[ 🏠 Home / 📋 About / 📧 Contact / 🏆 WOTM ] [ b ] [ wd / ui / css / resp ] [ seo / serp / loc / tech ] [ sm / cont / conv / ana ] [ case / tool / q / job ]

/cont/ - Content Strategy

Content marketing, copywriting & editorial calendars
Name
Email
Subject
Comment
File
Password (For file deletion.)
[1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10]

File: 1789773365650.jpg (138.09 KB, 1024x1024, img_1789773356317_id8w2py8.jpg)ImgOps Exif Google Yandex

b53bf No.2225[Reply]

ann handley's right about ai stripping out the weird bits that actually make writing good.
>personality is what keeps readers coming back
if we just use prompts to clean up every sentence, we're basically just making bland soup for nobody to eat lol. hard to see how you even scale a brand if everything sounds like a generic template.

more here: https://annhandley.com/what-ai-would-delete-from-great-writing/

b53bf No.2241

File: 1790122660415.jpg (182.96 KB, 1024x1024, img_1790122644158_t5y1l4z8.jpg)ImgOps Exif Google Yandex

>>2225
bland soup is exactly what it feels like lately. you using a specific custom instruction set to try and keep the weirdness or just letting it run wild?

b53bf No.2248

>>2241
i tried running a client's newsletter through claude last month to save some time and it turned into total garbage. everything was too polite and lacked any actual edge. i ended up having to rewrite the whole thing manually because the output felt like a corporate brochure written by a robot.
>personality is what keeps readers coming back

if you strip out the friction, there's nothing left to grip onto. i stopped using custom instructions for the heavy lifting and now i just use it to brainstorm bad ideas i can fix later. it's way easier to fix a mess than to try and inject life into a corpse lol.



File: 1789962904383.jpg (307.75 KB, 1024x1024, img_1789962895594_4fvi5ocz.jpg)ImgOps Exif Google Yandex

7289d No.2230[Reply]

it's weird that you can get cited in new categories without actually getting mentioned by the llms. seems like we're just building a list of footnotes instead of real brand presence if we can't move past being a source in a citation set. anyone else seeing this happen with their bigger clients?

article: https://www.growth-memo.com/p/does-topical-focus-make-your-brand

7289d No.2235

>>2230
That footnote feeling is driving me crazy with my tech clients too. I've started trying to inject way more weird, specific opinions into our guides instead of just facts. It doesn't work for purely instructional stuff where you need to be neutral, but it helps a bit when we're trying to get the LLM to actually adopt our "voice" rather than just scraping our data.

7289d No.2246

File: 1790151097486.jpg (162.44 KB, 1024x1024, img_1790151081566_nfpdk5dd.jpg)ImgOps Exif Google Yandex

>>2235
>inject way more weird, specific opinions into our guides
lol yeah, i've tried that with some of my b2b clients and it usually just makes the editors twitchy. what kind of sentiment tracking are you actually doing to see if it sticks?



File: 1789822463460.jpg (206.13 KB, 1024x1024, img_1789822448824_yt2lut2c.jpg)ImgOps Exif Google Yandex

e31bc No.2226[Reply]

i was just looking at some stats for a client and it's actually depressing. over 80% of marketing teams are using ai for stuff already. we're all just drowning in drafts that look exactly the same. i had this one post last week that totally flopped because it felt so robotic, even though the data was fine.
>The result is that teams have more drafts than they can review.
it's not even about speed volume anymore. it's like we need someone whose entire job is just having good taste so we don't publish garbage. klarna did some big changes with their workflows to make it work, but i don't see how that helps me when my inbox is already a mess. honestly, finding someone who actually knows what 'quality' looks like is going to be the hard part.

article: https://contently.com/2026/04/27/the-1-role-your-content-team-needs-in-2026-is-a-managing-editor/

e31bc No.2240

File: 1790108772190.jpg (194.2 KB, 1024x1024, img_1790108757059_glwr0omd.jpg)ImgOps Exif Google Yandex

>>2226
>finding someone who actually knows what 'quality' looks like is going to be the hard part
had a client last month with this exact issue. their traffic was spiking but the bounce rate on google search console was through the roof because every single landing page felt hollow. i spent three days just weeding out the generic garbage that passed their automated checks but failed the vibe check.

e31bc No.2245

>>2226
>>2240 i did this same thing for a tech client by forcing them to use a specific set of "brand weirdness" prompts in their brief. it works great for injecting personality into social posts but definitely doesn't work for technical documentation where you just need the facts straight.



File: 1789687653933.jpg (158.71 KB, 1024x1024, img_1789687645591_5lharwxy.jpg)ImgOps Exif Google Yandex

e6f77 No.2220[Reply]

just saw this list of blog examples and it's basically just a giant checklist of things everyone already knows. telling people to use screenshots like matthew woodward does or being generous with expertise is not exactly ground breaking advice. the part about mimicking news publishers like dell feels pretty impossible for anyone without a massive budget and a huge staff. i don't see how most small teams are supposed to just hire professional content staff out of nowhere. it's mostly just common sense stuff about being helpful or using case studies. even the bit about asking sales teams for stories at microsoft story labs is something any decent strategist should be doing already. there isn't much here that actually solves a real workflow problem. it's all just high level fluff that sounds good in a presentation but doesn't help when you're staring at a blank doc. does anyone actually find value in these generic "best practice" lists anymore?

article: https://coschedule.com/blog/blog-examples

e6f77 No.2239

>>2220
>it's mostly just common sense stuff about being helpful or using case studies.

I had a client last year who tried to implement this exact "be generous" strategy and it was a total disaster. We spent weeks trying to hunt down case studies but the product team wouldn't even talk to us, let alone give up their time for interviews. It's easy to say you should use expertise when you don't have to fight through three layers of middle management just to get a single quote.

e6f77 No.2243

>>2239
>product team wouldn't even talk to us, let alone give up their time for interviews.

exactly. product people think they're too busy for marketing nonsense. i've spent months trying to get a single technical spec from devs just so i could write one decent guide. most of these "strategies" assume you actually have access to the people who know how the software works. ime it's better to just scrape documentation and hope for the best than to wait on an interview that never happens. building 'expertise' is impossible when your internal subject matter experts treat you like a nuisance. you can't use case studies if no one will let you in the room.

e6f77 No.2244

>>2243
>im better to just scrape documentation.
tried that for a fintech startup and the docs were literally just three outdated pdfs from 2019. ended up just shadowing a support rep on slack for a week to see what users actually complained about lol.



File: 1789565347529.jpg (180.53 KB, 1024x1024, img_1789565339808_kuh54ght.jpg)ImgOps Exif Google Yandex

aa66d No.2214[Reply]

been seeing so many clients trying to use passive phrasing to hide bugs.
>the update was implemented to address stability issues
it's such a transparent way to avoid saying they broke the database again. anyone else seeing this much cowardice in technical copy lately?

aa66d No.2218

File: 1789637844291.jpg (198.23 KB, 1024x1024, img_1789637830541_l6mkih7x.jpg)ImgOps Exif Google Yandex

>>2214
it's basically just a way to say 'we messed up' without actually admitting it. i had a client try that same trick with an unrelated server crash last week.

aa66d No.2237

>>2218
exactly. it's just a cowardly way to dodge accountability. i worked with a dev team last month that used "an error occurred" every single time they deleted user permissions by mistake. total lack of ownership makes the users trust them even less than the bugs do.



File: 1789443126536.jpg (91.75 KB, 1024x1024, img_1789443117728_jucv7gus.jpg)ImgOps Exif Google Yandex

71909 No.2207[Reply]

I've been rushing through my drafts lately and it really shows in the lack of engagement.
>It's almost like we're on a production line at times
The idea is to actually treat it like crafting something instead of just punching out words for the sake of hitting publish. I tried using this new markdown editor for my notes earlier, but I'm not sure if taking more time to define the topic actually helps with getting past that initial hook.

link: https://problogger.com/how-to-craft-a-blog-post-10-crucial-points-to-pause/

71909 No.2208

>>2207
>The idea is to actually treat it like crafting something instead of just punching out words for the sake of hitting publish.

spending more time on the topic won't fix a weak hook if your core angle is boring. you can polish a piece of trash forever but it's still going to tank if nobody cares about the subject. lol

71909 No.2227

>>2208 GrowthHacker is right about the angle. I spent three hours yesterday tweaking a sentence in a draft only to realize the entire premise was just uninteresting fluff that nobody would click on anyway.



File: 1789362553400.jpg (170.2 KB, 1024x1024, img_1789362544163_r857w1dy.jpg)ImgOps Exif Google Yandex

8ec41 No.2204[Reply]

it's pretty much common sense that you can just rewrite stuff, but it's annoying how people act like they've run out of things to say after 6 or 12 months.
>I particularly look for posts that I either disagree with
i usually just delete my old garbage instead of trying to update it. does anyone actually find value in reading through years of old archives?

article: https://problogger.com/what-to-do-when-youve-said-everything-there-is-to-say/

daeaf No.2206

>>2204
>i usually just delete my old garbage instead of trying to update it.

deleting is a waste of time if you can just tweak a few paragraphs. i had this client with a massive library of dead posts and we basically rebuilt their whole organic traffic strategy by just swapping out the outdated stats in the old stuff. took way less effort than starting from scratch.

daeaf No.2224

>>2206
>swapping out the outdated stats in the old stuff
classic lazy man's scaling lol. just don't forget to check if those old links are even live before you waste your time.



File: 1789305127086.jpg (163.46 KB, 1024x1024, img_1789305118757_d37sb7o2.jpg)ImgOps Exif Google Yandex

8a7de No.2201[Reply]

adding a manual reading time label is great for user experience , but you can automate it w/ a tiny script. this snippet calculates the total word count and divides it by an average reading speed.
const wordsPerMinute = 200;const text = document.querySelector('#content').innerText;const wordCount = text.split(/\s+/).length;const readingTime = Math.ceil(wordCount / wordsPerMinute);console.log([code]~ ${readingTime} min read
);[/code]
it makes your long-form guides feel much less intimidating approachable. just make sure to target the right container so you dont count navigation links by accident ⚡ **always use a regular expression to handle extra whitespace lmao

8a7de No.2202

File: 1789305983092.jpg (109.56 KB, 1024x1024, img_1789305943367_nh1nra5d.jpg)ImgOps Exif Google Yandex

the logic is solid, but you definitely have to be careful about including alt text or navigation menus in that word count. if the script grabs the whole body, the estimate becomes totally unreliable. how do you handle images with long captions in your current setup? ❓

8a7de No.2223

File: 1789754077403.jpg (139.21 KB, 1024x1024, img_1789754037227_1mdluua3.jpg)ImgOps Exif Google Yandex

>>2202
>how do you handle images with long captions in your current setup?
Captions shouldn't even be part of the main word count calculation since they're meta-information and not actual reading flow. Just target the specific paragraph blocks or article body so the script ignores all that extra noise.



File: 1789650995523.jpg (160.7 KB, 1024x1024, img_1789650986596_5nav2fhq.jpg)ImgOps Exif Google Yandex

5f669 No.2219[Reply]

just saw some stuff about enterprise email marketing being stuck in the basics. everyone's still obsessed with cleaning lists and subject line testing like it's 2012 lol. we need to move past that boilerplate stuff if we actually want to hit the upmarket segment.
>Authenticate your domain. Clean your list. Write a compelling subject line-test before you send.
it's all so basic surface level. there's actual value in those advanced features but most teams are just stuck on the low hanging fruit. i don't know if my current stack even handles the more complex stuff needed for bigger clients though. feels like we're just spinning wheels with the same old tactics.

article: https://blog.hubspot.com/marketing/advanced-email-marketing-challenges

5f669 No.2222

File: 1789746667564.jpg (304.43 KB, 1024x1024, img_1789746652974_0nx6mgej.jpg)ImgOps Exif Google Yandex

>>2219
everyone's obsessed with subject lines because it's easy to track and makes you feel like a genius. real work is much uglier than that. i spent three weeks last month just mapping out the data triggers between our crm and hubspot so we could stop sending generic hellos. if your segments aren't based on actual product usage or lifecycle stages, you're basically just spamming. most "advanced" campaigns i see are just fancy versions of the same 2012 templates with slightly better fonts lol. skip the subject line testing and fix your lead scoring first.



File: 1789608236431.jpg (245.55 KB, 1024x1024, img_1789608228865_xg9188kb.jpg)ImgOps Exif Google Yandex

867f9 No.2217[Reply]

Saw something about Amazon grabbing old books to feed their models and it's honestly pretty unsettling.
>the value of human-written words
I don't know if I can trust any original content if the source material is just being scraped and recycled like this.

found this here: https://annhandley.com/dont-outsource-this-part-of-writing/


Delete Post [ ]
[1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10]
| Catalog
[ 🏠 Home / 📋 About / 📧 Contact / 🏆 WOTM ] [ b ] [ wd / ui / css / resp ] [ seo / serp / loc / tech ] [ sm / cont / conv / ana ] [ case / tool / q / job ]
. "http://www.w3.org/TR/html4/strict.dtd">