Content marketing: Reach vs. relevance!

A few days ago, I was introduced at a meet-up as a content marketing expert and got involved in a discussion about blogging, journalism, marketing 4.0 and content marketing. I was slightly embarrassed, because quite honestly, I have no idea about any of these things. There were good laughs at the event when I said that. They didn’t buy it.

(Reading time: 4 minutes)

So many content marketing experts

As soon as a buzzword is trending again, experts spring up like mushrooms. Content marketing is no different at the moment. It is often not so easy to separate the wheat from the chaff. Quite simply because anyone who has ever published an article with 5,000 visitors a day is inclined to call themselves an expert.

That’s nonsense, of course. Real experts are rare. Aldo Gnocchi, for example, is such an expert. He has many years of experience and has advised many companies. You can hire him and work with him. He can add strategic value.

People like him don’t just blather on, they can explain basic principles and derive the right measures for their customers.

So I am truly not an expert and yet I think I have learned a thing or two from just over 2 years of writing and giving talks. A few things I share here, please take it with a grain of salt. Because as I said, I am not an expert.

Followers, likes, reach as far as the eye can see

I think a typical beginner’s mistake is to concentrate on the number of followers and/or likes, etc. It’s not that difficult to get lots of followers. The way I get them defines the quality of the followers. Why does someone like my Facebook page or become a Twitter follower?

A good follower is someone who interacts with me, who is critical, who can function as a network hub, who is selective and choosy and who will sooner or later become a colleague. In extreme cases, a bad follower is bought. By this, I don’t necessarily mean primarily in monetary terms, but also, for example, by sharing trending topics.

And so I keep meeting people who tell me they have xy number of followers etc. and ask me for my numbers. I always have to pass because I don’t know exactly.

Followership, or reach, is important, but only a means to an end. And it is only important because great content is not that useful if it cannot be shared with anyone.

All too often, however, I find that reach is seen as the result to be produced in social media and content marketing. I think this is fundamentally wrong, because I don’t get anything from a large reach.

Interaction is the consequence of relevance

What’s important to me, and I think this is a pretty good metric, is the amount of interaction that results from content marketing activities. For example, the people who write to you, who comment, who call you or simply speak to you.

For me, that’s all that matters. Not a day goes by when I’m not asked about the articles. That’s great at first, of course, and good for the ego. Sometimes it also produces amazing results: like the two older gentlemen from a medium-sized company, who were previously unknown to me, who simply approached me in the lounge at Frankfurt Airport to talk about the agile company. I sometimes live intellectually from such, and less spontaneous, exchanges.

So if anything counts, it’s the interaction with readers, viewers and listeners. If you’re on the move commercially, that’s the starting point from which you start doing business. If, like me, you do it out of interest in the cause, you will make lots of new contacts and exchange ideas. Connecting and exchanging ideas in this way is everything these days.

Relevance

If the result of relevance is interaction, what exactly is relevance? I can’t really give you an answer to that. I don’t know.

I can only tell you what I do and what my readers tell me. They find most of the articles exciting, stimulating, inspiring and helpful. I can only guess why that is. Maybe it’s because I stick to 3 simple rules: a) I never write because I have to or only when a topic concerns me, b) I never write about topics for which there is a general consensus and this consensus corresponds to my opinion (carrying water into the Rhine) and c) I write what suits me and I can argue, regardless of what others think of it.

Content marketing is showbiz

However, half the battle of relevance is show. The show part is wrapping the topic in a story in such a way that people want to read on, that they are entertained. It has to be fun in some way. If you don’t find your “mojo” here, it will be quite difficult.

“Noise”

The content produced across the board today is incredibly mediocre. I think that’s one of the reasons why my blog is successful: because so much “noise” is produced every day. “Noise” that is geared towards SEO, “noise” that suits the boss, “noise” that endlessly quotes studies. It doesn’t take much “signal” to stand out.

Relevance attracts reach

An inevitable consequence of relevant content is that it automatically increases reach. This doesn’t happen overnight, it takes time. But, to my complete surprise at first, it actually happens: over time, partners and, above all, the media come by themselves. A little piece of advice: don’t accept everything, say “no” more often.

Corporate Blogs

Even if a supposedly independent blog – nobody is independent – certainly has it easier, I am convinced that corporate blogs work well. But only if the countless stories that happen in a company are told to the outside world on a broad front. If the PR department orchestrates or articles are bought in from outside, then good night.

That is why it is important to define exponents in the company who can carry the company’s “quorum” to the outside world. And who can turn a good story into a really exciting story. The rest will come, sooner or later.