If you create “great content”, but no one reads it. Is it still great content?
You’ll have to bare with the slightly philosophical title. However, the point very much stands, because I do not understand how people can say create great content when there are no set criteria on which to measure the greatness of your content marketing efforts . . .
In my humble opinion there is no such thing as “great content” or “great content marketing”. It’s all perception, an individual’s perception. I’m still not even sure who or which individuals can ever call content great though, because something could be incredible for two people, but eliminate the rest of the world’s population. If two people then call the content great, is it now great?
Sure, if you believe that you are creating interesting and relevant content for your audience, that could be considered great right? After all as Rene Descartes once said “I think therefore I am”. But ultimately how can you possibly define something as great when it has had 0 or minimal impact on someone’s life or on very few peoples lives?
What if 10, 100, 1000 or 10,000 people read the content, and really liked what was said, could you now call it great? How many people does it take to call your content great, for it to be actually great? Does herd mentality come into play when trying to define great content?
How do you even measure the greatness of your content? I’ve never seen a statistic that shows greatness. I’ve seen statistics for shares, views, time on page etc etc, but are any or all of those an indicator of greatness? Of course they may all contribute, after all if I were to like, share and read an article twice, I would have almost definitely have found it interesting. That still doesn’t mean I’d call it a great piece of content though.
The interesting thing is that there really isn’t any clarity on good content to start. If you cannot measure the step before, how can you measure the next step. That is because logically good must become before great.
Let’s take a Tennis player for example. If they are in the top 100 in the world, you could certainly call them a good player, because they are ranked by points, tournaments they’ve played in, things like that, so there is a direct comparison and ranking system. Also, you have there a set criteria which can define good, so logically to be a great you must fulfil at a minimum the criteria of a good player.
However, even in a measured system “greatness” is still near impossible to quantify. Is it by number of titles? Length of time at rank 1 in the world? Number of wins? Maybe it is any or all of the above?
The point is, greatness isn’t measurable.
However, just because you cannot quantify or measure greatness, does that mean you shouldn’t try?
Even trying isn’t a guarantee though, because a single sentence or a quote could quite easily be perceived by more people as great content than a 10,000 word in-depth white-paper . . .
That’s what happens when people say create “great content” without any feasible way to decide greatness.
What are your thoughts on “Great content”?
Can you define it or measure it? I’m intrigued to hear your perceptions!
Also if want to hear this buzzword dissected a bit more, have a listen to the “Great Content” episode of the Marketing Buzzword Podcast.