bill Gates in 1996 as part of his Internet worldview, it’s worth noting that even back in the 28.8k days of dial-up modems, “content is king” was not all the Microsoft Chairman stressed. Equally important was the context of the material published.

“To be successful online, a magazine, [for instance] can’t just take what it has in print and move it to the electronic realm,” Gates wrote. “There isn’t enough depth or interactivity in print content to overcome the drawbacks of the online medium.” 

Nearly two decades after Gates wrote those words and their meaning still resonates. Not only is context important between print and online, all the digital mediums such as email, social, mobile and so on require different methods of user engagement.

In other words, one size does not fit all.

One of the most obvious rules of thumb: lengthy copy should be presented on lengthy screens, tablet-sized or greater. Smartphones, even those with 6-inch screens are too small for maximum user enjoyment. Even the definition of “long copy” is relative to the medium. Chances are that anything over 500 words in mobile format pushes the limit.

But it’s more than that.

Ideally, PR teams should be large enough to include channel-specific content writers. Or at the very least, content writers should have the freedom to discuss with in-house or outsourced social media experts how their content could best be adapted to fit channel needs. Repackaging a 3,000-word whitepaper into 120, 140-character tweets might “get the job done” in the strictest sense, but it may miss the mark in terms of user engagement.

Successful tweets are not article or presentation bullet points. They’re conversation starters; unique insights or observations that spark genuine debate and feedback.

Maybe “dethroning King Content” is a little harsh. After all, establishing proper context would be impossible without the raw materials of content already laid out. But how those knowledge building blocks are assembled and presented to the right audience on the right channel is critical if PR executives (and any communications professionals) are to use the web and its many channels to their fullest extent.

iPad iPad in my hand, who is the fairest tablet in the land?

“Mirror mirror on the wall” now reads “iPad iPad in my hand"... First day pre-orders rounded up to 120,000 for the iPad. Nice... Make that 120,001 with my order.

If the iPhone moved the needle on the smartphone market and mobile advertising, publishers and content pushers will be rubbing their hands with absolute glee. My take is that the iPad will spur the pay-for-content movement –- finally –- and help re-write the playbook on why quality content should not be free.

Free is way too expensive

“Quality content is not free. In the future, good journalism will depend on the ability of a news organization to attract customers by providing news and information they are willing to pay for.”

Three cheers for Mr. Hinton, chief exec of Dow Jones. I couldn’t have said it better myself.

It really is time to get our heads around the idea of paying for online news content (the good stuff, that is). Digital content is where it’s at, but just because we aren’t paying for it doesn’t mean it’s free.

All the online news orgs have been trying to support themselves with advertising, but it’s not enough. Giving away good content is not a good business model - freeconomics just won’t work in the long term.

Smaller news organizations fear charging the right price could be their demise, but if they have something unique or of value to offer, why the heck not?

In Brett Arend's MarketWatch commentary this week, he highlights Talking Points Memo (TPM), a liberal online news source that is turning a profit, paying above average salaries and expects to triple in size by 2012. How are they doing it? By catering to a very specific niche market. They employ a focused journalistic staff of 7. They know who their audience is and what they come online looking for.

This demonstrates that the public IS willing to pay for quality content and news, and contradicts the popular thinking of free as a business model.

The current model has to change and there are many reasons why online news could become profitable and could actually raise the quality of the content. The internet eliminates costs like paper and printing and distribution services, and if realistically priced online subscriptions combined with a lean staff of experienced journalists providing great content, then why should news agencies not turn a profit? How could they not?

I’ve been banging this drum for years now. The internet began as a renegade information source, but things have changed. If news services don’t start charging – and realistic subscription fees thank you very much – for genuine journalism, not only will more newsrooms be reduced to tumbleweed rows, but the content we read will simply erode to tabloid fodder provided by people unqualified to deliver content worth reading.

And that’s not news, even if it’s free.

A Purpose Driven Life? Only If It’s Free….

Hoping to capitalize on the success of pastor Rick Warren’s A Purpose Driven Life, in January Reader’s Digest Association (RDA) launched a quarterly print publication to complement Warren’s Purpose Driven Connection. For an annual fee of just $29.95, the project offered a shebang of goodies - DVDs, study group guides and access to its website – all necessary in the quest of finding purpose!

10 months in, and RDA turned off the life support. In spite of A Purpose Driven Life’s rapid online audience growth, it seems that not enough purpose-seekeers were willing to pay for a subscription.

Is it because, like the Wiccans, Christians believe that spiritual knowledge is universal and already belongs to everyone? Or maybe they thought they should get a rebate on their 10% tithe? Perhaps they felt bad about the environment and wanted to save some trees? Or just plain skint?

I believe it’s because Christians - along with the rest of us - have grown so accustomed getting whatever information we want for FREE that consciously or not, we resent having to pay for it.

Is that fair? Absolutely not. In any other transaction or business process, NOBODY GIVES ME ANYTHING FOR FREE. NOBODY. Somebody, somewhere has to pay for the content that we voraciously consume by the megabytes, the research and journalism to accumulate the information, the cost of creating and updating and editing, SEO, advertising, brand building..... and the list goes on!

Quality content is created and presented by professionals – real people whose livelihood depends on real income from their work.

If the public, regardless of their faith or purpose does not support the development of intelligent and informed content, then where is it going to come from?

And more importantly, will it even be worth reading?

Unlikely.

Journalism Rocks

(This appeared in MediaPost on May 29, 2009)
Talk is cheap, but good content, labor and product are not. In an era of thrift and the return to newfound values — where less of everything is the new world order — everyone is talking about what will happen to American newspapers. I think, more importantly, we should be asking what will happen to American journalism right now? I’ve been harping on about this topic for some time (like as far back as 2006), and my words have usually been met with equally strong worded opinions.

Opinions, coarse or otherwise, are good. In fact, they are to be encouraged — they stimulate critical thinking and discourse. Look, plain old-fashioned thinking is good — that’s why we live in a democratic society, right? But opinions are just that — a personal viewpoint like this very piece you are reading. And so, while I like to think of myself a good writer, a journalist I am not.

Journalism is a profession, ignited by a thirst for the facts and the truth, accompanied by deep passion for telling it how it is and in a way that will impact lives. These are skills which cannot be acquired via a webinar or a Bulldog Reporter Media Blitz one-day circus for $399.

While the business model for newspapers may be broken — and, yes, they’ve been irresponsible, unresponsive to changing needs — let’s not miss the point here. What happens to news, and in two words, our intelligence, if we don’t support journalism?

To read the entire article "Journalism Rocks", click here.