19 Replies to “The Mounting Challenges of an Established Social Content Market”

      1. The technology that many write about is not that new or innovative anymore. The value is in what you can do with the technology. This is not a comment about you or your writing, Geoff, it’s about a lot of the “echo chambery” stuff that people write about, i.e. 10 K ways to get 10 K Twitter followers.

        1. I got you. Yeah, I don’t see it as new, I see it as established. I also find many of the current posts to be overly optimistic. It’s not that you can’t succeed, but it’s a mature content marketplace, not a shiny new place that everyone can do well in.

    1. Indeed, I also see a lot more corporatization of content. I imagine we’ll see more traditional media players like News Corp, etc. sweeping in and absorbing some the independent content farms and pubs like Mashable and Gawker.

    2. Indeed, I also see a lot more corporatization of content. I imagine we’ll see more traditional media players like News Corp, etc. sweeping in and absorbing some the independent content farms and pubs like Mashable and Gawker.

  1. “How would you approach the modern social content marketplace?”
    Interaction, honesty, good content, well written, passion!
    Very interesting post. Thanks :-)

    1. Thanks, Mich. Trying to resolve some of the issues my clients face in content marketing. It’s not as easy as many paint it to be! Love what you are doing with the MidEast efforts.

  2. Very thoughtful post, Geoff. I agree, the web is no longer as democratic as it used to be. And it’ll only get worse if we get a tiered internet (i.e. if net neutrality isn’t truly preserved).

    The content is only half the battle. Making real connections with people and broadening the network one node at a time is what seems to be working to getting content out today. Challenges include getting people to want to be connected to an organization where they don’t necessarily have a natural affinity, and even if they do, maintaining their attention and earning their appreciation of your content. Even if they cross those two hurdles, there’s still a many other sources available to them.

    1. You are so right. When we all began it was about participation. Now it’s about influencers, crowdsourcing and content marketing. We lost the networking value of online media. I think that’s what keeps people interested in organizations. Thank you for your response, Daniel.

  3. The sad thing is, the majority of people want bland. It’s why the likes of the Kardashians get media space, while people fighting AIDS in Africa work away tirelessly but get no real recognition.

    The world’s screwed for innovation when innovation means $10 for Google Reader ideas and 300 social shares on posts about being a Twitter Jedi.

    1. I think you touched on a great point, Danny. Innovation in content doesn’t really exist anymore, at least as it’s being preached to the social web masses. Homogeneous activity is, and that means we are seeing a lock down of what good is. But that also leaves a great opportunity for competitive voices.

  4. It is becoming so easy and typical to be a Twitter Jedi, that it really sets up a clear path to being different. Brave new world for solid, quality writers to stand out. I’m ever hopeful.

    1. I think differentiation can happen, but it does take a break from the pack. I may blog some more about this during the week.

  5. Geoff – one thing that popped into my head while reading this was that in a way we have re-invented the glass ceiling, but instead of having it in the workplace its in something larger and more difficult to break through. Peer-to-peer sharing is my favorite way t o find content and have to thank Danny Brown for passing you along a few months back.

    1. There you have it. I do agree with the peer to peer sharing. The systems above it simply harness that system, but it does make peer networks more important than quality in a lot of cases, and that can be systematic and frightening! Thanks for coming on by and sharing!

  6. Pingback: Five for Friday

Comments are closed.