I am currently doing some research for my presentation at the Hoosier Hospitality Conference and I ran across this quote by Cory Doctorow from BoingBoing:
“Content isn’t king. If I sent you to a desert island and gave you the choice of taking your friends or your movies, you would choose your friends…. If you chose your movies, we would call you a sociopath. Conversation is king. Content is just something to talk about.”
It made me think hard about my opinions on content and the use of such tools to drive leads to businesses using the Internet. Sometimes the point of conversation is missed by many Internet marketers. It is excellent if you are at the top of Google search for your keywords but what happens when the potential customer clicks through to your site?
Do you have the necessary tools and systems in place to create conversations with the users influenced by your search ranking? Is it even necessary?
Absolutely it is necessary. We are seeing an overwhelming demand for the marketers and businesses of the world to call consumers… PEOPLE… and not the other way around.
It is important to creat excellent content in order to push the conversation but…
Conversation leads to Relationships. Relationship leads to Aquisition.
What do you think? Is Content king or did Conversation just take the throne?
Related articles by Zemanta
- Candle Company Uses Blog Entries to Gain More Targeted Customers (blogduck.com)
- Using PPC and SEO Together to Improve Your Google CV (lookuppage.com)
- Web Search Engine Ranking: How To Get To The Top (marketersdaily.com)
![Reblog this post [with Zemanta]](http://img.zemanta.com/reblog_e.png?x-id=38e5abc5-4414-4aca-8caf-d17b52b7e366)
[...] more: Is Conversation or Content King on the Social Web? Share and [...]
It depends on your friends, i guess!
I’d rather debate a great book or idea with myself on that island than attend a cocktail party with 10,000 boring, irrelevant, non-thinkers.
Ok, being serious for a moment. . . What’s the point of chatter without content? Doesn’t it really take both- conversation about good content?
In the end, the premise of the question is wrong. Why should I have to chose? I want both- good conversation, which means a meaningful exchange of ideas. I think it is impossible to have good conversation without something of value to discuss.
Kyle,
I vote for conversation.
As an example, our family plays a game together on the internet during the holidays. We exchange gifts in a white elephant format. The gifts are the “content” in the game. But in the end the conversation becomes the king.
We share hundreds of comments between less than 15 people. We forget the gifts (content) and turn 100% of the focus on the conversation.
Conversation is crowned king over Content!
I feel that ‘either/or’ is a dangerous management habit. One of the reasons for this is because it leads to a chase after simplified linear causalities. It also forces people to stand on one side of the fence or the other and this in turn leads to ‘power plays’ and posturing rather than reaching an improved understanding. The fact is social affairs are complex and subtle. This means that there is an interdependence between content and conversation, and it in the interplay between the two where the real value lies. Content informs conversation, conversation makes meaning out of content. They are both equally vital in any social space.
I’ve gotta disagree with you on this one… When it comes to the web, content is king. Because putting out content(on your blog, twitter, etc) is what starts the conversation.
It was this post that got me interested in you and your site. This post is the beginning of a conversation… a conversation that wouldn’t have happened unless you were creating content for people to read.
Interesting discussion.
Hello,
I always thought that CONTEXT is king, not content and not conversation. Context determines both the content and the conversation. Depending on where you are and with whom you find yourself, the content and the conversation will be determined. While content is what the conversation is about, it also drives the conversation. Without good content, there is not quality conversation. However, without good communication skills, conversation cannot take place in an edifying or profitable manner. All these help determine one’s context. Therefore, context is the king. What do you think?
@Travis that is an interesting thought. Context being king over content and conversation and yet… I have a problem with applying context to the Internet. Isn’t the concept of the “social web” that where you are doesn’t matter?
Wow, all of these response bring up such interesting points. Conversation, Content, and Context….now I am going to have to say I am a fan of THE 3 C’s
Ahhh….but context becomes increasingly relevant in terms of search. Obviously, I thing your audience has spoken that Content is king… without content nothing happens.
That content needs to be delivered in Context right? Context is relevance….people are going to engage in content that is in context to what they are interested in.
Finally we get to Conversion or what you are calling conversation. Basically the next step in the relationship. This is the ultimate goal of any online strategy. But keep in mind, a conversion is a conversation, but a conversation is not necessarily a conversion. You and your buddies talking to each other online probably doesn’t do a lot to move the organization forward.
I like Travis’ comment on CONTEXT. It makes me think of relationships deeper than just folks who follow you on Twitter, or who occasionally comment on your Facebook status or even your blog. Do you have customers (sorry, People) whom you specifically contact when you’re considering making a substantial business move? You e-mail them, call them, or meet with them, right? You don’t post your plans on your blog, hope that they’ll read it and respond, do you?
Yes, the question included the term “..on the Social Web?” My point is that the “Social Web” is not king* – it’s not an end, but a means to an end. And your most meaningful and important relationships do not end there. Those relationships certainly won’t feel valuable or personal by virtue of your on-line content OR conversations alone. So, I’m backing Travis – it’s context.
*This is just a clarification of my position, not a criticism.
To make it more simple, it is conversation WITH content. As someone else said before, I rather have a good movie and/or a good book that chat with people I find boring or superficial (or that talk about issues I am not interested about).
It’s the conversation on the social networks and the content of that conversation is what makes you a winner. To many businesses on social networks are detached from the conversation, on twitter they have taken away the DM feature. Social networks want communications and that comes from conversation not content. So those businesses not engaged with their customers on the social networks are wasting the time. You many have many followers to say “glad you are here” but you’ll quickly loose their attention with the close door of no conversation. Talk to your customers, you’ll be surprise how they help you build your business.
What happens when "conversation" is the "content?"
Interactive conversation that is 50%+ "shaped" by a Brand and the balance is User Generated conversation.
We're seeing emerging formats for this within Twitter, or the use of Twitter alongside video etc., where the "conversation" is clearly part of the "content" experience for the User/Participant. Whether this is done through humans or artificially intelligent characters (no different than a character on TV we accept as "real"), the result is that there are going to be "branded conversations" as well as interactive storied content that is simply, conversation.
Content will always be king because without it you have no conversation/context etc (Online). The problem I find is that people see content as just videos but content can be anything; text, videos, images etc.
I understand what you are saying but i think the context you used for the example was unfair and slightly misleading so the point of conversation vs content can be argued