Wow, were really selfish readers. Talking with some folks the other day and they were expressing their frustrations with Twitter for that reason. They didn't care what others were doing every minute of the day, there wasn't anything in it for them.
Mark Dykeman
· 1 year ago
Most of the time I approach blog posts from the "what do I want to say today" point of view instead of what you describe. I'd say that your method works very well for evangelists, guides, educators, and pro/business bloggers who want to connect with their audience. For that matter, it could work well for anyone.
The only problem with that technique, for me on a personal level, is that I would feel like I was dumbing down the presentation of the material. The reality is that it's actually sticking closer to the inverted pyramid format used by reporters for generations: get the most important points out first, then provide additional information for those who want to keep reading. You're assuming that your audience doesn't have a lot of free time for reading (and many don't).
I can't see myself using this technique consistently, but I can see where it would work with certain types of posts that I write. Food for thought. Thanks.
Jay Moonah from Wild Apricot
· 1 year ago
Chris: On the one hand I think this is great, but on the other I do think there is room for what I'd call more "academic" thought.
I was thinking about this when I was putting my PAB presentation from this past weekend together. Part of my presentation was about Marshall McLuhan. Now McLuhan, I'd argue, was one of the great communications theorists of all time. He was also famously (and to some, maddeningly) UN-prescriptive. The reason? He, as he always stated, was an academic. It was not his job to tell you why what he said was important, or how it applied to your life. It was his job to tell you what he observed, and you could figure out if it matter to you, and how.
I think if you are blogging or presenting specifically and solely to provide actionable information for people, your advice is right on the money. But if you're blogging or presenting to share ideas that may or may not be actionable, or may inspire action days or even years after the audience absorbs the ideas (like McLuhan, or many other profs) I'd say it isn't always necessary to draw that straight line to what's in it for the audience.
Tamal Anwar
· 1 year ago
We bloggers should not be much more self centered. I usually tell my experiences and inspire my readers "how you can apply it too."
Sometimes I do get self centered, like "I've done this and I did that, bla, bla, bla and so on...." but I try to keep it balanced and this is how I blog!
Rowan Manahan
· 1 year ago
Hi Chris,
I start all of my dealings with the world on the basis of a 'Continental Shelf of Interest'. For the vast majority of human beings, as long as it's about them - they're highly interested. The SECOND it starts being about other people, you are off the continental shelf and down into the deep waters of couldn't-really-give-a-damn - and believe me when I say it's a really big drop-off.
When I keep that in mind in preparing talks or posts or working with clients, everything goes swimmingly well. The times I lose sight of that are the times I see blank faces staring back at me, or the tops of people's heads as they work away on their Blackberries.
The Continental Shelf, know it and respect it. Schoolboy geography - I knew it would come in useful some day!
jsloss
· 1 year ago
Hey Chris,
I think "Whats in it for me?" is the central question that any organization or person looking to build up a following or community or fan base, whatever descriptor they choose to use.
I recently read an article on American Apparel CEO Dov Charney in Fast Company. When asked about the choice to move away from marketing the brand as environmentally conscious and instead flaunt sexuality, he said
"You're not going to get customers walking into stores by asking them for mercy or gratitude, if you want to sell something ethical, appeal to their Self Interest."
Whats in it for them, that's the question I try to ask myself.
Thanks for the great thoughts Chris!
Brian Clark
· 1 year ago
Look, up in the sky, it's...
Copybrogan!
:-)
erwin blom
· 1 year ago
You're right when talking about a blog post. A presentation is different in my opinion. A presentation is first and foremost about presence. How does the person tell his story, does he make me want to listen. That's more about entertainment value than content. In the best cases they go together, but very often not. Entertain Me is more important than what do i learn.
Josh Klein
· 1 year ago
Absolutely, Chris. That's why it's so important to be clear about the value you're presenting upfront. It's the executive summary and the headline that grabs you by the collar.
Not just the presentation, but the substance too. The reason there is no need to get upset about the apparent selfishness of content consumers is that it isn't a simple zero-sum game. Where I gain value from consuming your content, you gain value from my consumption of it. Through this exchange, we literally manufacture value that did not previously exist. In sum, what's beautiful about the whole thing is that our "selfishness" slowly leads us collectively forward.
travis st.denis
· 1 year ago
while i can accept that from a certain standpoint, i don't think it is universal. for many, the blog is a form of expression, much like an artist's painting, a musician's song or a director's movie. depending on your blog's objectives, the audience's role is different. the blog as art (a stretch?) is simply an outlet for the author's creative energy. the audience is secondary to simply expressing themselves.
Lacy
· 1 year ago
I agree with this post to a certain extent. Personally, I read blogs in order to gain some insight, or become educated in some way. So technically yes, I think, "What's in it for me?" But more along the lines of, what can this person teach me? It seems a bit less selfish when you think of it like that.
All Comments
The only problem with that technique, for me on a personal level, is that I would feel like I was dumbing down the presentation of the material. The reality is that it's actually sticking closer to the inverted pyramid format used by reporters for generations: get the most important points out first, then provide additional information for those who want to keep reading. You're assuming that your audience doesn't have a lot of free time for reading (and many don't).
I can't see myself using this technique consistently, but I can see where it would work with certain types of posts that I write. Food for thought. Thanks.
I was thinking about this when I was putting my PAB presentation from this past weekend together. Part of my presentation was about Marshall McLuhan. Now McLuhan, I'd argue, was one of the great communications theorists of all time. He was also famously (and to some, maddeningly) UN-prescriptive. The reason? He, as he always stated, was an academic. It was not his job to tell you why what he said was important, or how it applied to your life. It was his job to tell you what he observed, and you could figure out if it matter to you, and how.
I think if you are blogging or presenting specifically and solely to provide actionable information for people, your advice is right on the money. But if you're blogging or presenting to share ideas that may or may not be actionable, or may inspire action days or even years after the audience absorbs the ideas (like McLuhan, or many other profs) I'd say it isn't always necessary to draw that straight line to what's in it for the audience.
I just let them to to the thing and explain the story just like I did here, 10 Qualities of a highly successful person - http://www.tamalanwar.com/2008/05/10-qualities-...
Sometimes I do get self centered, like "I've done this and I did that, bla, bla, bla and so on...." but I try to keep it balanced and this is how I blog!
I start all of my dealings with the world on the basis of a 'Continental Shelf of Interest'. For the vast majority of human beings, as long as it's about them - they're highly interested. The SECOND it starts being about other people, you are off the continental shelf and down into the deep waters of couldn't-really-give-a-damn - and believe me when I say it's a really big drop-off.
When I keep that in mind in preparing talks or posts or working with clients, everything goes swimmingly well. The times I lose sight of that are the times I see blank faces staring back at me, or the tops of people's heads as they work away on their Blackberries.
The Continental Shelf, know it and respect it. Schoolboy geography - I knew it would come in useful some day!
I think "Whats in it for me?" is the central question that any organization or person looking to build up a following or community or fan base, whatever descriptor they choose to use.
I recently read an article on American Apparel CEO Dov Charney in Fast Company. When asked about the choice to move away from marketing the brand as environmentally conscious and instead flaunt sexuality, he said
"You're not going to get customers walking into stores by asking them for mercy or gratitude, if you want to sell something ethical, appeal to their Self Interest."
Whats in it for them, that's the question I try to ask myself.
Thanks for the great thoughts Chris!
Copybrogan!
:-)
Not just the presentation, but the substance too. The reason there is no need to get upset about the apparent selfishness of content consumers is that it isn't a simple zero-sum game. Where I gain value from consuming your content, you gain value from my consumption of it. Through this exchange, we literally manufacture value that did not previously exist. In sum, what's beautiful about the whole thing is that our "selfishness" slowly leads us collectively forward.