Web Content: How Can You Tell if It's Any Good?
Gerry McGovern, an "authority on managing web content as a business asset," posted an interesting article entitled "Impediments to seeing information as a task," in which he makes some interesting claims on establishing the true value of content on the web.
His argument is summed-up in the following statement: "Until the Web, the act of creating content and the impact that content had on the reader were not really connected. But the Web opens up a window through which we can look and see if the content is actually delivering on its objectives."
McGovern's perspective is informed by the notion that web usage is task driven and that "[m]ore than anything else, it is content that will influence the successful completion of these tasks." Accordingly he concludes, "We need web writers whose first and foremost concern is the action their content will drive."
While I agree that the web allows us to apply metrics to writing, at least in terms of page views, feed subscriptions, comments, etc., I don't agree that the "completion of tasks" is the best measure of content value or that content influences the completion of tasks "more than anything else." Furthermore, I disagree that the goal of all or even most content on the web is to "drive actions" (unless we count as content the word "Continue" written on a button on an e-commerce site).
Within a business context, it goes without saying that we need to be able to evaluate and justify the things we do in business terms. At the same time we need to make sure that we are comparing apples to apples. Content <> Content. Entries in an FAQ are not the same as product descriptions, which are not the same as user reviews or the instructions for submitting a review. Content needs to be judged against its stated purpose, not against the general purpose of "driving action."
What do you think?
Image courtesy of santheo.
Social Bookmarks