Contributed Content: A Good or Bad Trend for Media?

I've been a professional writer since 1993, when I got my first editorial job at a small
local newspaper in Colorado. Since then I've worked in staff roles at trade and business magazines such as CIO and The Industry Standard, and as a freelancer for websites, magazines and companies. I also had a stint at Microsoft in a content role. So I've been on both sides of the fence: journalism and corporate marketing. In the last few years I've been almost strictly corporate, writing white papers and articles for corporate-sponsored sites and doing some PR. Lately, there's been some brewing debate about the concept of corporate-contributed content.

Some people think the idea of allowing executives and other experts from industry write for independent media is a disturbing denigration of the field of journalism. Others say that it's simply the direction content is heading now -- with bloggers becoming journalists, journalists becoming bloggers, and everyone with something to say actively contributing to the broader bucket of knowledge that we consume every day from social media, traditional media, and corporate-sponsored sites.

I'm in the middle here. First of all, whether they will admit it or not, newspaper and magazine editors need content. The current ad-driven revenue models cannot support large editorial staffs any longer, nor even freelancers; I know this firsthand, since freelance rates have plummeted drastically over the past few years. If a news-oriented, relevant article idea is submitted, that fits a current need, editors are much more inclined to take it these days if they trust the source. The media organizations accepting contributed content are not just small trade rags, but top-tier publications such as Fortune and BusinessWeek.

But the media needs good content— discussions that are well-researched, cogent, objective, and provide fresh insights and value to readers. As long as that criteria is met -- I don't see the problem with an executive writing a blog post for a traditional media site. In the few occasions that I have helped write such articles of late, the company nor its products are mentioned in the article. And often, such pieces are clearly labeled as a viewpoint piece.

Now you still might disagree: independent authors are the only ones worthy of writing for independent media. Yet the tide is changing: economics are demanding the acquisition of cheaper forms of content. This is an opportunity, in my mind, for both media sites and companies. For media: an occasional contributed article is a way to expand editorial coverage on tight budgets with a fresh industry-driven viewpoint that a journalist can’t always convey. For companies: this is an opportunity to express your (hopefully respectable) opinions and drive thought leadership among your peers, colleagues and customers.

Of course there's a danger here: use of such articles requires, perhaps, more stringent editorial policies to weed out people with an agenda versus those offering a thoughtful discussion. And most would agree that the large majority of articles from independent media should still come from journalists, not companies. Story ideas and execution must be held to the same level of rigor, if not more, of that of the independent journalist. And it must be distinctly clear in the article credits who penned the piece.

If managed properly, corporate-written content is not evidence of the field of journalism rapidly going downhill into the dregs of promotional drivel. Many freelance writers with pedigreed backgrounds, in fact, write regularly for corporations along with their journalism pieces—because they must, to survive. On the same token, many news organizations will have to consider free, contributed, yet high-quality content from both leaders and industry to "fill the pages" so to speak.

But that's just my view. What's yours?

High-tech marketing: is content still king?

These days, as a home-based writing and PR consultant, I work with a lot of marketing teams. Most of them are in high-tech, and I am also working to build up a business involving green tech and health care. Marketing budgets have been slashed over the past couple of years. I don't have the numbers to show for it, only the anecdotal evidence and my own personal experience—enduring a 20% downturn in income since 2007.

When companies have marketing dollars to spend, they are ruminating long and
hard about how to spend it: what kind of messages and information will resonate
today?

Some people think that micro-blogging a.k.a. Twitter is a high-value activity for marketing when you have a tight budget. Yet despite all the hype it's unclear what tangible results most companies are gaining from social media, and there’s a lot of a palaver that's time-wasting and annoying. Behind the tweets and posts there has to be some useful, valuable content. I'm not talking about quick-hit promotions and spin but information that will help purchasers and decision-makers learn more about your products and services and their industry: research, analysis, predictions, and customer stories. It's about building a relationship, sharing information, and enriching a discussion with customers and other stakeholders.

In 1993, I began my career in journalism, and while I occasionally still write journalism pieces, the bulk of my work has evolved into corporate-sponsored writing and communications activities. I like to call myself an information broker. The same tenets that I learned at the American University M.A. program in Journalism in 1991 and 1992 still apply to my work today: research, relevance, and really good writing.

Sometimes however, I wonder if anyone really cares about that anymore. White papers seem to have gone by the wayside. Cases are getting shorter and shorter. The bulk of news and analysis publish exclusively on the web, which means articles must be tight, concise, and often lacking perspective. Blogging is hot -- yet there's plenty of blabber out there on the Web and it's hard to know what's credible and what's not.

I surveyed a few friends and colleagues for their perspective on the world of marketing content today, and here's what they said:

"Ultimately, I'm thinking the issue is less the mode of content delivery instead of the nature of the content itself," says Jason Gillikin, president of Gillikin Consulting which provides business communications services. “Material that speaks to the effectiveness of some new technology are going to play better than empty sales rhetoric, irrespective of the mode of delivery. So emphasizing the ROI will be a smart move. Show the customer how this new tech will make their lives easier or cheaper or reduce their carbon footprint. That, ultimately, will count for the most.”

Michael Schmier, VP of research and media at high-tech market research network Tippit, still believes in the power of white papers and case studies, as long as they are distributed widely on other sites. Blogging, if attached to a social media strategy, is another favorite of this San Francisco-based former marketing exec. And webinars on products can be very useful for customers, he says.

Michael: I agree wholeheartedly. I believe that diversity is paramount: technical people might enjoy spending five minutes watching a product demo while marketing-savvy execs can quickly breeze through your social media updates on their mobile phones. And, members of the media and prospects can get a better idea of the capabilities of your product or service by reading a well-written and engaging case study. Everyone knows such documents are always one-sided, but they can also offer a valuable snapshot into the real-life scenarios your company enables.

In the world of headlines and sidebars and video clips in which we now live, I sometimes mourn the halcyon days in which I could interview 7 or 8 people and spend hours researching a subject to pen a thoughtful and comprehensive 3,000-word piece. I hope that marketing folks won’t lose sight of the fact that not everything can be consumed in 10 seconds. Nor should it be.

What’s your take on the state of corporate-sponsored content? What do your clients and customers want?