Content Shock: Myth or Reality?
By Staff | January 28, 2014
“Content shock” has been a hot topic in the content marketing space lately thanks to a recent post by blogger Mark Schaefer. Should the industry be worried?
In a recent post, top content marketer and blogger Mark Schaefer created quite a stir with a piece titled “Content Shock: Why content marketing is not a sustainable strategy.”
His assertion: We are on the brink of what he dubs “content shock”— the tipping point at which the volume of content being produced surpasses the human capacity to consume it. Content shock, he says, will soon drive the cost of content creation beyond the means of all but the biggest companies that have the deepest pockets. His conclusion: The current trajectory of content marketing is unsustainable.
And the debate was on. After more than 350 comments and loads of spin-off blogs, Schaefer took to his blog again this week to address many of the dissenting opinions brought forth throughout the weeks-long dialogue.
While Schaefer’s points made in both his original post and his follow-up post are insightful and worth consideration when developing and implementing a marketing strategy, we still aren’t sold on the idea that our future will be an inevitable struggle through content shock.
At the core of the matter, high-quality storytelling that resonates with readers, meets a need, and is targeted appropriately will always find an audience, and that audience will always become ambassadors of the content. Without a doubt, the content marketing landscape is a rapidly evolving space and brands will continue to need to rise above the rest. But one thing will likely remain the same…marketers should be investing in quality over quantity to ensure their connection to consumers, both now and in the future.
Check out Mark Schaefer’s argument for the inevitability of content shock, an interesting rebuttal by Shel Holtz, Six Reasons There Will Be No Content Shock, and Schaefer’s follow-up blog.
Read next: Content Marketing vs. Advertising: What’s the Difference, Again?
