For some it might be debatable whether it is that Content is king or actually your site visitors. At WordCamp Chicago, Amanda Blum mentioned during her speech that content was not king, but it is the visitors that fill that role – specifically, “Relationships are king”.
I disagree. Why?
You start a website. You create your articles and pages full of information. You then take that information and put it out on the social network sites.
The Scenario
Now, say you do not have a Twitter or Facebook, or even Youtube account (for those who like to video blog)… and you do not belong to any communities? Okay, I will give this scenario a little hope. You have have optimized your information on your post and pages for the search engines.
Unless someone actually puts the keywords you optimized in your pages in the search field, you might have a chance of getting traffic. Just because you optimized your site for search engines does not always mean you will be listed toward the top positions. You are fighting with hundreds of thousands of others in your niche.
So, your content is king because that is what comes first. Your visitors are the queen. And no, I am not saying the men visiting are queens… it is merely a role. Let us face it – the King and Queen work well together. The Queen shares their opinion and the King might change their outlook because they got feedback and because frankly, the King sometimes does not enjoy being put on the couch.
Visitors are important. Comments are Important. That is why this site thrives. However, why do you come here? You come because you are curious on what you might read and be able to engage in conversation, right? That is my reason. It is also a reason I would completely leave a site and never return.
What are your thoughts on this?
heyo…. i think its possible you misunderstood me. at the very least, misquoted me:) I say this a lot:
"content isn't king, [i]relationships[/i] are king."
my premise is this and it fits your argument. The platforms are always going to change. Today, its WP and Facebook and Twitter. 10 years ago it was newsletters, email and magazines. In a year, who knows what it will be. Point is, content sticks, relationships move.
Now, if the person in your example HAD relationships, then they wouldn't need to use SEO tricks to bring in viewers. Viewers who come via SEO simply aren't as valuable as viewers who come from more organic ways like recommendations, etc.
But sure…. lets say you're going to value content over relationships and the character of the content itself…. its about gaming the system and getting eyes on the page. You write content for the engines and the viewers funnel to your site, and then……….. what happens?
<<<<boing>>>>>
Again. if you create GOOD content and cultivate relationships then people will want to interact with you, regardless of where you go … they'll endorse new offerings and platforms. it's one of those "if you build it, they will come". If you game the system to get people's eyes on your site, the same methods that brought them there will prevent them from getting engaged with the content and sticking with you.
I'm not saying you should ignore SEO, but it should never come before good content. And… this is all purely my opinion, subjective, and open to vast interpretation. Either way, enjoyed talking to you after the sesh.
Added specifically “Relationships are king”
The problem is even before I had Twitter and FB, I was in forums and communities. I did not worry about SEO when I first started off. I already had great traffic because of what I wrote and how I engaged in conversation with others.
But, I have been blogging for a LONG time throughout several sites until I settled here. I replied to my visitors and returned comments. On the other side of the coin: I saw others in the community who jumped on board and became comment whores. They wrote interesting content, but never engaged… and eventually burned out and now write once in a while. They do not even social network. They still get some comments, but they really are nothing like they use to be in value or how many.
When I write something, I write when I want, which is quite frequently. Then I share it. A lot of times I will go and visit my long time blog friends because… well, we already regularly visit each other and have a lot. The social networking is for that outer circle that Jim Turner mentioned toward the end.
I think of it like a marriage… Content & Relationships. They have a dynamic relationship. For example, in Chess, the Queen is a unique character that has some control over the king and has more flexibility on where to go and what can be done. And a lot of times is the deciding factor on who wins in the game. The King is a bit stiff and has a limit to where it can be.
While I see your point, I do not totally agree with it because of how things have been changing with sites. I do believe relationships are important, but it also depends on the type of site.
Or, in outside blogging:
You walk in the mall and see many stores. (Stores having a lot of items – content.) You walk in, look, but nothing is interesting… you walk out and go to the next right? However, if you see something, you might even be willing to engage in conversation with the store owner or even employee. Most likely your conversation will start about their products and services that you saw.
If you walk into the mall and are presented with many stores, you will walk towards the one where you know the owner, or really like the girl who works there, etc because you trust them. once there, if there isn't good content, you'll bounce and go someplace else. It is, infact, why many people choose restaurants, etc. The food must be good, location decent, etc. But by in large, its because bad service sends you elsewhere.
I get the idea of this. After reading Amanda's response, I see both, but this is something I've come to see a lot of social media consultants have to agree content is king with websites. Social networking can go with or without, but I'm like you, I'll read and decide if I want to hop into the conversation. Or I'll just leave because there wasn't anything new or worth it.
I come for the content too. The conversation is just a perk!
A never ending debate. For me, content is the final determinant and marketing (which is related to traffic) is the biggest helper as I write in my one of my blogpost — the one that I link in comluv link below.
My recent post American Idol 2010 Final 3 Answers The Biggest Blogging Question
This is an interesting conversation and I'm glad I came by. I came because I like the blogger, I stayed because of the content. So, I understand both arguments. And the fact that I am commenting almost two months later on the content is proof that content is king. Even if I didn't have a relationship the blogger, the content kept my attention.
I totally agree with you. When I started my website and it is still new, the first posts I published were rubish. Now if I don’t like the post I don’t publish it. I have to like it first. Then I believe the readers will like it also.
Cheers
Hi Nile, I agree with your point. What good is quality content if no one sees it? What good is traffic if the content is of low quality and then the traffic bounces? The quality content is just one piece of the puzzle. The traffic is another piece of the same puzzle. If one is missing… Got my point, right? None of them is better than the other, they have to work together 😉