White Hat SEO experts can’t seem to get their heads out of the spam philosophies. If they are not out there publishing thousands of unnatural links across the Web they are sending out emails asking other people to create the links for them.
Welcome to the world of “Content Marketing”, which is just another delusional name for “manipulative linking strategies”.
Real content marketing is built on distributing branded content to the masses. That has nothing to do with “guest posts”, infographics, and chasing keywords with machinated blog schedules.
You are spamming the search engines with your faux content marketing practices.
Here are some problems with your “content marketing”:
Start With A Content Strategy
Any content that needs a strategy is clearly not serving a consumer-oriented purpose. To be consumer-oriented there is no direct, measurable payback in the content marketing process.
Real content marketing builds a market. Fake content marketing seeks links, conversions, visitors, traffic, etc.
What’s the difference? Is it a subtle difference?
Actually, there is no subtle distinction here: a market building campaign CREATES DEMAND. You’re not creating demand with your SEO fakery. You’re measuring links, conversions, visitors, traffic, etc. Which of those types of metrics measures demand?
Your “content strategy” is not focused on creating, stimulating, building, or reinforcing demand — therefore it’s not content marketing. Please spare me the fancy rationalizations. If you think you can defend “content strategy” you have way too much to learn about real content marketing to be participating in this discussion.
Perform Keyword Research So You Can “Target Content”
Again, if you’re not building demand, you’re not practicing content marketing. There is no keyword research that builds demand.
In other words, if people are already searching for KEYWORD ALPHA the demand already exists so no matter how much content you throw at the keyword you’re not engaging in “content marketing”.
If you want to be a content marketer you have to give the consumers a reason to CREATE NEW QUERIES. That’s not just brand-related queries, either. Content marketing leads to questions, speculations, and general uses of the content that the marketers never expect.
You can do keyword research AFTER you create the demand and call that Secondary Influence Research for Resonance Modeling Performance or some nonsense like that but first learn to create demand.
Create Great Content
Geeze, Matt Cutts already said that.
Frankly, you don’t need great content to create demand. Why? Because you’re introducing something new to consumers. You’re allowed to make mistakes, do stupid things, look like a damn fool. The consumers will either connect with the new concept or not.
If the consumer connects with your marketing campaign you will see the demand. If the consumer fails to connect you will see no demand. It’s the simplest metric in the world and you can use any cheap, incompetent analytics software to measure it (even Google Analytics).
You do not need “great content” for content marketing. You do need “great content” to chase keywords. Chasing keywords is NOT “content marketing”.
Optimize Your Content
Optimize it for what? If you’re doing this right you are building the market and that means you’re the first mover. In fact, it means you’re the ONLY mover.
So what the hell are you optimizing? How do you optimize when you are the only kid playing in the sandbox?
Promote Your Content Via … blahblahblah
Okay, by now if you haven’t gotten the memo: Content Marketing IS the promotion.
You do not promote content marketing content. That is like saying you hire civilian soldiers, trust your criminal police organizations, expect politicians to put their country first and political aspirations last, etc.
Content Marketing IS the promotion. Therefore, you cannot promote content that was created for “content marketing”.
Any SEO who slaps his head at this point and says, “Right — do NOT look like an idiot by talking about promoting content for content marketing” has officially gotten the clue.
Distribute Your Content
I’m going to let this one slide, although it has been screwed up by several different “content marketing” experts.
Since the content marketing IS the promotion then clearly you need to distribute some content (but that could be achieved with a simple post on your own blog, adding a product to your inventory, etc.).
Here is an example of content marketing: many independent authors are occasionally offering free downloads of their eBooks from Amazon’s store for 24-72 hour periods.
Yes, ladies and gentlemen, THAT is content marketing on the Internet. Do they need to tell people about these free downloads? Absolutely, but you don’t need to hire an SEO agency to publish guest posts and who-knows-what-else in order to “get the word out”. There are simpler ways to do that (by starting with your friends and co-workers, for example).
Spreading the word about free content is not the same as publishing content all over the Web.
Build Links To Your Content…
Any SEO who builds links to content created for content marketing obviously has no faith in his/her content.
Assuming you have actually done some content marketing it’s okay to use a few links (on sites/accounts you already control) to tell your friends, customers, audience, etc. that the content is out there.
But if you’re building links you’re chasing keywords and if you’re chasing keywords you are NOT engaged in “content marketing”. The promotion will bring you all the links you need if consumers connect with the concept; otherwise, all the link fakery in the world is NOT going to build demand.
What does content marketing do? It builds demand. Content marketing builds markets.
If What We’re Doing Is Not “Content Marketing” Then What The Hell Is It?
For years I have called this kind of SEO practice (that is, “the chasing of keywords”) spamming the search engines.
If you’re chasing keywords you’re spamming the search indexes. Why? Because clearly you’re trying to muscle in on someone else’s conceptual turf.
Now, you can do keyword research to see if you’re satisfying consumer interest adequately. That is, if people are coming to your site looking for “brilliant red diamond-encrusted shoes” and you don’t have any content that matches that query, you need to plug the hole.
And if you have content that IS relevant to “brilliant red diamond-encrusted shoes” but no one is finding it (and there is nothing else out there), that is a keyword opportunity.
If the SERPs are already loaded with relevant content for highly active queries and you’re trying to get a piece of the action you’re just chasing keywords and that means you are spamming. You are creating unnecessary content. You are not providing unique value. You are spamming, spamming, spamming.
And the moment you say that isn’t what you’re doing you are LYING, LYING, LYING.
Stop being a liar. Admit the truth. It will be easier for you to spam if you don’t devote so much energy to pretending you’re not a content spammer.
Sharing Content Is Okay, But …
So when you share content (through Tweets, LIKEs, PINs, whatevers) you may or may not be “content marketing”. You still have a right to tell people about what you’re doing. That doesn’t make you a spammer.
Sharing is good.
But sharing content is NOT “content marketing” — not in and of itself. If your sharing doesn’t build demand then you’re not content marketing.
But I Have a Better Mousetap
So everyone who tries to muscle into established keywords is convinced they have something better to offer. That may be true in your case but you’re still not “content marketing”. You’re just adding another Web page to the index, another product to the shelf, following in the footsteps of pioneers who built the market.
On the Internet not all demand is created through content marketing. Sometimes it’s created or stimulated through public relations (NOTE: that does not mean “publishing press releases”). If you can get the media interested in a story about your (client’s) business and the public reacts positively that might very well lead to new demand. So even if 100 news articles contributed to that demand that is NOT CONTENT MARKETING.
Public relations and media relations are distinct from content marketing. So building a better mousetrap doesn’t mean you have to use content marketing to build demand. Content marketing has to bring something new to the consumer experience in order to be content marketing. A new blog post doesn’t count. A new social media account doesn’t qualify. New infographics, new widgets, new product listings — those are not content marketing.
Better mousetraps may very well be needed in the marketplace but if the marketplace already exists you’re just competing for existing demand.
But Everyone Is Now Saying “Content Marketing” …
It’s true that this horse is already out of the barn. A lot of people are now using the “content marketing” euphemism for their spammy SEO practices. The search engines will sort it all out eventually.
Meanwhile, back at the SEO conference ranch, we can expect about 2 more years of these awful presentations that misuse a concept that has been around for over 100 years. Eventually we’ll see an adjustment in the presentations but for now just practice rolling your eyes whenever another “expert” steps up to talk about “content marketing”.
If they don’t go into how you create new, previously unexisting demand they don’t know what they are talking about.
See also:
- When You Should and Not Create More Content around A Keyword (April 2021)
- What Does ‘Content Spam’ Mean? (February 2014)
- Sustainable Content Marketing is the New Web Spam (October 2012)
- How to Lose Millions of Dollars with Content Marketing (June 2012)
- What Is A Content Farm? (January 2011)
I couldn’t agree more, this latest fad of “content marketing” has all the same hallmarks of the guest blogging craze, forcing content into a hole in order to get links rather than finding the best medium for a good piece of work. As long as something is viewed as a “tactic” rather than seen in the context of good old fashioned marketing, it will never be applied in a sustainable way that brings the maximum benefit.
I actually wrote about this last night on my own blog http://pegasuswebservices.co.uk/challenging-the-backward-notion-of-content-marketing/ so I’m glad I’m not the only one who can see where this is all going.
Congrats on a good post with some very sensible points.
As long as a piece of content gets someone to your site and gets them in your funnel, it’s marketing– and thus content marketing. I’m not sure I understand your argument here.
Tony, it’s not “content marketing” just because you’re publishing content as part of your marketing strategy.
Some classic content marketing campaigns that are easy to find out about are John Deere’s magazine (from the 1800s — I don’t remember the name of it) and Jell-O’s salespeople handing out free samples door-to-door.
Michael, agreed, just publishing content does not constitute “content marketing”. But Tony’s example – content resulting in traffic and the growth of the sales funnel – well, that can be defined as content marketing. To quote your own rule of thumb, published elsewhere in these comments, “if it’s creating new demand by introducing consumers to something new it’s content marketing”. I think you are both saying the same thing.
Is it really a new generation of spam? I’m not sure of the difference between what you describe above and the answers.com / suite 101 / huffington posts of the world… unless perhaps it’s in the application of this tactic to ‘brands’?
Damian,
A good rule of thumb (I think) is to say that “If it’s creating new demand by introducing consumers to something new it’s CONTENT MARKETING; if it’s competing for existing demand it’s ADVERTISING.”
I’ve been involved with SEO since 2005. Long enough to have spent a lot of time doing link building techniques which since Google Penguin have become frowned upon. After doing something for so long and seeing results from it, it’s hard to make a drastic change. SEO is about one thing… improving a sites performance in search… so at the end of the day you have to do what the search engine wants to see.
In order to change my process over the past year I’ve just started thinking “Link Earning” rather than “Link Building”.
A really interesting post. I happen to disagree though. Not all content marketing is spam and those who are doing it the right way should be congratulated for their efforts.
A lot of content marketing is adding nothing useful to the web, and is worse than traditional spam as it tries to pass itself off as something more respectable, and seems to be treated with more respect too.
Of course there are still great examples of content out there, but good content should always provide interest, entertainment, or information first, and be a marketing tool second.
Too many are putting the marketing aspect first with their content, and this will harm them in the long run.
I think what Michael is trying to say is that genuine content marketing is content that naturally goes viral and earns links passively. Anything else is just either spam (because the content is proactively posted elsewhere on sites prepared to link but have no real audience value) or advertising. I so think it’s worth point out that PR outreach is acceptable as no feature editor worth their salt will accept a crappy creative work unless it does have value for their audiences. Even if it does get included, it’s no guarantee of a link but at the very least you’ll get a mention which will create demand for your brand.
There are always going to be two types of people using content marketing strategies. The ones who are simply doing it for link building purposes and the ones who are doing it to actually build their brand.
Nice Post. Wrote something similar as well. Creating demand is not as easy as it sounds. I believe in practice vs. theory. The reality is most businesses trying to survive will never be able to create the demand your talking about. They can however create demand for their products and services through effective “content marketing.”
I think the main issue is not whether content marketing is good or bad or spam, (i agree that the majority of people think content marketing is what you have described, which is sad) but in the interpretation thereof. This is why there are 5000 ways to market a business, guerilla marketing, SMM, Demand gen, lead gen, search marketing, blog marketing, blah blah blah barf.
Our agency takes a “content marketing” approach by providing content that solves customers problems through content. This in turn build relationships with current and prospective customers for our clients.
For businesses looking to grow it all comes down to dollars and sense. We wouldn’t have a business if the demand (keyword alpha) wasn’t already there. Effective content marketing in my opinion looks to enhances end user experiences for customers through content.
I like what you have put. I am an SEO consultant and its less about focusing on going out to build links and more about actually interacting with people and building that all important brand. Not only does this naturally gain you links anyway it also gives you more lead generation through other places, not just the God of Google!
If someone creates good content, but has a new blog with no authority, followers, or friends, how do they market their content without optimizing, promoting, distributing, or building links?
Rick, you begin by making sure the blog pings so that new posts are fetched by the search engines. Then just write whatever you feel passionate about. You get links, traffic, regular visitors. All good things.
And wait patiently… but don’t hold your breath.
I love what Chris said about “link earning” rather than “link building.”
I don’t know what Martinez is trying to say (unless he’s just invented the hula hoop)… but I’ll keep reading his rants anyway 🙂
Michael, you just saved my sanity. Bless you! I survived the crash and burn of the dot com bubble and it took years for me to even stick my toe back into the Internet. I get it. I really, really get it. Now I can forget about pouring over all the “search engine optimization techniques” articles and focus on my first love — sussing out a good story, getting the who, what, where and when of it, writing about it and be done. If it gets found and read, fine. If not, that’s fine, too. On to the next. 🙂
Great article explain why your content strategy should really just be to create quality content. I agree with you. After the Penguin, Panda uproar everyone is looking for new ways of creating links and content marketing seems to be the top favorite. Great observation that people should not rely on keywords so much since there is a demand for that information anyway, instead give the people what they don’t know they need yet. This will help you stay ahead of the trends so when audiences start looking for these low traffic keywords, your content will already be there.
MODERATOR’S NOTE: The name on this comment was changed. Please see “Your Name Is Fred — Please Use It”
LOL – This is an amusing rant. Write quality content…blah blah.
You either rank websites for keywords that generate revenue or you don’t. It’s really simple. It doesn’t matter if you use a PR engine, outreach, social, or spam bloggers to feature your content. The end goal is the same. Getting contextual links from relevant, authoritative blogs is always going to drive results. I don’t really see the problem.
Michael, I agree and disagree with you on multiple points. My 2 cents:
Creating new demand/a new market by introducing consumers to something new would be great content marketing, true. Most companies can’t pull it off, though, because what they’re offering isn’t unique. In comes the product/market lifecycle of pioneers, early copycats, late majority, etc. Technically speaking, Burger King is nothing but a copycat of McDonalds and so is Pepsi of Coca Cola. What you’re talking about is creating entirely new demand for entirely new products/concepts by creating something new which solves a problem that hasn’t been solved before (after all, the essence of marketing is solving people’s problems in a profitable way).
I agree that all companies, in an ideal world, should be pioneers. Here’s my problem with that: do you know how much money is required to be an actual pioneer these days, a company which creates new solutions for unsolved problems? The vast majority of companies can’t pull that off. Think prototyping costs here, scaling production, creating distribution networks. Most companies lack the funds and knowledge and so they resort to spinning products (add twists to existing products, like Apple did with the iPod versus the walkman). Can you really blame them for doing the same thing online?
Yes, creating content of 2,000 words long that is filled with rehashed advice, offers no unique perspective/has no entertainment value sucks… agreed… but that’s not what I’m talking about here.
Second point: there are a gazillion distractions these days for every human being on the planet that has access to technology (computers, phones, TVs). Result: often times, demand needs to be created by positioning a new product against an existing one, like Tylenol did with regular aspirin. So, a pioneer sometimes has to emerge itself into the existing demand just to create demand: people need to KNOW there is an alternative/solution for their problem before they get it. And we can sit here all day and talk about how awesome it would be if a pioneer would go online and people will find its great products after a while and it becomes the next Apple or whatever and I wouldn’t disagree with you that it SHOULD be that way, but it’s not that way. I mean, you can’t possibly expect a pioneer to wait for years until people catch up… because the pioneer could be broke by then. And so even pioneers sometimes must pay the bills by doing “average things” until their invention catches on.
Long story short: I know the point of your post is to show people that what they call content marketing, isn’t… but I hope you’ll agree with me that creating demand is much more complex than waiting until people, perhaps, some day, discover one’s invention and that creating demand is not always possible because of budget constraints and what not. Think the BCG matrix here: one needs a cash cow before one can invent risky products that, some day, could become the new cash cows.