In mid-December 2008 they ran a couple of articles/posts on what they referred to as “content strategy.” I wrote a couple of lengthy comments on both.

Step 1, Step 2…

The gist of  “The Discipline of Content Strategy” was that content always seems to go last in a website project and often the wrong person does it. And that the role of content strategist needs a clearer and more respected definition. I don’t disagree with any of that really. People involved in content “strategy” and creation deserve respect for their skills. But the post seemed to continue the current website creation practice of placing content after IA and design.

That I have a problem with. Website creation starts with the audience — who is the site for? Next is objective and goals — what defines success and what do you want the audience to know, do or feel after they visit the site. Next is the content that will carry the message to achieve the objective and goals. Only then can you execute a design. Otherwise you just have a bunch of shapes and colors arranged in a pleasing manner.

Another point made was that one person can’t know it all. I’d contend that if you don’t know enough about the different roles in the process then you can’t be effective. And that the Renaissance person is possible.

Hello, I am a Content Strategist

In the  “Content-ious Strategy” post the author described where content occurred in the process of a website execution. He even included a link to a cocktail napkin drawing showing where content strategy fit in the website design process. His main point I think was to describe who should be doing content strategy. He (rightly) determined that information architects, content analysts (library science specialists) and subject matter experts were not appropriate content strategists. And especially not project managers. So he created  a new role, content strategist.

Enough with the new roles already! Website creation professionals seem to think that nothing else is like website creation. And it often seems that IA, UX, UCD and now content strategy professionals have a kind of duality complex. They feel inferior because they never seem to get their due respect for the expertise they have. And they feel superior because their role in the creation process is most important. And they are all missing the point. It is a team effort. And every team member has a role that is vital to the success of the project.

Wheel Reinvention

Most of my comment referred to the successful model of film and video production. Nearly a century in the making, the model of producer, director, writer, cameraman, etc. has worked. But the website creation business, like the multimedia business before it, seems to feel that their business has no equivalent. I think that must be because of the roots in software development. The role that is really missing is that of producer. Project managers are not producers. They manage projects. Producers lead the creative team. They do the upfront analysis, define the initial content and creative vision, and then assemble the team of experts to execute it. I think the contention about content strategy is that so many people claim all or a piece of that producer-type role: account execs, PMs, IAs, user experience people, coders and now content strategists. Why not just create the role of Producer and be done with it? The ideal team for a website project, in my opinion, would be, in order of hierarchy: producer; creative director and writer; technical director; project manager, graphic artist; and coder.

I’m making the content of DoingMedia more accessible for the vision impaired. Rather than using a screen reader like JAWS they can click the “Listen Now” button to hear the posts read to them. It’s a computer generated voice but not bad. Anyone can listen so listen away!

Accessibility made sense for DoingMedia. Doing media is for everyone. I’ve also been involved with the Accessible Internet Rally in San Antonio for a couple of years. It’s a program run by Knowbility to promote accessible website creation. Accessible websites make it easier for people with visual, auditory and mobility impairments. Because the sites are built using web standard coding practices the side benefits are that the sites are more Google-friendly (Google is the largest deaf and blind web denizen) and they port to mobile devices more simply. Oh, and the market for disabled people is in the Trillions of dollars. Trillions. With a “T”.

Another bonus to my “Odiogo” implementation is that you can now subscribe to DoingMedia in iTunes! So drop us onto your iPod and listen while you drive or workout or just work. (Gee, guess I’ll have to come up with some motivating posts for the treadmill.) There is also an mp3 version available for all you Zune/Blackberry/etc. users.

This may be just the beginning of a publishing empire! DoingMedia Television! DoingMedia Apparel! DoingMedia NASCAR! DoingMedia Breakfast Cereal!  Where will it end?

Oh, excuse me.

“Who’s on the phone? Oh, tell Rupert I’ll call him back.”.

We publishing mavens have to stick together.

This quote is what got me:

“Marketers want to advertise next to content they can trust, so this frenzy of nonprofessional content generation is not likely to produce adequate monetary rewards. Advertisers continue to shy away from attaching their brands to unpredictable content.”

via eMarketer: User-Generated Content Difficult to Monetize.

Content that advertisers “can trust.” They’re kidding, right? Ad execs are right up there with lawyers and auto mechanics on the “Don’t Trust ‘em” continuum. So if an advertiser’s customer creates the content it isn’t trustworthy. If I say Brand X is great that’s bad for Brand X? And if I say Brand X is the scum of the earth then, well, that’s bad I guess. Maybe that’s what they mean by “unpredictable content.” If it goes your way it’s a benefit but if it goes against you then we can’t have that, can we?

Even if it’s true. Like “I almost died when I ate peanut butter.” True, but obviously bad.

The bottom line though is that traditional media and advertisers don’t know what to do. They’re faced with competition for message from these uncontrollable content creators. That can’t be fair.

Oh, wait. That’s like that freedom of the press thing, isn’t it? Only traditional media doesn’t own the presses anymore.

What a sunny day for people who communicate!

Of course!. Think about what a rich communications environment we would have!

Phillip is a very well respected and talented video professional and I hope his rhetorical question resonates in that community. It actually gets to the core of what we talk about here at DoingMedia.

ALL media production disciplines are necessary to fully communicate your messages. That includes video but also, audio, websites and blogs, even live (eww, PowerPoint) presentations.

The semiconductor chip has made all of this possible. The availability of cheap machines that enable sophisticated functionality allow anyone to be a video maven. Of course, that’s the risk. Anyone CAN create video (or other media) because so many people (the Digital natives) have never known a time without that ability. But there’s literacy and then there’s Literacy.

Knowing how to shoot a bunch of scenes of video and then assemble them into a persuasive piece of communication is a distinct skill set. Anyone can learn it and some have great talent in it.

The point really is having at least a passing understanding of the visual language. That will allow you to “write” at least basic pieces of video communication or, be able to talk to and explain your communications needs to one of the video “linguists”.

Let’s take that language metaphor one step further. Don’t assume that if you talk LOUDER that people will understand you. Talking louder here is the equivalent of shooting somthing quickly and throwing it together and calling it quality communication. Start with simple sentences (short, well planned clips) and then as you get more skilled expand them into longer paragraphs with richer vocabulary. And if time or skill set or priorities don’t allow go out and find a translator (a media professional) to help you out. You’ll get from Point A to Point B much faster and with much less misunderstanding.

These come from the June 2009 Larry Jordan newsletter who got them from Ric Viers, author of The Sound Effects Bible.

1. Thou Shalt Have a Pre-Roll and Post-Roll of Two Seconds on Each Recording.
2. Thou Shalt Record More Than You Need.
3. Thou Shalt Slate Every Take with as Much Information as Possible.
4. Thou Shalt Check Thy Levels Often.
5. Thou Shalt Listen to Thy Work by Always Wearing Headphones.
6. Thou Shalt Eliminate All Background Noise.
7. Thou Shalt Not Interrupt a Take.
8. Thou Shalt Point the Microphone at the Sound.
9. Thou Shalt Check Thy Equipment Before Going Into the Field.
10. Thou Shalt Remember the Copyright Laws to Keep Them Unbroken.

Many of these are actually good for any kind of production such as 1, 2, 3, 7, 9, and 10.