Content Strategy

posted 05/11/11 by Frank Marquardt

The Internet is invariably about content. The best of that content is meaningful to those it’s developed for—which is to say, strategic. We approach content strategy with the organization’s personality and business goals in mind and a central focus on making it actionable, thinking carefully about the best way to plan, create, manage and govern content.

Here are some recent posts from our employees about Content Strategy:

When Content Creep is Both a Problem and a Person

Last Monday, The Barbarian Group’s San Francisco offices hosted a Bay Area Content Strategy Meetup with special speakers Margot Bloomstein and Sara Wachter-Boettcher. In town for the Where Conference and to promote their new (Margot) and upcoming (Sara) books, the two bright CS mavens sipped on wine and chatted about the opportunities and consequences of content’s coming of age in the workplace.

Letters Are Content

I spent the last five years eating Nature’s Path cereal for breakfast, with added walnuts, sunflower seeds, and raisins. It served me well until I decided I didn’t want the extra sugar, and went about seeking a healthy replacement, which I provisionally settled on in November: Grape Nuts.
Grape Nuts is properly filling, appropriately healthy, and quite tasty when you add raisins. The problem was this vague worry that Post might be using GMO ingredients, and, for various reasons, I oppose GMOs.
So I wrote an email to Post, asking a simple question: Do you use GMO ingredients in Grape Nuts?
Post could have responded in simple, easy-to-understand language; it’s a yes/no question. Here’s Post’s email back to me:
Trying to make sense of Post’s email response got me thinking about how a content strategy needs to govern all communications, not simply digital content, and that Post’s response is a massive fail. A few lessons:
  1. Write friendly. “Thank you for the opportunity to respond to your inquiry,” seriously? (Or seriously stilted?)
  2. Don’t lecture. “Regulatory responsibility for much of the nation’s food supply” blather blather blather. I’m not writing you to learn about the FDA’s dereliction of the American citizen; I’m asking you a question.
  3. Keep it simple. “As a food processor, we will be observing applicable regulations regarding use of genetically modified foods” is a Presidential Candidate-worthy non-answer answer.
  4. Communicate leadership. “[We] will be studying what the American public seems to want in its food products in the future so we can respond to their interests”: What does that mean? Does it mean, “If massive numbers of Americans boycott our use of GMOs, we’ll stop using them?” At the very least, tell me if you sell products that don’t have GMOs, because I might buy them.
  5. Answer the question. It’s a yes or no question. Answer it with a direct, yes or no statement.

Social Media Hotsheet - Week of 1/13/2012

hot sheet logo

Back by popular demand is the Earned Media team's Social Media Hotsheet. In this installment, the battle for social ads heats up while the debate between image-based content and text-based content continues. Let us know what you think in the comments.

Brands Embrace Pinterest
A Whole New World for Google Search
Facebook Fights Back with New Ads
Good Content is Shared More Than Images

Content Conversations: Margot Bloomstein on Curation, Branding, and Ethical Content Strategy

I posted the results of my questionnaire with Margot Bloomstein last week as a prelude to this heavier discussion with the content strategist and author of the upcoming Content Strategy at Work. We talked a bit about how content strategy fits within brand strategy, the dangers of algorithmic ‘curation,’ and ethical content strategy. Read on!
At Barbarian Group, the content strategy department sits within the user experience department but often collaborations with our strategy department since many of our techniques overlap. You identify yourself as both a brand strategist and content strategist. How do they distinguish themselves or work together?

When I say that I’m a brand and content strategist, I don’t offer the breadth or depth of expertise that a branding agency might. I feel like as long as I’m upfront with my clients about that, that’s usually appropriate for their needs on a particular project. Often times, clients might come in and say we’re a new company or we’re an existing company trying to relaunch our brand on the web so maybe they already have figured out how their brand works offline, but they need help translating it to a new medium or figuring out the voice and style and what that means for content types that they should be supporting. So I really practice brand strategy in the context of content strategy. I think that also speaks to my background – I have a BFA in design – so I have approached it from a visual and verbal angle, and I think it also more broadly speaks to the breadth of content strategy. We say that content strategy is a pretty broad umbrella in that there are people under it that focus more on metadata-driven content strategy and content models, and maybe other people that focus more on workflow and governance issues as they relate to content management and still other people that focus more on brand-driven content strategy. That’s really where I tend to work.

Have you worked in tandem with a branding agency or branding strategist before?

Early in my career, definitely. I learned a lot by working alongside those folks especially how they view the entire marketplace in which we were introducing a new brand. And I worked just as much with usability and user researchers, and that’s helpful to understand the audience that’s going to be engaging with the brand. Now that we’re focusing more and more on content strategy as it works in communities and social media and user generated content, we have to constantly balance the needs of the business and the needs of their target audience and kind of establish the goals and rhetorical arena that exists between the two.

I wanted to talk about one of your recent presentations on creation, curation, and ethical content strategy. What on the web are you responding to right now?

At a semantic level, over the past year, I was seeing more and more how people within content marketing, SEO, and content strategy realms were kind of co-opting the term curation and using it interchangeably with aggregation and editing in some contexts. That bugged me because I knew that we were getting behind something as a buzz word without really understanding all of its implications. That’s why I wanted to reach out to the more traditional world of curating content – museums and exhibit designers – to find out more about when they use that term – what do they mean, what does it entail, and what are the implications and responsibilities that they have to convey.

That was the conversational milieu that I was responding to and then specifically on the web, when I was seeing content, it appeared like it was aggregated entirely by an automated engine without human oversight. That was really bugging me because I knew from a branding perspective that it was undermining what it was attempting to do. It was undermining the credibility and thought leadership of the brands that were producing it.

Do you think aggregation of content or amassing content is ever useful?

It’s definitely useful as an intermediary step in an internal process. I’m a big fan of automated curated solutions to sort of establish the scope and gather the things that a human curator can oversee and say ‘Okay, this obviously came in through the keywords and it came in through a Boolean search but it’s not right for our target audience, or it’s not right because it’s talking about an especially volatile political issue.’ There’s always got to be that person that steps in and until our so-called “curation solutions” get better at sentiment analysis and understanding nuance in the way that people do, it’s going to be very tough to replace what a human can do in that process.

Does curation ever pose a threat to open access to information, in the vein of Wikipedia or WikiLeaks?

Well, I think the idea with open access to information is half of the equation. We’re giving everyone access to all of this content with the assumption then that people will look through it and make their own decisions. That’s great and it works when you have a very focused, niche target audience and a narrow data set, but once you start saying, everybody jump into this, where this is a huge volume of content, then you have to wonder: are people looking through all of it? I look at the challenge of when the Huffington Post says ‘OK, the government just released all of this content and we need volunteers now to look through it to look at what’s important’ – they’re basically saying we need help curating.

Even if we just look at content online, there are billions of websites, millions of blogs, and more content goes up on YouTube every minute than anybody could ever look through in their entire lives, so that’s why we need ways to filter it ourselves. Of course, YouTube gives you ways to filter it by topic and keyword, and they also give you assistance in filtering by showing you related videos that are more like what you just saw and then they’re putting the tools of curation in part in the hands of the viewer, but also in the hands of the content publisher and the person that uploads that video and decides to tag it.

What about the issues of the filter bubble that have been discussed recently? That perhaps too much filter is blocking access to information that we may need to know even if it’s not what we consume regularly?

I think that raises a lot of difficult and uncomfortable issues. Siva Vaidhyanathan spoke recently at edUi. His talk was all around the power of Google and what we recognize as that curatorial power, and he also shared an example of two people conducting the same search with the same keywords but doing them on two different devices or from two different geographic locations and how the content that showed up on the search results was very different because Google was making certain assumptions and the algorithm was basing its results on the results of past searches and what those different users have previously chosen from different search results. It also raises some big challenges around the issues of the echo chamber within our news environment. That more and more we self-polarize and tend to seek out news sources and support viewpoints that we already have – that’s really not that different from going to the search engine, having it either be cookied or that you log in to use it, and it says, ‘Oh, you again and I know the type of content you like and let me show you more of that’ because we’re getting more content within that echo chamber that supports our existing beliefs and our existing knowledge.

You talk about the idea of ethical content strategy. What does that mean?

If we go back to one of the core working definitions of content strategy, it’s that it’s fighting for the creation, aggregation, governance, and expiration of content in an experience. I think it’s easy to focus on the first two parts of it – on the creation and aggregation of content. What are we getting, where are we getting it from, that type of thing. But I think the ethical issues around curation especially focused on governance and expiration are important – you wouldn’t bring content into an experience if you were an exhibit designer and say “Okay, well we’re going to include this particular painting but we won’t think about how to get it back to its original owner after the exhibit is over” or “We’re not going to think about where it needs to go back in our own collection if we pulled it from our own archives.” Or, if content is no longer relevant to an experience – maybe an exhibit has been designed to speak to a particular current hot button topic in the news – the exhibit designer is not just going to abdicate the responsibility of maintaining it and making sure that it’s still relevant to that topic and current. Online, I think we face similar challenges. If we’re bringing content into an experience, whether by linking to it on someone else’s website or maybe introducing a blog post about it, we can’t then abdicate the responsibility of continuing that conversation. That’s why we say content strategy is a committeemen, not just a campaign.

I think the challenge that we face then is how do we link to something faithfully – link to the original source material or give credit to the original copyright and follow whatever rules for that particular originator are. How do we make sure the links aren’t broken over time? Or, if we’re introducing a concept or linking out to a particular item on a website or writing a brief blog post about it, what are we doing to moderate the comments on that blog post? How are we remaining faithful to the content that we’re curating, and how are we remaining true to the target audience so that we’re then bringing them into the experience and then allowing them to interact with that content?

So it sounds like it’s about being responsible and accountable.

Some of it is about the logistics of it – like making sure links aren’t broken. But then there are the other issues of what’s our governance plans. Or we’re writing this number of blog posts this week, so what’s our plan to engage in the comments of those blog posts? If we’re making the commitment to start to start engaging as a brand on Twitter, how frequently will be tweeting and listening to what’s going on there and reading tweets from others so we’re staying abreast of the conversation?

Now that content strategy is a bit more mainstream, what do you see as its current challenges?

I think there are still a lot of challenges around curation especially as that’s becoming more mainstream. Can I bring in some automated curated solution and check it off and say ‘Okay, I’m done with curation.’ We want to work with people to make sure they understand the implications. I think that closely ties to issues of sustainability and our love affairs with tools in the content management world as well. Where in many organizations, content management is still a problem that IT owns and choosing the new CMS is something that comes out of the IT department. They choose them based on features rather than workflow, and they don’t look at content management as a cultural issue that relates to their organization’s publishing culture. I see that as a challenge frequently with my clients, to encourage them to look at content management as everybody’s problem – that often times has cultural roots, not just technical roots. I guess those two are big for me.

I think more and more, we’re seeing the opportunities and challenges that responsive design and design for multiple devices can pose. The opportunities there are tremendous. How can we tailor our content for different devices for different screens and in multiple contexts, and how do we make sure that we have the information to do that in an appropriate and useful way, not in an annoying way. That’s an interesting challenge for us. Fortunately, there are a lot of opportunities and the beginnings of solutions out there through smart, structured content and metadata.

Tell us about your book. It looks great!

It’s called Content Strategy at Work because one of the things that I think we’re always crying out for in our profession are more case studies, more discussion around the ROI of content strategy, and more war stories about things that go well and things that don’t and what we can learn from them. Over the course of the book, I met with brand managers, content strategists, project managers, IAs, and social media consultants in a wide range of agencies, large and small, digital agencies as well as more traditional marketing and advertising agencies, corporations, non-profits and government agencies to talk about their approaches to content strategy on different initiatives. We got some really good discussion and case studies, and we approached it from perspectives outside content strategy.

That’s another thing. As content strategists, we have our conferences, we meet with each other, we drink with each other, and those are all fabulous things and I’m thrilled to be able to contribute to that. I want to open the door a little bit and invite some other folks into our party and say if you’re a designer, an IA, a UX person, an SEO person, a social media strategist, a salesperson focused on business development – what do you need to know about content strategy? How can you bring it into your own practice, partner with a content strategist, or take a look at what they’re doing and incorporate it into your own work? That’s it in a nutshell.

The Content Strategy Questionnaire: Margot Bloomstein

We recently had the pleasure of chatting with brand and content strategist Margot Bloomstein, author of the upcoming Content Strategy at Work, which you can preorder here.
I’ll be posting my longer conversation with Margot shortly, but wanted to whet your appetite first with Margot’s responses to the first-ever Content Strategy Questionnaire! (Think Proust questionnaire but much, much nerdier – and less about your childhood.) Without further ado, here’s Margot and her survey:
What is your favorite content strategy deliverable?

The message architecture. Without communication goals, how can you attempt to communicate?

What is your least favorite content type? Your favorite?

My most favorite is whatever is most appropriate for the specific target audience and brand.

What content creator, dead or alive, do you idolize?

Kurt Vonnegut was pithy, insightful, and smart. We ask that of most content creators, but few respond.

The quality you most admire in a client?

Boldness. We cannot always wallow in perfect information, but when we can act quickly and with courage, the world can move on. And it’s HTML—we can always change it later.

Who are your content strategy heroes/heroines?

Jeffrey MacIntyre carries the torch with diplomacy. Karen McGrane is savvy and generous enough to share her wit and wisdom. And I learn a tremendous amount from museum exhibit designers, who practice many aspects of content strategy in physical spaces.

To what content strategy faults do you feel most indulgent?

I do love to indulge in a good dirty martini. Is drinking a “content strategy fault” or merely a defining characteristic?

Who is your closest content strategy companion on a project?

A friend in need is a friend indeed… and I try to keep open dialogue with designers, project managers, social media strategists, and the clients alike. My time shifts depending on the phase of the project and its focus.

What is a brand and/or website you love, when it comes to CS best practices?

I’ve been drinking a lot of tea lately. Time and time again I go back to Adagio.com, the website for Adagio Tea. It serves as a hub for their broader web presence, encompassing blogs, video, and microsites. Whether you explore user-generated content, instructional copy, or seasonal shopping lists, you’ll find a consistent and brand-appropriate experience that evolves over time in a sustainable manner. I touch on Adagio briefly in Content Strategy at Work.

What is your favorite word?

Modernity.

“Content is king.” Does that phrase need to be phased out or is it a keeper?

I’d prefer a gender-neutral alternative—and a catchphrase that encourages greater democratization of work, responsibility, and accountability. After all, the web is less a kingdom and more of a kibbutz.

Transmedia, Content Strategy & Story

As the technologies and channels with which we communicate change, the stories we tell with them change too.
Transmedia involves the telling of stories across multiple platforms—offering a narrative that integrates, say, live events, a Facebook page, a character’s blog, video games, and video to tell a multifaceted story, often one that invites the viewer’s active participation.
Already, brands are using transmedia with impressive success.
Example: Inside, billed “a social film experience created” sponsored by Intel and Toshiba, drove 10 million views, 130,000 tweets, and 200 press stories reaching 25 million people through eight short episodes, posted over 11 days, in which the audience, interacting with the film’s character through Facebook, YouTube, and Twitter, could affect the film’s plot.
Content Strategy & Transmedia

While a content strategist may not be involved in the content creation of the stories that we tell in a transmedia experience, we are intimately engaged in the planning of the experience—which is one of the reasons I went to the Storyworld Conference + Expo last week.
Even when they’re not producing a transmedia story, brands are typically engaged in multiplatform experiences. As a brand, you have a YouTube channel, a Facebook page, a Twitter feed, a website—all helping to communicate your brand story. Integration across those channels can only enhance the relevance and impact of what you’re trying to tell people. Taking a cue from transmedia could offer new, fresh ways to engage and delight your audiences—creating more immersive, relevant experiences around your brand.
Bigger than Content Strategy

Content strategy wasn’t the only reason I went to Storyworld. I’m also interested in the nature of story—its power both to set limitations for our vision for ourselves, and liberate us from those limitations.
At a fundamental level, our identities are created and reinforced through story —maybe one of the reasons stories have been a fundamental part of human society for thousands of years. In many key respects, the operating system for our lives is story; story is what governs our vision of what’s possible for ourselves and our world.
Many of our stories are good, pleasant, hopeful. Others reinforce our limitations. We can spend hours, weeks, months, years with therapists or in repetitious relational drama grappling with these stories, reliving them—because so often, our noses are pressed so tightly to the glass of the story, we can’t distinguish them as story.
We often turn to books, or movies, or theater, or other story experiences to get some critical distance from our experience—looking for a way to introject ourselves into another’s experience and, in the process, potentially begin to heal the wounds of our experience.
The Potential of Transmedia

Transmedia represents an entirely new way of adding dimension to our stories, of getting critical distance, of playing out our stories and resolving them by moving us from passive observer to active participant. Transmedia may even help us recognize that our lives are made up from the stories, and give us tools to architect ever more imaginative stories.
This is one of the reasons why they represent so much potential for brands: You can now literally architect stories around your brand, and instead of offering a passive experience, you can give people an active, real-time role. (See more examples of brands using transmedia.)
Transmedia offers an equally exciting opportunity for storytellers to architect new worlds. They can extend the story experience into new media, creating richer stories; integrate real-time, real-world experience with media experiences; and even draw on our social graphs—or personal metrics from a Jawbone Up band, for example—to personalize the story or give it new relevance to our lives.
In the process there is real, significant power to change the our lives and world for the better.

Understanding Social Behavior: Innovation Fatigue

One of my favorite creepy moments in film is the opening scene to The City of Lost Children, by Jean-Pierre Jeunet and Marc Caro. In the scene, a small boy is delighted to find Santa come down his chimney on Christmas Eve and present with him with a magical little toy. But when more and more santas keep coming down, the boy gets confused and overwhelmed, and soon his dream becomes a nightmare. Too much of a good thing can certainly be tiresome, and I feel that society as a whole has become inundated with new technology and is beginning to fall victim to innovation fatigue.
We now live at a time when the pace of innovation is staggering. If it’s your full-time job to keep up with all the new platforms, and apps, and sites, and devices, it’s completely exhausting, and there are still things that slip past your radar. While professionals are struggling to keep up, most ordinary people have simply stopped trying and have settled for what they’ve already got because they don’t want to start fresh again with something new. I think this feeling of innovation fatigue explains why no new offering has dethroned Facebook as the giant of Social Media. After moving from Friendster to Myspace to Facebook, and each time starting from scratch, no one wants to rebuild a new social network. Even if it’s brilliantly designed and extremely easy to get on board with, like Google+. The same is true with apartments when you live in New York. At some point you just get so tired of moving that you stick with your current apartment; it’s not because it’s necessarily the best apartment, but rather because you already live there.
So what does this mean for brands, marketers, and other professionals creating innovative new experiences for their customers? For one, it means that your audience isn’t as receptive as you’d like. And it means that reaching your audience is only half the battle; even if a loyal customer is convinced that your latest offering is a must-have, they still might not go out and get it. This explains why Apple fell short of its quarterly goals earlier this month. Customers anticipated that an even newer model was coming out soon, so they simply didn’t buy any iPhones all summer. And now that they’ve waiting this long, what’s another few months?
I think the secret is to empathize with the average consumer and to be patient. Feel their frustration. Feel their fatigue. And find ways to break through the apathy and disappointment to show them that your brand and your service is here to make their life better. Demonstrate that you’re listening and you care. When you’ve had a long day, the last thing you want is a salesman showing up at your door. Instead, be the friend that comes by to lend a listening ear.

The Journalist and the Brand

A few months ago, Mitch Joel predicted that content marketing would turn into branded journalism.
Joel argues that marketers must let journalists live and breathe as actual journalists within the company and report on the industry at large, undisturbed. I agree that journalism is the best marketing a brand could ask for (hello, PR departments!), but I think it’s pretty contradictory and outlandish to suggest that brands can start their own in-house journalism operation.
He says hiring a journalist part-time or starting an entire department will give organizations high quality content to publish. This content could include ‘unbiased’ articles about the industry or thought leadership work, including commentaries and interviews with influential individuals in the industry. He writes: “They could add a layer of credibility to the content you’re publishing, because you’re very clear in your disclosures that this journalist’s role is not to write favorable content about the company, but to write great content about the industry you serve.”
Really? Does anyone actually believe that a so-called brand journalist wouldn’t feel pressure to tout their own brand or minimize their brand’s deficiencies? What if the competitor is doing better? In what universe would a brand allow their own content to tout a competitor? Maybe there’s something I’m not seeing here, but the conflict of interest appears to be too great. I don’t see any situation in which Brand X would let a person they’ve employed rate one of their products as subpar in comparison to a competitor. Even if the purpose is not to discuss competitors or specific products but to inform with industry-wide content, the goal will still be to have the journalist reinforce the organization’s particular perspective or strategy. There’s no way an in-house journalist will be seen as anything other than a corporate shill, as good as their intentions may be. Newspapers try this themselves with the ombudsman, who is supposed to serve as an outside critic of the paper’s coverage. Sometimes it works, sometimes it backfires and critique can lead to internal strife.
But I do believe in the idea of creating valuable, meaningful content. I just disagree with the semantics of ‘branded journalism.’ Branded content feels more accurate to me, and I agree that journalism is a great place to get lessons on how to do it right. (I’ll write a separate post with some of those tactical lessons next week.)
Marketingspeak is rarely effective and most consumers can see right through it, even if it’s clever. Providing content – text, video, audio, photos, whatever – that’s not about you or your brand is where content is heading. It’s now about the consumer and his or her needs. By providing information about the industry or things related to but not actually about your product, you are performing a service for your audience. You are adding value beyond the product because you are finally thinking (and talking) beyond your product. And when you do this, you also start to stand out in the category.
Many fashion brands already know this about meaningful content – perhaps because fashion brands and women’s magazines have been collaborating together for decades, and it’s a widely accepted relationship. ‘Advertorial’ is a phrase often used to describe ads with ‘editorial’ content on them (actual paid ads), but it can also refer to the types of pages you see in magazines that blend product with in-house editorial content that is promised not to have been preapproved by the advertiser. (This may be a fine church-state separation for some, but notice that it’s rare for magazine content to feature products they don’t ‘love’ on their editorial pages.)
The challenge for brands, then, is doing this in an honest way. I think adding a level of accountability for brands can only be a good thing. If you’re publishing an article about how this industry technique or product is necessary and better than anything else on the market, it better be true. And if it’s not, improve the product. Turn thought leadership and the editorial content you produce into iterative action that proves you’re more than all talk. If your product is in fact not a great value, then work to make sure that it is. The meaningful, successful content on your site or on your social channels can provide a roadmap for your organization’s next steps.
If you’re concerned about quality and integrity (or just have limited resources), by all means outsource the content to vetted writers. I’m becoming a fan of Contently, a content creation house that serves as a safe, comfortable medium between vetted journalists and brands desperate for content. Brand publishing via freelance journalists. Currently, they’re writing blog and other content for reputable places such as Mint.com and LinkedIn. Because of their own internal selection process, the content that comes out isn’t content farm crap but real, researched content. (And writers are paid appropriately.) Assignments are unbylined, so the content comes from the brand itself, and the writer doesn’t have to brand his or herself as a communications writer.
The point is not to pretend that your content is unbiased but to focus more on providing trustworthy information out there that has a strong narrative and includes the audience wherever possible. Static corporate websites are over. You have to engage your audiences wherever they are and try to provide them with information or a service that can help them live their lives better. We’re doing this with the new searsStyle site right now, a branded editorial hub that touts Sears fashion but also provides useful information about shopping and fashion that would interest the Sears fashion audience.
And yes, that was a clever branded content tactic I just used: waiting until the end of this long, industry-related post to subtly mention one of our own projects. And I bet you don’t totally hate me for it!
(Points if you get the lame title reference to an excellent book by Janet Malcolm, The Journalist and the Murderer, which you should read and no one is paying me to promote. Service!)