Are you interesting?

There is a lot of talk about the effectiveness of content marketing for startups. And while I don’t doubt that it has some effect for some, I am firmly in the camp where I would advice anyone to up their game significantly, if they want to do content.

Because there is som much ‘blah’ put there that’s just not interesting at all.

Compare it to a party, where you meet someone you have never met before. You talk casually.

What’s the most interesting conversation?

The one where the guy across from you just babble on in banal terms without even making the slightest effort to understand whether you’re interested or even paying attention.

Or the one who actually engages in a conversation, brings new perspectives to something you care about or at the very least can relate to and leave you wiser and eager to know more?

Of course you would choose the latter one.

And that’s my point:

Content marketing is the first one. Thinly disguised as being ‘customer centric’ it is essentially about the sender and demonstrates a lack of understanding and/or real interest in who you are and what challenges you are facing. Basically, it doesn’t care.

The latter one is content where you from an angle of curiosity explore the field, you’re working in making sure that you bring fresh perspectives to your field and basically is worth the time and investment for others to follow and engage with.

That kind of content doesn’t need to be hard to produce. It just takes someone who knows what he or she is talking about and with a willingness to write about it from time to time and a openness towards getting it out there and potentially get some interesting feedback.

It’s an approach that doesn’t fit very well with outsourcing to an agency, because it takes knowledge, real insights and – crucially – the authenticity and presence that you can only bring to the table, when the one putting the content out there is deeply immersed into the field herself – day in, day out.

That’s what will make it interesting and worth following. And that is what could be a great and efficient building block for building and nurturing relationships.

If you can go that route, you have a number of potential advantages looking at you compared to your competitors, who stick with the old, ineffective content marketing playbook:

You can essentially become a real thought leader. You can get valuable feedback from customers and other constituents that can have an impact on your business. And ultimately you can drive new leads to the business that will both be worth significantly more over time from a commercial point of view but will also be way cheaper to connect with than other means of advertising.

Because all it takes is essentially your insights, willingness to share and openness towards connecting.

(Photo by Markus Spiske on Unsplash)

The ‘Worldview’ biz model

Yesterday we held local elections in Denmark. Always a super exciting day where people come out to vote on the issues that matter the most in their everyday lives.

While ideology seldom gets a lot of room in the local election campaigns, the ingredients are still there to pit people against eachother in order to force a result and ultimately the way things will be run locally going forward.

So it matters what your message is, how you word it, the level of nuance (or the lack of it), how you get it out, and how you build a loyal following enough to stick at least until the fateful vote is cast on election day.

It’s essentially about your local ‘Worldview’ and getting the electorate to buy into that. And that got me thinking (a bit off the rails but please bear with me as I think it’s quite important):

If you are into the media business and have ever harbored doubts about the advertising driven business model in an online context, beware of the new dangerous animal in town:

The ‘Worldview’ biz model.

This is the business model, where content creators with a particular worldview go solo or band together in small groups to deliver media content with a certain ‘worldview’ that users can subscribe to for a fee.

While there is every reason to applaud a business model based on subscription, the danger of the ‘worldview’ model is that it is only successful because it is inherently polarizing.

Just as ads supported business models have an interest in creating sensation and conflict to get the eyeballs needed to monetize on ads, creators of ‘worldview’ media content have an interest in painting everything black or white according to a certain belief system to get loyal subscribers to fork out their cash to access the content.

This, of course, means we’re likely to get more and more of it. We can call it a wealth of niches of special interests. But we shouldn’t neglect the fact that probably a good part of it is inherently dangerous to the commonwealth.

Want proof?

Look at some of the people with the biggest subscriber followings for paid newsletters. You will see a good few of them coming from people who have very clear ‘worldviews’, who are excelling in flaming the views of others in order to keep them loyal, hungry for more – so they will keep paying the subscription.

The phenomenon should definitely be taken seriously, and it should also be scrutinized. We shouldn’t gloss it over out of sheer admiration in the ability of some to build a sizable subscription following in a digital media world, where we have struggled for viable alternatives to the ads driven business model for years on end.

This is serious. And could potentially become quite ugly going forward.

(Photo by Jason Rosewell on Unsplash)

Twitter finally makes a move

The new Super Follower feature from Twitter looks super interesting; the ability for a user to offer special perks to followers, who choose to pay a monthly fee.

One thing, we should immediately be asking ourselves: What took Twitter so long?

Tiered access and perks is nothing new at all. Lots of different services have had it for years. Dating sites is a great example, where it has long been the norm, you couldn’t contact someone and keep a conversation going, unless you were a paying member.

It should be a slam dunk for Twitter.

Unless of course, they blow this too.

There probably isn’t a big service out there, who have botched so many opportunities to develop their product and their business model as Twitter has. Anyone remember Vine which was TikTok before someone in China got that idea. Thought so.

I do however think there is a chance that Twitter will get it right this time. I don’t think you should underestimate the profound change that occurred when Twitter finally decided to kick the former US president to the curb for life.

It was a watershed moment. The lid came off the tube, and Twitter is in a different place now. So they should be able to do this.

For users it will also be interesting. From the looks of it, it will be super easy to create a Super Follower package, set a price and cater to the needs of that special paying audience. When you enable opportunity and make it dead simple for people to take it up for themselves, usage usually follows.

For media it will also be very interesting. Twitter just made it super easy for any user with some insight and expertise in something to create their own personal brand and get compensated for it. At the same time Twitter has a reach built into it that most media companies can only dream of.

I wouldn’t be surprised if this – or something like this – ends up being a preferred go-to-market plan for journalistic talent that would otherwise have chosen the more traditional media route. And that will in itself carry yet another branch to the bonfire of old medias imploding business model.

Interesting times.

PS. Big hattip to Prof G who saw this coming from a mile.

(Photo: Pixabay.com)

The cue from Disney+

Disney+ has gotten a really strong foothold in my household, since it launched in September last year.

Where Netflix is just a plethora of content with hits and misses, the basic premise for firing up the Disney+ app is that when you do so you’re immediately immersed into a content universe, where the production value is just super high.

It rarely disappoints. The experience is key.

There is a lesson here for the rest of us;

Going forward I am not sure the winning argument will be the abundance of choice, the lazy-ness of ‘The Long Tail’.

Rather I think it will be about the immersiveness of the experience. That we feel well taken care off. That someone has our backs and goes the extra mile to make sure that we get the best of the best.

Storytelling will play a big part of this. Storytelling that can – if you look at it with strict content lenses – move into franchises that can then again be expanded and added onto almost endlessly for the foreseeable future.

Strong, open ended narratives, where we feel at ease and at home.

I think part of what will also be driving this is a need to go more slow with some things. The rapid pace of change has been killing us for a long time, but the pandemic has shown us that a great fallback option to pick ourselves up and find our feet is just going slow for a while.

Just. Going. Slow.

Immersive experiences with strong open ended narratives will help us sit back, take a break, feel at ease and give us the sense that we’re not just pawns in somebody else’s chess game but actually in control of the game ourselves.

Businesses that can operate natively in this space and cater to that need for a greater experience will prosper well.

(Photo: Pixabay.com)

The real magic of Disney+

Disney+ launched in Denmark yesterday. By 6.45 AM I had it installed on 2 devices and our Apple TV at home. That’s how much I have been looking forward to the launch. And yes, I saw the first two episodes of “The Mandalorian”.

But aside from being a cool service in itself with an abundance of great content, Disney+ is also a big picture strategic masterstroke and a model to get inspired by for a lot of other companies.

Yes, they are late to the streaming game. But you could also say that they have had amble time to observe and learn from the competition and thus avoid the worst of the ‘early days’ diseases the firstmovers usually encounter.

On top of that the direct comparisons with Netflix, HBO and all the others are slightly flawed. Disney+ is so much more; it’s a direct avenue to increased merchandise sales and visits to their theme parks (where available and not taking into account the current Covid-19 restrictions, which – honestly – no one could have planned for).

The goal of Disney+ overall is not to win the streaming wars as I see it. It’s more of a clever way of driving awareness of and interest in the content universes themselves thus sparking increased demand for all the products sitting on shelves in retail stores, where Disney really makes their margins.

The price of 59 DKK per month – a little more than half of Netflix or HBO – supports this.

This is what Disney+ has that’s unique. Netflix doesn’t have that play, HBO doesn’t either and none of the other streaming players have it. Disney does. And it’s every bit as much a part of their core business model as the quality of their content is.

Having waited the streaming phenomenon out until there were some well established models that others have worked the kinks out of and THEN launch with the long tail of related products that no other player can match is a simple, beautiful strategic masterstroke you can only bow to.

It’s almost magic.

(Photo: Screenshot)

Infinity beats speed

Is there ever such a thing as too much of a good thing? I came to think about it after following a discussion on Twitter about how news media may have been a contributor to their own digital demise by doing too much – or rather: publishing too much – rather than too little.

The argument against publishing, publishing and publishing more is that by betting on speed and volume, quality goes down. The finished product becomes thinner, offers less value to readers, which again drives down engagement, advertising revenue and – crucially – the likeliness of subscribing for a fee.

On the other hand, media execs may argue that there are great examples of great businesses being successful based on an abundance of content. Netflix is perhaps the best example, where precisely the vastness of the catalogue is a big reason to describe.

Here it is just worth noting that while shows on Netflix predominantly age well and stay relevant, the same cannot be said about news media. So when we compare the two, we’re comparing the value of infinity with the value of sheer speed. And here infinity always wins.

(Photo: Pixabay.com)