Nearly 90% of my work involves some form of writing to service my clients’ business needs. PR requires a solid writing ability and a very specific skill set of intuitively knowing who will be interested in reading your content and why.
Part of my work also involves monitoring the news environment, which has almost completely moved to online from the traditional print pubs. It used to be where online content would supplement print. The publishing crisis changed all of that, and now I would safely say that it’s the other way around. In today’s world, print articles are outdated the minute they are published, and therefore they have become pretty showpieces of a nostalgic past where flipping pages was more satisfying than scrolling down to “read more” on a screen. The need and the capability to immediately comment on articles sealed the deal for print pubs. Period.
Clearly, the publishing crisis has impacted all of the IMC components, with a particular emphasis on PR. Nowadays, I scan so many websites for content, I’m baffled with how many “experts” there are posting articles such as, “5 key points to…,” or ”7 trends to monitor…” and so on. Everyone has become a reporter of some kind, but the ability and the skill to write is absent in too many of these mainstream, mislabeled, yet keyword-rich articles. There’s so much to sift through, and absorb, it makes me wonder: what will content look like by 2020?
In 2010, we know that social media will drive content, and social networks are likely to continue dictating what is actually being read and absorbed, versus simply skimmed and shared.
Big questions to ask:
1) Is quality of content gradually becoming more important in the face of the infinite amount of regurgitated content that just reads a little differently than the previous post?
2) If content is closely tied to social media, what does that say about the future of the fickle three: Facebook, Twitter, LinkedIn? Can we get enough quality content through these social networks so that they continue to be credible sources of information, as much as they have become marketing tools?
3) What is the next step once we reach the point of content saturation? We all love informative articles that can help us shape opinions, and start conversations. What happens when the online content world becomes too cluttered to make a real impact?
I think that one of the issues is that too much content is free. We’re noticing that some news sites are planning to start charging for readership in the next year or so. If charging for content becomes mainstream, then it will be interesting to see how that will change the content world as we know it today.
Tags: breaking through the media clutter PR, future of online content, imc, newspapers vs. online, print vs. web, publishing crisis, social media PR, the future of publishing
The transition from print to online hasn’t changed the importance of good writing skills, which still remain a quick and reliable way to identify quality messages. Twitter has shown that good writers have embraced the challenge of 140 characters as the new “30 second sound bite.” There is still no excuse for poor grammar, spelling mistakes, or typos.
It’s interesting to read about the effects of electronic media on PR professionals because as a professional freelance writer I also feel the impact every day. My colleagues and I have had to learn new ways to write, especially those of us with magazine and book backgrounds and a penchant for writing long sentences! I think, though, that the pendulum may be swinging back a bit. Although many print pubs are indeed gone and forgotten, as writers we’re starting to see others take their place and target new audiences and new trends. My guess is that many publications will publish both an on-line and a print version, usually with different content, into the foreseeable future. Whatever happens, it’s bound to be an interesting journey for all of us who work with words.
Karen
Very interesting points. I agree with your opinion on all of them.
Just a couple of notes.
1) As a nostalgic of printed word myself - coming from the Old World! - I do believe that in this era of regurgitated digital content, printed articles (I mean, valuable printed articles!) still feature a deeper insight on an issue, and even though they become ‘old’ as soon as they are printed out, they are effective carriers of a personal opinion. Personal opinions are the best way to trigger conversations and to embark on constructive reasonment. Web content is getting more gossipy every day, even cultural web content. there’s this horizontal approach I personally dislike, even though it’s useful to gain a general view of the situation.
2) I believe that social networks will slowly fade out once they become out of fashion, mainly because their real mission is marketed-oriented, while the social aspect is just an excuse. Being a Facebook member since a couple of years, I see every day how people have less and less to say to each other and get lost into a net of useless tests and farmvilles. I don’t think they will be as interesting 5 years from now. And I don’t think they will be real content carriers, but rather chat networks with occasional news in it.
3) What is the next step once we reach the point of content saturation? I suggest reading Jeanette Winterson’s The Stone Gods, talking about a society that banned written words, novels and poetry, in favor of immediate, vocal, visual and TV-like information. A lovely, poetic way to say what I think about this present era! I agree that charging to read web articles would be a smart way to filter relevant contents. But this goes against advertising investments!
Hope this makes sense…I’d explain in better in Italian!
Marta