Awhile back I put forth a “success formula” to create business benefits through social media:

Connections + Meaningful Content + Authentic Helpfulness = Benefits

The more I see and hear and learn about the social web, the more I’m convinced this is spot-on.  You can see the whole article here, by the way.

I’m learning that within this formula, content is a SEVERE bottleneck for most companies.  Here’s why:

1. Companies are piling on to the social web and are desperate to provide content that will cut through the clutter. It takes a special talent to do that. Typically, they don’t have that special talent … but are willing to pay for it.
2. I’m sure you’ve heard stats like, “more content has been created in the last five years than in the history of mankind.”  I either made that up or I heard it someplace (or both) but I’m sure you’ve heard similarly ridiculous statements.  There is a kernel of truth in there, however.  There’s already too much freaking content for any normal person to keep up with.  And the problem is going to get worse.  In fact, it will never get better. The need for content seems insatiable. This exacts more pressure on companies to not only develop “meaningful” content, but content that will knock your socks off.  Every day.
3. The need for “authenticity” is an artificial barrier set by the social media country club that is keeping some people from ghost blogging. (Article on how to do it RIGHT is here.)  That barrier will go down as the price companies are willing to pay for content goes up.  There will be plenty of content-whores around for everybody.  And I mean that in the most respectful way.  

So here’s the business plan: Come up with a posse of technical writers/content whores who can churn out blogs on a variety of subjects (maybe organize by verticals) and fill this out-sourcing market niche.  I would do it myself but I’m far too lazy.  

So there it is.  Business Idea of the Year!  Go be the Wal-Mart of content.  The Blog Super Store.  Content Whore Warehouse.  Whatever, just go do it and I’ll be the first to hire you for my customers.   See, you can’t tell me I never did anything for you. : )

13 Comments

• 

  By autom, November 18, 2009 @ 7:27 am

  mark, mark, mark..so help me understand: if “there’s already too much freaking content for any normal person to keep up with” why must we aim to create content everyday even though it’s fresh and meaningful? aha! well, i do see how the daily pace may well apply to some orgs that rely on everyday online client usage (news n certain b2c outfits) and also for internal clients that look to grab compelling content on intranets (since everyone is pretty much a client for us marcom folks).but i think we also need to be mindful of relevance and timeliness of the information we push, particularly if we already have a clear understanding of who our targeted audiences are and what they expect from us on a daily basis–that is, if we do know who these audiences are. the undeniable impact of blogs is psychologically pushing content seekers for the new, the meaningful and the helpful on a daily basis, and the social psyche is being conditioned to behave in this manner. i just wonder if the daily push has now begun to shift the focus (perhaps subconsciously) to determine/find better ways to *filter* content that would be of tangible value after it’s all been consumed, aggregated and compiled on a daily basis. we know content is king but we also know that blogs are more than just compelling forms of consumable content–that they are in fact a platform for inviting others/clients to have a dialogue with us, not just about *our* content but also about the content *they* want to talk to us about (concerns and interests that *they* may want to push on us, for us to in turn shape into something that they would find useful).so voila..my 2 cents on only 2 sips of my morning coffee haha – 2cents. thanks for the share autom
• 

  By Mark, November 18, 2009 @ 8:26 am

  @Autom A lot of heavy thinking there, lot of good thoughts, and I don’t think our perspespectives are mutually exclusive. I definitely think there is a high amount of energy spent on filtering which again points out the need for content excellence. And just because there is a lot of content, that is not going to keep companies from producing even more.

  Unless you are a very large company, it is unlikely that you’re going to have the resources to accomplish this and you probably aren’t going to want to hire a staff to do it. It’s also unlikely this service can be provided by traditional ad agencies … you simply don’t need all that overhead sitting in an office with exposed brick walls in SoHo. This needs to be a virtual business where people are cranking it out from home to keep costs low.

  I am connected to a bunch of people who do the same kind of consulting that I do and we’re all scratching our heads trying to figure out where all this content is going to come from.

  Considering you only had two sips of coffee Autom, this was an excellent contribution to the discussion : )
• 

  By Joseph Fiore, November 18, 2009 @ 8:52 am

  Mark,

  Autom’s points were excellent and hit the nail on the head. The insights I’d like to share may not be entirely on topic, but your point on the “superfluous” nature of online content made me think of a conversation I had not too long ago.

  It happened during an online meeting with a prospect for our online monitoring service. It was a refreshing discussion with a person who appeared to have an extensive science background. There was an element of purity in the discussion as it seemed this person was not looking to monitor social media the same way 99% of our clients do.

  To the point, something she said really left an impression with me. It wasn’t like I didn’t already know what was being said, its just the manner with which it was articulated. That being, that everytime we share our opinions and thoughts, we effect behaviour and perception. If your in the business to provide basic facts, then what we may be witnessing an age where we aren’t as concerned about enlightenment unless its laced with sparkle and glitz – and if its deficient of it, then there might well be a monetizing aspect to it.

  More to the point, this idea of an organic and wholesome conversation age is muddled by the “conversation economy” aspects, and dragging along on SM’s coattails is this tendency to repackage and repurpose content in self-interested ways. Not surprise, and to address the discourse from that online meeting, if it can’t be monetized, then people will sure try their darndest to change people’s way of thinking about it.

  Lather, rinse, repeat.

  I’m rarely if ever pessimistic, and didn’t want for this comment to come across this way. But its a reality about SM that you either accept or avoid.

  Joseph
  @RepuTrack
• 

  By Mark, November 18, 2009 @ 9:10 am

  @Joseph There is enough great thought in your post to fill my blog for a month!

  There is no denying that every piece of content helps define the “brand.” (I sweated over using the word “whore” but decided to be playful. “Fun” is part of my brand).

  There are many reasons people blog. My focus is on the strictly business/marketing aspects of social media, so my thoughts, and my advice, may be less altruistic than some would prefer. In a highly competitive business environment, the facts might be surrounded by self-interest, sparkle and glitz if it helps cut through the clutter. That doesn’t bother me unless the facts are misleading! In fact, I might even prefer to be entertained while I’m getting a dose of data : )

  Thanks for the truly profound comments, Joseph.
• 

  By Lisa Foote, November 18, 2009 @ 9:58 am

  Autom and Joseph – Valuable comments following a refreshingly frank post from Mark.

  Here’s another 2-cents perspective: In our paradoxically more-connected/less-connected digital society, we’re looking for what I’ll call the “clerk who knows my name.” Wawa C-Stores understand this. They drill intimacy into their staff, understanding that commoditized coffee + intimacy = heavy repeat business.

  Mark, what I think you’re pointing out is that most companies, and certainly small consultancies like ours, don’t have the time to be the “clerk-who-knows-your-name.” So outsource it.

  While I get the tongue-somewhat-in-cheek tone, I think the premium level will still be the voice of a person who is in-house, truly living and working in the company. Zappos is a good example of saturating the company with this ethos. It’s expensive, but done well, it works.

  (By the way, perhaps the tagline for Content Whore Warehouse could be: “You’ll sound good in my words — I guarantee it.”)
• 

  By Mark, November 18, 2009 @ 10:46 am

  @Lisa I think you’re opening up a whole new topic (which is fine by the way!) but I think there is a difference between developing and executing a content plan versus day-to-day customer intimacy. I agree with the Zappos model of making people accountable for customer satisfaction, rewarding it and making part of the company culture. That should permeate the content too, no matter who authors it.

  Love the tagline. Just wish I had thought of it first!
• 

  By Jim Schweitzer, November 18, 2009 @ 1:05 pm

  Mark, what’s to keep that from degrading to another form of syndication? I think that any content sweatshop would need to be able to sell the content to multiple sources. Pretty soon people would see through the veil, and all authenticity would be lost.

  Authenticity will always be significant. The best thing a company can do is express themselves directly. If the company has no message, they have bigger problems to worry about than who is blogging for them.
• 

  By Mark, November 18, 2009 @ 2:13 pm

  @Jim Excellent point. There would have to be some cross-over at some point, wouldn’t there? But then again, if it is mission-critical, it probably wouldn’t be out-sourced in the first place. Good thinking. Thanks for participating.
• 

  By Jeff Hurt, November 19, 2009 @ 11:37 am

  Mark:

  I always enjoy your frank words and snarkiness. It’s a breath of fresh air and cuts through the noise. Plus, your humor helps ease the bloody toes as you sometimes step all over my feet. Geeze, does that make me into S&M you know social media sadomasochism? I digress.

  I agree with you that we will continue to see a lot of content developed. Yes, it will be up to the readers to filter. And the good stuff will naturally rise to the top by WOM.

  IMO, there are two types of content: soda pop and fine wine. Which type a company creates is up to them.

  Cola is low quality communication: thin information, low-bred substance, and just plain disinformation. Wine is high-quality communication: analysis, debate, and knowledge.

  Many content developers create content that is pedestrian, prosaic, humdrum and uninspired. Some will just rehash others sacchariny sweet recipe adding an extra dollop of sugar or caffeine, and put it in a pretty package instead of providing higher-quality, thought-provoking, multi-layered fine wines. Those with great content will develop fine wine with multiple textures, a variety of notes, degrees of intensity and an assortment of tactile sensations from tannin to prickle.

  So, it will ultimately fall in the hands of the readers. Yet, I suspect, if a company or consultant like you and the others that have commented here, share great provocative thoughts, you’ll continue to attract new customers. If you have common-cola-thoughts that you’ve copied from the competitor, the reader will know. It will taste flat and unrefined.

  So go ahead and be a fine wine, the uncola or be the common inexpensive cola or boxed wine found at your Walmart. Choice is yours.
• 

  By Jayme Soulati, November 19, 2009 @ 9:40 pm

  Let me cut to the chase; I’m a content whore. Hire me. @Soulati
• 

  By Mark, November 19, 2009 @ 10:40 pm

  @Jayme Comment of the year!
• 

  By Anne Giles Clelland, November 21, 2009 @ 6:53 am

  Mark, I appreciate our email correspondence about this post and I acknowledge your points that I may be taking the word out of context and that my response may be exaggerated. Still, for me, the term “content whore” devalues the person, the transaction, and the act of content creation.

  I respect commenter Jim Schweitzer’s important point that the “best thing a company can do is express themselves directly. If the company has no message, they have bigger problems to worry about than who is blogging for them.” Sometimes, though, it’s not the message that’s lacking, but the skill to express it. As the founder of a company that creates content with and for clients, we won’t create content for just anyone about just anything for money. We work with clients for whom we have genuine regard so we can create content for them that conveys as authentically as possible who they are and what they do. That can’t be churned.

  To quote Jim Schweitzer again, “Authenticity will always be significant.” About my company and its products and services – and this is the path I’ve chosen for my company and it’s not the best, right, or only path – I would want content created by someone who values what he or she does and has the capacity to authentically value what my company does. From my view, those created words, images, videos and other media add value not only to my company, but to the quality and caliber of online content. As did this post, which I sense was written by you authentically, that content can then provoke important discourse, even insight, even enlightenment. That contributes to the greater good which, I believe thoughtfully, authentically, even artistically created content can do.
• 

  By Brian O'Kane, March 1, 2010 @ 4:09 pm

  Content is not just about creation – it’s also about editing. Diamonds in the rough are less valuable than polished in a ring setting. And publishers provide the ‘quality mark’ that guides readers in advance whether to read or not to read the specific content piece. Yes, the Internet allows everyone to publish – which is why publishers are increasingly valuable in filtering what’s becoming an overwhelming wave of content. This is why I follow only a small number of people on Twitter (Mark’s one of them), who add value to my day by directing me to (usually) useful content. Writing, editing and pubishing – creating, editing and qualifying – are integrated parts of a whole system. And, yes, authenticity lies at its core. So, Mark’s right, there is an opportunity – but, to follow his analogy, it’s not for whores, only for lovers!

Other Links to this Post

RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URI

Leave a comment