Post by account_disabled on Jan 6, 2024 0:33:05 GMT -5
How many tips are there on how to create content for the web ? They can't be counted anymore. But are they all valid? Are they really helpful? I believe that many of those pieces of advice should instead be contextualised and explored in depth, otherwise they are just chatter. Today I wanted to show some of them, at least the best known ones, to see them in a new light: that of myth. Advice that remains valid, but not if seen as an end in itself. #1 – Content is King Content is King – Bill Gates (1/3/1996) It's a phrase we often read, which has been circulating on the web for years (19!). Content is king . The meaning is equally famous: that phrase underlines the importance of content on the web and even more so in blogs. But what contents? For who? And how is this content created? Really today, with everything that has been published online, can we still limit ourselves to this concept? No, today content is no longer king , but it is part of a democracy, where each deputy has his own importance and is king in his own way.
When they tell you that content is important in a blog, they are only telling you part of the truth. #2 – Posting frequency In a blog you need to publish frequently. This is another phrase that often circulates. If we publish a post on a blog today and another in two months, we won't get far with that blog. But what is the right publication frequency ? How Special Data many days a week or month do you post? On what day? And what time? The way I see it, the minimum wage is one item a week. Below this threshold, in my opinion, the blog risks losing readers, visits, trust, and risks ending up forgotten. Are there more suitable days of the week to post? And better hours? In an article by Fabio Piccigallo we can understand when to publish on the blog by analyzing the statistics . I therefore had confirmation that Penna Blu is not widely read on Saturdays and that from 5pm to 9pm people prefer to do other things rather than read my blog. Saying frequency of publication means almost nothing if that frequency is not quantified. #3 – Good content = great results That's not true at all.
Just as it is not true that content of little use does not give good results. Any examples? My post about compulsive book buying got 98 comments. Is this article useful to anyone? No not at all. If the readers liked it – otherwise they wouldn't have commented so much – I'm certainly pleased. But I don't think it's a useful post. I talked about myself and that's it. Perhaps the desire to comment was triggered because many readers recognized themselves in that post. And this only confirms what I wrote: even content of little value can give excellent results, if it hits the mark. When I wrote the article on the various examples of micro-copywriting , I was convinced it would be well received and instead it only has 3 comments. Why? I don't know, maybe the reader didn't understand anything, maybe it wasn't the right time to publish it. I have no idea, but to me that's valid content that didn't deliver.
When they tell you that content is important in a blog, they are only telling you part of the truth. #2 – Posting frequency In a blog you need to publish frequently. This is another phrase that often circulates. If we publish a post on a blog today and another in two months, we won't get far with that blog. But what is the right publication frequency ? How Special Data many days a week or month do you post? On what day? And what time? The way I see it, the minimum wage is one item a week. Below this threshold, in my opinion, the blog risks losing readers, visits, trust, and risks ending up forgotten. Are there more suitable days of the week to post? And better hours? In an article by Fabio Piccigallo we can understand when to publish on the blog by analyzing the statistics . I therefore had confirmation that Penna Blu is not widely read on Saturdays and that from 5pm to 9pm people prefer to do other things rather than read my blog. Saying frequency of publication means almost nothing if that frequency is not quantified. #3 – Good content = great results That's not true at all.
Just as it is not true that content of little use does not give good results. Any examples? My post about compulsive book buying got 98 comments. Is this article useful to anyone? No not at all. If the readers liked it – otherwise they wouldn't have commented so much – I'm certainly pleased. But I don't think it's a useful post. I talked about myself and that's it. Perhaps the desire to comment was triggered because many readers recognized themselves in that post. And this only confirms what I wrote: even content of little value can give excellent results, if it hits the mark. When I wrote the article on the various examples of micro-copywriting , I was convinced it would be well received and instead it only has 3 comments. Why? I don't know, maybe the reader didn't understand anything, maybe it wasn't the right time to publish it. I have no idea, but to me that's valid content that didn't deliver.