A while back, I worked on a project with someone who had a background in graphic design. The person had done a lot of layout jobs for magazines, websites, and online publications, and the project we were working on was somewhat similar. In planning what our layout would look like, she often used the word content:
What kind of content are you interested in running?
I think we really have some great content this time.
Can we get any more content?
And so on. I see similar echoes all over social media, where sites talk about running content, users absorb increasing amounts of content, and buzz surrounds people who are content creators.
And I’m fucking sick of it.
Content is a Catch-All That Describes Creative Work From a Marketing Standpoint
On the surface, content seems like a really useful term to describe different types of media, especially online. In the 21st century, people use their devices to watch videos, read books, listen to music, play video games, read articles, check out social media, listen to podcasts, and a whole bunch of other stuff I can’t think of right now. That’s a lot of different kinds of media, so it makes sense that people would use a word like content to encapsulate all of it.
The problem, though, is that people who need to talk about different kinds of media lumped together are often the ones who are marketing that media, or selling it, or at the very least, presenting it in a way that allows it to be more easily consumed. In this respect, different kinds of media that people actively enjoy is viewed as different kinds of content that’s only important for how it’s sold.
I started this post with the anecdote about my project partner who worked in graphic design, which was no accident. Many programmers and graphic designers talk about content in the sense that what’s really important to them is the design and logistics of whatever publication they’re working on—so content becomes whatever stuff get slotted into their design, regardless of what that content is. (WordPress, which I use for this blog, tosses around the term ridiculously often.)
I also hear content used in the context of media like YouTube videos, blog posts, website articles, podcasts, or social media posts that follow a set formula, are almost always nonfiction, and are easily consumed in large quantities. Using content to describe things like this seems to be a way of differentiating it from media that requires more creative thought or stands on its own: for example, a full-length feature drama vs. a John Oliver video on YouTube. The latter kind of content is more easily disposable, as opposed to the movie drama, which stands on its own and could be remembered for decades.
All of these examples place emphasis on the mechanisms surrounding content, rather than the books, videos, movies, music, podcasts, or games that people actually enjoy.
Talking About Content Devalues Creative Work
If content is merely about producing stuff to fill a marketing plan, design template, or sales quota, then how much value does the quality of the work matter when we talk about content?
Answer: Not very much.
Think about situations where people talk about the movies, music, books, or other things they really enjoy. Now replace these things with the word content:
How about going to the movies this weekend? There might be some good content playing.
Oh man, my favorite band has some new content coming out!
Have you read any good content lately?
What’s your favorite content?
Talking about movies, music, books, or anything else in this way makes it sound commercialized, mechanical, and not very enjoyable at all.
I don’t use the word content on this blog to describe things that creative people make: instead, I use the more general term creative work, or terms like books, music, or videos to describe more specific kinds of creative work. This not only matches the way we talk about these things in the real world, but places emphasis on the people doing the creating, rather than the act of selling or marketing these things—or treating them as disposable.
Being Overwhelmed By Content in the Attention Economy
One final thing I think about often is that in the age of the internet, when creating and sharing media is easier than at literally any other time in history, there’s also more media out there to read, watch, listen to, and play than ever before. This has given rise to the term attention economy to describe how small creators and big companies alike compete for consumers’ time.
Perhaps all of this content has an exhausting effect on us—so much so that it encourages us to reduce the more meaningful creative work we enjoy to an endless onslaught of content to be consumed.
This way of enjoying books, movies, video games, and music doesn’t sound very enjoyable to me. In fact, it sounds more like a chore, or even an addiction.
That’s not the kind of creative work I want to make.
Final Thoughts: Treat Your Creative Work With the Respect It Deserves
It makes sense for marketers, programmers, and designers to talk about content to fit the marketing plans, programs, and designs they’re primarily focused on—but if you’re reading this blog, you probably don’t belong in that category. Refer to your work in a way that shows that it matters: it’ll make you feel better, and help you focus on that work in a more genuine way.
The one exception might be people who make videos, podcasts, articles, or blog posts (like this one!) that are meant to be consumed and then never touched again, but that steer people toward the next item in a series. (Many YouTubers understand this intrinsically and do it very well.) This kind of content might well require tremendous amounts of creativity and passion, but it’s ultimately meant to be viewed as disposable and part of a greater body of work.
While there’s still value in this type of content, and while it also makes sense to distinguish this content from other, stand-alone types, people who make this kind of work can do themselves a favor by avoiding the term and instead using language that gives them more integrity as creators.