Too short for a blog post, too interesting to ignore, here are a few snippets on what I’ve been thinking about lately.

Content creator angst

I am finding it harder and harder to post on social media. I feel like it has become a performance. People are trying to out-vulnerable each other.

I just want to do good work. Spending one second of my life editing a Reel seems like a waste of a second that will never come back.

Perhaps this is why I like writing. Create. Let it sit. Make it sing. And it doesn’t disappear.

There’s no schtick to it.

Content you can create in your underwear. Now that’s livin’.

Content creator angst part deux

My friends and colleagues are constantly debating any system tweak that pleases the LinkedIn algorithm. The major theme is to post stuff that generates comments. LinkedIn wants conversations.

I generally do not write for comments, but sometimes I stumble into it.

A few weeks ago, I posted a photo of myself sleeping on a bench in the Amsterdam airport after canceled flights and a hotel foul-up. It received more than 82,000 views.

The following week, I posted a helpful, original article reflecting on Peter Drucker’s unique wisdom and how his “five questions” remain relevant to marketing today. This post, which took about four hours to write, received 2,000 views, or about 3% of the airport post.

This suggests that the key to engagement on LinkedIn is goofy personal photos. But before you follow this path of least resistance, keep asking yourself — for LinkedIn and ALL social media activity — “to what end?”

Engagement is largely a vanity metric. You can engage yourself broke. Marketing is about creating customers.

It’s all about the feeling

New research shows that 42% of teens say that talking about their feelings is important to them, and brands are responding. McDonald’s new “Draw How You Feel” Happy Meal boxes trade the classic red for a blank canvas. This ties into a broader trend of experiential and wellness-driven packaging.

Built around the finding that 85% of teenage girls aren’t meeting recommended physical activity guidelines, Nike and Spotify launched Make Moves to encourage girls to move to just one song a day, using music to make physical activity more joyful and emotionally accessible. A UK pilot with 700 girls showed a 20% improvement in confidence and a 19% decrease in regular feelings of anxiety.

Experiential marketing is such a huge opportunity and is largely overlooked.

More about experiences

My new book, How AI Changes Your Customers, details six ways AI is rewiring human psychology.

Chief among these is cognitive offloading, addiction, and a trend to form trusting emotional connections with chatbots.

But pay attention to the news. There’s a backlash trend emerging.

Young people are rediscovering the joy of gathering. I’ve recently seen articles about young people watching movies together, listening to vinyl albums straight through at parties, and a surge in the popularity of board games:

How can your company help bring people together like this and be part of this trend?

Keeping pace with AI

The AI world is changing so rapidly. I think there are three key strategies to keep up:

1. Schedule time to dabble every day. Most platforms have a free or trial version. Push the envelope and experiment.
2. Subscribe to at least one podcast, newsletter, or video series commenting on the latest updates and releases. I really love the Artificial Intelligence podcast hosted by Paul Roetzer.
3. Join a community of like-minded people who are experimenting and can teach you by association. One option for marketers is RISE. You can’t stay relevant on your own.

We need to find new channels

Here’s another reason why looking at alternatives like experiential marketing and word-of-mouth makes sense: Social media use appears to be in decline. A roud-up of research I’ve seen:

• A 2025 Deloitte consumer trends survey of more than 4,000 Brits found that nearly a quarter of all consumers had deleted a social media app in the previous 12 months (inclund one-third of Gen Z)
• Social media use has steadily declined since time spent on the platforms peaked in 2022, according to an analysis of the online habits of 250,000 adults in more than 50 countries by the Financial Times and digital audience insights firm GWI. Globally, adults 16 and over spent an average of two hours and 20 minutes per day on social platforms by the end of 2024, down almost 10% since 2022. The decline was particularly pronounced among teens and 20-somethings…
• Young people who are deleting their social media platforms cite the increasing pressures of being online as well as damage to their mental health as causes. Deloitte’s consumer survey found that nearly a quarter of respondents who deleted social apps reported that these apps had negatively affected their mental health and consumed too much of their time.

Implementing AI in your company

Long ago, I led a Fortune 100 company into the digital age.

The marketing world faced the same distractions — lots of sexy opportunities to make a splash on social media, with easy-to-measure “Likes.”

I was more successful than almost any competitor in my space by staying strictly focused on one thing: Digital applications that could directly make us money or save us money.

And, like today, measurement with absolute attribution was difficult. But you know what great managers pay attention to?” Stories, like “hey, a customer just raved about how easy it is to do business with our new eCommerce system.”

I think this is still an effective implementation playbook: 1) Focus tightly on making money and saving money instead of vanity metrics; 2) Look for qualitative measures like comments and stories as a success indicator, at least at first.

Thanks for reading along with me today. I never take you for granted!

Need a keynote speaker? Mark Schaefer is the most trusted voice in marketing. Your conference guests will buzz about his insights long after your event! Mark is the author of some of the world’s bestselling marketing books, a college educator, and an advisor to many of the world’s largest brands. Contact Mark to have him bring a fun, meaningful, and memorable presentation to your company event or conference.

Follow Mark on Twitter, LinkedIn, YouTube, and Instagram

Illustration courtesy MidJourney

The post Content creator angst: You can engage yourself broke. appeared first on Schaefer Marketing Solutions: We Help Businesses {grow}.

My career has a clear dividing line.

For most of my professional life, I was a marketing executive with a Fortune 100 company. To drive the stock price, we needed to make great products and continuously innovate. In my marketing role, I created more customers so we could ship more stuff, more often, at higher prices.

Act 2 (the dividing line) started when I launched my own company about 17 years ago. Most of my income now derives from earning the attention of an audience through blog posts, podcasts, keynote speeches, and books. This is the promise of the creator economy. Anyone can monetize attention, and I’ve taken full advantage of that opportunity.

But the days of the attention economy are coming to a close, and we need to embrace a new mindset to succeed in the AI Era.

Let’s dig in.

From attention to intimacy

The term “attention economy” is widely attributed to Herbert A. Simon, the Nobel Prize–winning economist and cognitive psychologist.

In a 1971 paper titled “Designing Organizations for an Information-Rich World,” Simon wrote:

“In an information-rich world, the wealth of information means a dearth of something else: a scarcity of whatever it is that information consumes. Hence a wealth of information creates a poverty of attention.”

Blogging pioneers like Chris Brogan, Julien Smith, and Gary Vaynerchuk codified this radical business model: Give away all your best ideas. If you earn attention, the money will come.

This became the foundation of the modern content marketing movement. In 2006, “Inbound Marketing” was coined by Hubspot founders Brian Halligan and Dharmesh Shah. The strategy: Overwhelm a niche with relevant content, and it’s game over for competitors.

In 2014, I characterized the downside of this new dynamic as Content Shock — once a niche becomes saturated, the cost of winning a content arms race forces some companies to drop out. Content becomes commoditized.

Here we are in the AI Era. The cost of creating excellent content is near zero, or heading that way. The attention economy model, which drove so much success, is nearly obsolete. Marketers are battling:

1. Fragmentation of media channels
2. Ability to massively scale custom content through AI
3. Lack of competitive content “moats” — everything is easy to copy and steal
4. Heightened competition due to low (or no) entry barriers
5. Diminished importance of SEO due to AI and knowledge panels

The cumulative pressure is so severe that even Joe Pulizzi, the “godfather of content marketing,” declared:

“Most creators who build audiences that monetize generally take between 18 and 36 months. We may not have that kind of time. The major platforms are bending more to synthetic content (of course, they are and will). Synthetic creators (AI’s) are booming and will continue to boom where they will outcreate humans at an unfathomable rate. It will simply be near impossible (not impossible) for a new creator to break through and build momentum in 2-3 years (I think).

“Synthetic content is going to move from slop to amazing in a very short period of time.And then, our devices will begin to create content on demand for us … original stuff (well, from the LLMs original) that will be like magic. No creator needed for that stuff.

“But we have the now. And right now that hasn’t happened yet. And right now businesses need to be leveraging their employees as creators and building their own personal brands because now it’s possible.”

Human content will survive and thrive. But we’ll need to re-focus and tap into something new: intimacy.

The intimacy economy

I was in conversation with my brilliant friend Mitch Joel when we first tossed around this idea. When everyone is chasing attention, perhaps the future is intimacy.

“I care less about what everyone else is obsessed with and more about what deepens what I already care about,” he said. “It’s about how deeply one message can land… and where it leads me next. Content that moves from viral reach to emotional proximity.”

There is a word for that type of intimate content: Art.

No matter what happens in the world of AI, art will persist.

I will always love the human creator named Bruce Springsteen. An AI song that sounds like Springsteen might be a curiosity, but I will only pay my money to see The Boss, not a bot pretending to be Bruce.

I have an emotional connection to the way Bruce’s songs interpret the intimate human experience. Our content must do the same. It will have to be intimate. It will have to be vulnerable. And that takes courage, especially if you work for a company that is still focused on battles over keywords.

Anyone, or anything, can earn attention. AI created an oil painting that sold for over $1 million, won writing contests, and mimicked the works of our greatest musicians. Tragically, organizations are creating rage farms that industrialize attention.

But intimacy … humans can always win that game.

The imperative for art

The idea that corporate content must approach the level of art is probably uncomfortable. Maybe this post is the first declaration of this new reality.

But take a hard look at our world. What choice do you have?

If you’re competent, you’re vulnerable. AI is more than competent, and it will overwhelm you. Worse, if you’re merely competent, you’re ignorable — the worst marketing sin.

But as the world moves inexorably toward AI slop, real, raw, vulnerable human stories will be a luxury.

I don’t see AI as a competitor. The world is already overrun with content. What does it matter if I have a million competitors or a billion? I’m never going to win at SEO.

But I can win with intimacy. I can earn your trust and love, just like Bruce Springsteen. He’s real, he’s honest, and he gives his all. When I publish content for you, there is only one sentence pounding in my brain: “I will never let you down.”

I was interviewed on a podcast this week, and the host — with emotion in her voice — said, “We’ve never met, but I feel like I know you as a friend. I’ve read your content for so long.”

I doubt she will ever gush those words to an AI bot. I have achieved intimacy with her. I am part of the fabric of her life. I am her trusted friend.

Every post I write carries a badge that says “100% Human Content.” It’s my pledge to you that this is me. I am here. You can count on me. And isn’t that rare? Isn’t that the assurance we all want in this world?

Now, how are you going to achieve that intimacy for your business?

Need a keynote speaker? Mark Schaefer is the most trusted voice in marketing. Your conference guests will buzz about his insights long after your event! Mark is the author of some of the world’s bestselling marketing books, a college educator, and an advisor to many of the world’s largest brands. Contact Mark to have him bring a fun, meaningful, and memorable presentation to your company event or conference.

Follow Mark on Twitter, LinkedIn, YouTube, and Instagram

Illustration courtesy Mid Journey

The post Your Content Marketing Survival Plan: Abandon the Attention Economy appeared first on Schaefer Marketing Solutions: We Help Businesses {grow}.

I’ve been blogging for 16 years, giving away all my best ideas and advice. I am continually re-evaluating my strategy and have spent time thinking about monetizing my writing by moving to a subscription model on Substack. What I concluded might surprise you and perhaps guide your own monetization strategy.

Today I’ll cover:

• My current content monetization strategy
• A high-level view of Medium versus Substack
• My in-depth analysis of the risks and opportunities with Substack
• A final conclusion

Allow me to share a little story about how blogging drives my business.

The inbound marketing model

A few years ago, I received this email:

“Hi Mark. I’ve been reading your blog for three years and have become a real fan. I purchased your latest book and wanted to let you know it is one of the best business books I’ve read in the last 10 years. Just thought it was time to tell you how much I appreciate your work.”

It was signed by the CMO of a Fortune 100 company.

Two years later, he hired me to help organize a new content marketing department. I didn’t bid on the job. He just hired me becuase he grew to know me and trust me through my content.

Let’s break this down and reveal the classic “inbound” marketing strategy:

1. This person discovered my content and subscribed. I didn’t pay anything for this connection. It was organic, driven by the helpful content I freely put into the world.
2. After reading my content for several years, a trusting relationship developed. It was one-way, of course, but he grew to trust me entirely through the blog content.
3. Three years into this relationship, he bought a book, his first purchase from me.
4. Five years after he subscribed to the blog, he hired me for my most profitable assignment of the year.

And this is the way the world has worked for me, over and over again.

I’ve never made any money directly from my blog content — no ads, paid links, or sponsored posts. But when people trust my content, they hire me for speeches, workshops, and consulting. They’ll buy my books, purchase a consulting hour, or come to my Uprising retreat.

I’ve had a successful, profitable career by giving away content for free.

But many people are earning significant income on Substack. As I move to a slower pace of life, is it time for me to monetize my content directly and charge for it?

Substack versus Medium

There are many ways to monetize content directly, but the two big ones are Medium and Substack.

So far, my strategy has been to publish content on my website and then publish for free on both of these sites. Since both platforms have millions of subscribers, this allows my content to reach new audiences. For example, I have more than 45,000 followers on Medium. Medium articles also tend to rank well on Google.

Medium has another advantage — you’re paid by the number of people who read your content. By simply re-publishing a blog post on Medium, I average a modest $250/month, which is better than the imaginary benefit of Likes and retweets. And, there was an unforgettable month I made $10,000 on Medium. It’s like hitting that one great golf shot. It could happen again, right?

High-earning posts result from a Medium “boost” that floats your article beyond your audience so many more people read it. When does Medium boost? Who knows. It’s unpredictable and frustrating.

Substack has a smaller user base compared to Medium, but offers a business model with a more reliable income stream. People pay for your content through a subscription, and as long as you provide value, the income flows. You’re in charge of your revenue potential by growing your paid audience rather than relying on an algorithmic  Medium boost.

I currently publish for free on Substack — why not? I’ve attracted far fewer followers there compared to Medium … less than 1,000. And I’ve never made a dime there because to succeed, you must commit to a subscription model and refrain from publishing anywhere else. Many people are making a healthy living on Substack. Is it time for me to finally have a reliable income stream directly from my content?

The Substack life

Focusing on Substack as an income stream would require major changes:

• I’d have to create at least one in-depth post per week, and maybe more (I can do that).
• I would stop publishing original blog content on my own website.
• I’d have to develop and grow a Substack community with bonus events and content to add value.
• I would have to move my current blog/Medium audience to a paid subscription on Substack.

While I can commit to creating great content every week, the other changes represent significant risks. Let’s look at each one.

1. The end of the content on my site

As I researched this opportunity, I looked at the websites of Substack stars. If you click “blog,” you’ll find a link to Substack. There is no web-based blog any more.

There is a serious functional implication to this. Without regular, fresh content on my site, my SEO/AI signals dry up. My website isn’t just a blog; it’s a legacy media asset. It’s a lead generation machine.

If the site goes dormant, I lose:

• Authority signals

• Fresh content triggers

• Long-tail organic reach

• Visibility when AI search dominance arrives

That is just too much to lose. The sensible option would be to create two different posts for my site and for Substack. Double the work? No thanks.

2. Moving my audience to Substack

How many of my free blog readers will pay for Substack content? The research shows it will be 5% or less.

But those “free” readers have fueled my entire business model.

• Book sales

• Speaking leads

• Personal branding classes

• Media invitations

• Uprising retreat attendees

• Word-of-mouth leads

The average annual subscription price on Substack is $96. Assuming that 5% of my subscribers move, it’s probably not worth the financial risk.

And there’s another consideration. What if Substack goes out of business?

3. Building a community

The most successful Substack pros fully leverage the platform’s ability to create community through commenting, special events, and exclusive livestreams.

This would be a major benefit of Substack. But I already have a community called RISE. I’ve poured my heart and soul into that community, and I love the people there. I don’t have the need or bandwidth to duplicate that effort.

So a Substack community has no appeal or financial benefit.

The overarching goal

In summary, I certainly have an opportunity to monetize through Substack, but the risk of losing my SEO value and large audience overwhelms the benefits.

In the end, it comes down to my goals at this stage in my life. Money is less important than it was ten years ago. I want my ideas to spread. I want to help and teach. I want to find interesting projects that challenge me and connect me to cool people. I want to maintain a healthy and profitable speaking career.

A regular Substack income jeopardizes:

• SEO discovery for my website
• Serendipity (that random CMO, journalist, or CEO finding me)
• Long-tail inbound traffic
• A large, loyal audience

Monetizing content directly could actually shrink my economic surface area.

At this point in my life, a wide audience and the highest level of discoverability outweigh the potential of a steady income. I’ll stay the course and monetize through the indirect method.

Drop me a line and let me know if you’ve come up with a different strategy for your content.

Need an inspiring keynote speaker? Mark Schaefer is the most trusted voice in marketing. Your conference guests will buzz about his insights long after your event! Mark is the author of some of the world’s bestselling marketing books, a college educator, and an advisor to many of the world’s largest brands. Contact Mark to have him bring a fun, meaningful, and memorable presentation to your company event or conference.

Follow Mark on Twitter, LinkedIn, YouTube, and Instagram

Illustration courtesy MidJourney

The post Is it time to monetize your audience through Substack? appeared first on Schaefer Marketing Solutions: We Help Businesses {grow}.

For more than 15 years, I’ve studied and written about “rising above the noise” — how a business or individual can be seen, heard, and discovered amid the overwhelming wall of content competition.

Since I wrote about Content Shock more than 10 years ago, the total number of hours each day that consumers spend watching, listening to, reading, and interacting with content has barely grown. At the same time, technological innovations in production and distribution, the rise of user-generated content, and the proliferation of premium content have created a dizzying array of new choices.

This is Content Shock on steroids. There are 50 times more amateur uploaders than professionals on Spotify, 25,000 times more hours of content produced last year on YouTube than on all traditional television networks and video streaming services, and AI has flood the zone and is now the dominant source of web content.

So you can imagine my excitement when I discovered a new McKinsey Research report that offers an important new clue about how content actually cuts through effectively.

The breakthrough idea in this report is that most businesses focus on the time spent on content and the size of their audience. This overlooks a more important issue: the quality of time spent.

Not all consumer attention is created equal. Consumption and monetization vary widely across the content marketing spectrum, and the quality of the attention is the reason for that variability.

Let’s dive into this today and learn about how to measure and optimize the quality of attention on your content.

The drivers of attention value

Backed by an in-depth survey of 7,000 consumers worldwide, McKinsey developed an “attention equation” that reveals the full drivers of attention value. Attention doesn’t simply equal the amount of time spent; it equals the amount of valuable time spent, driven by focus and intent. 

Using a new equation, McKinsey measured the value of consumer attention across 20 media channels. Not all content types are created alike. The value of an hour of consumption ranged from:

$33 per hour for live sports,

$17 per hour for live concerts

$7.18 for movies

$0.37 for books

$0.25 for social media posts

$0.12 per hour for digital music

$0.05 for podcasts

This is common sense. If you’re attending a live sports event or a concert,  you’ve paid a lot of money for that “content.” You’re committed!

But looking at the “lower tier” of content we usually produce — social media posts and podcasts — there’s a massive difference McKinsey describes as an “attention quotient.”

The attention quotient consists of two primary components: 1) consumers’ level of focus, or how actively they’re engaged with the content, and 2) the job to be done, or why they are consuming the content. Taken together, these components have significant predictive power on monetization.

Let’s look at these two factors — level of focus and the job to be done — more carefully to see how this might work in practice in our own companies.

Level of focus

McKinsey’s research revealed several insights about where and how consumer focus differs across media:

• In-person experiences elicit the highest level of focus.
• Books (digital and physical) engage audiences to a comparable degree with live experiences
• Console and PC gaming is the only digital medium that gets close to live levels of focus
• Community events create a high level of focus, even in digital, where group activities elicit higher focus than more solitary activities.
• Younger consumers aren’t less attentive; they just pay attention to different media. Gen Z consumers and baby boomers report the same average level of focus, but it’s split across different media: Gen Z consumers are highly focused when playing video games, while boomers prefer reading.
• Overall, the more focused consumers are, the more likely they are to spend. Across consumers, a 10 percent increase in average focus paid across media is associated with a 17 percent increase in consumer spending. Consumers in the top quartile of focus spend twice as much as those in the bottom quartile.

The job to be done

The second factor builds on a famous framework created by Clayton Christensen. When a person consumes your content, what are they “hiring it” for? What is the job to be done?

The primary “job to be done” of media consumption falls into one of five categories (from most to least valuable):

1. To enjoy something that I love. In-person experiences—including live concerts and music festivals, theme parks, sporting events, and movie theaters—dominate this category. Physical books and (to a far lesser extent) audiobooks are also consumed primarily for love.
2. For education and information. This is the primary job to be done for newspapers, magazines, and podcasts.
3. For social connection. This is the primary job of social media sites (Facebook more so than others). Social video (including Instagram reels and TikTok but not YouTube), live events, and video games overindex on this role.
4. For light entertainment and relaxation. This is the primary job of cable television, video streaming, social video, and mobile and console gaming.
5. For background ambience. This is the primary role of radio, digital music, podcasts, and cable television.

Adding these two factors to our content analysis begins to shed light on why not all marketing-related content is created equal:

Implications for demographics

The research also allowed McKinsey to tease out three distinct customer groups based on their high level of economic value:

Content lovers

Entertainment omnivores represent 13 percent of all consumers. Curious and passionate, they spend 2.4 times more money on content and consume 1.7 times more content than the average consumer. They’re the superfans, casting their consumption nets wide to see the movie franchise, watch the spin-off show, ride the themed roller coaster, and buy the items advertised at every step.

Interactivity enthusiasts

The immersion seekers (16 percent). Competitive and lively, they love video games, sports, online betting, and comedy. They prefer endorsements to advertisements, overindex in user-generated content, and spend a reasonable amount of time on online message boards such as Reddit. Although eager consumers, they find the modern media landscape confusing, difficult to navigate, and overly expensive.

Community trendsetters

The culture creators (10 percent). Extroverted tastemakers, they seek out large communal events such as concerts, movies, and theme parks. They’re active on social media and drive online culture and fandom, often with outsize spending on their hobbies and interests. They enjoy advertisements more than any other segment, and when they’re not setting the cultural conversation, they’re shopping.

The report clusters the remaining 60 percent of consumers in groups with lower attention value, and thus lower economic value.

Implications for marketers

The competition for consumer attention has long been measured by audience size and time spent. This view misses the whole story (a point I made in my 2017 book, The Content Code).

It also reinforces the basic idea behind Content Shock: you’re probably going to have to pay more for the content types that cut through the noise.

The attention equation helps clarify what the winners in that competition have suspected: Quality and relevance, not just quantity, of attention go a long way in determining success. In a media environment defined by abundance, fragmentation, and distraction, marketers must ask themselves:

• Is my content designed for high focus or low focus?

• What job am I really being hired for?

• How can I elevate the focus or shift the job?

Think about this practical example: Google wanted to shine a light on the Nobel Prize-winning work of its genius AI leader, Demis Hassabis.

Most companies might put out a press release or a blog post — very low attention value. But Google produced a full-length documentary called The Thinking Game. It already has 14 million views on YouTube alone.

According to the McKinsey formula, this film is already worth more than $100 million in attention. Let’s say it took $5 million to make the film. This would break most content marketing budgets, but within the McKinsey model, that is a bargain. And that return on attention that will only grow as the movie is viewed over time.

Implications for strategy

This research tells us something I’ve been circling around for years: the brands that win aren’t the ones who shout the loudest, but the ones who create moments that matter. Attention is no longer a game of volume. It’s not about hacking the algorithm or flooding the zone. It’s about earning focus and aligning with the deeper job your audience needs you to do in their lives.

That’s the frontier now. Not more content … but higher-quality attention.

The companies that embrace this shift will stop measuring the wrong things. They’ll stop obsessing about impressions and start designing for immersion. They’ll stop producing noise and view content as nourishment. And in a world overwhelmed by Content Shock, that will be the ultimate competitive advantage.

I also want to connect the dots between the Attention Equation and a post I wrote about ethically-sourced marketing. If we turn our focus to higher-value content, it could reduce the social media “litter” that drives up energy costs and funds online hate and bullying.

Make something worth hiring. Make something worth focusing on. Make something worthy of the precious, finite human attention that has become the most valuable currency in the world.

Need an inspiring keynote speaker? Mark Schaefer is the most trusted voice in marketing. Your conference guests will buzz about his insights long after your event! Mark is the author of some of the world’s bestselling marketing books, a college educator, and an advisor to many of the world’s largest brands. Contact Mark to have him bring a fun, meaningful, and memorable presentation to your company event or conference.

Follow Mark on Twitter, LinkedIn, YouTube, and Instagram

Illustration courtesy Nano Banana

The post Research points to the “Attention Equation” behind measurable content success appeared first on Schaefer Marketing Solutions: We Help Businesses {grow}.

As a marketing educator, writer, and entrepreneur, I’m obsessed with understanding the impact of AI on marketing and sales.

On the latest episode of The Marketing Companion, I was fortunate enough to speak with Sandy Carter, who has a broad global view of the new realities.

Sandy, currently leading a high-growth tech unicorn and author of the new book AI First, Human Always (yes, I had the honor of writing the forward!), brings a rare blend of hands-on leadership and futurist perspective.

You can listen to this amazing show just by clicking here:

Click here to enjoy The Marketing Companion Episode 323

And here are a few of the highlights from our talk:

From Counting Clicks to Decoding Intention

For years, marketers have focused on measuring attention, including views, clicks, impressions, and dwell time. We optimized content and spent ad dollars based on where eyeballs went, striving to interrupt or insert ourselves into the customer’s stream of consciousness.

Thanks to AI, that entire playbook is already getting upended. As Sandy pointed out, with advanced predictive tools like ChatGPT, Claude, Gemini, and Perplexity, customers are now going straight to an agent who can not only surface information but also predict their needs.

Here’s the revelation: AI moves us from being marketers of “attention” to marketers of “intention.” When someone asks an AI assistant for recommendations, they’re stating exactly what they want—think “Give me the best CRM for a startup with $X budget and these features”—and bypassing traditional marketing funnels entirely. The agent already knows how to filter, rank, and recommend based on actual needs, not just exposure or interrupted attention.

The New Gatekeepers: How (and Where) AI Picks Its Winners

Naturally, our conversation turned to the practical question on every marketer’s mind: How do you become one of the five “recommended” brands that AI agents surface? When attention alone is no longer enough to get you into the consideration set, what signals matter?

Sandy’s real-world experiments and research laid it out:

Wikipedia Is Back in Style: AI tools routinely use Wikipedia to validate and select which products or companies to recommend. If you haven’t yet built or maintained a Wikipedia page for your business (or yourself!), you’re likely invisible to these agents.

Social Proof via Reddit: Surprisingly, Reddit threads and subreddits have become an influential social signal for AI. If your brand is being discussed positively in relevant Reddit communities, you’re more likely to make the cut. But beware: unresolved issues or complaints, even from years ago, can hurt you if your brand doesn’t participate actively and transparently.

Rich, Fact-Based Content Wins: AI loves structured, fact-heavy lists and articles — “five reasons to choose X,” “top ten features of Y” — even more than traditional SEO tactics. This means your blog’s FAQ pages, listicles, and data-driven content don’t just help search engines, but are directly picked up by generative models when responding to user prompts.

Authority Still Matters: Recent research (as discussed in a past episode with Andy Crestodina) shows AI privileges brand mentions in non-sales content, press articles, and academic references — pushing the importance of classic PR and media strategy back to the top.

The message is clear: if your brand isn’t showing up in these AI “source” locations, your odds of even being considered are catastrophically reduced.

Brand: The Ultimate “Override” in the Prompt Era

Yet, despite the surge of AI-powered decision-making, our conversation reaffirmed one crucial truth: brand still matters more than ever. AI might present five options when a user states their intention — but which one do they pick?

Often, the tie-breaker remains human: a personal recommendation, a powerful story, a reputation for exceptional service. I shared the story of my own Paris trip, where a friend recommended a gluten-free bakery that didn’t make it onto AI’s list, but immediately became my top pick. That’s the “brand override, ” an emotional shortcut humans still use to filter, select, and even instruct AI agents. Sandy reinforced this with her own experiences and evidence that many enterprise buyers, even after narrowing down their options via AI, still seek out word-of-mouth or social proof before making a commitment.

Even more fascinating: How do you become the default choice mentioned in AI user prompts? (“Book my trip on Delta,” “Research this with Salesforce,” etc.) This is the new holy grail — being so well-branded that you bypass the recommendation filter altogether.

Marketing to Machines (and Machine Influencers)

This doesn’t mean we can coast on reputation. We’re at the dawn of a future where, as Sandy observed, entire teams will be dedicated to “marketing to agents,” not just to human customers. Walmart is already experimenting with this, building strategies to influence the agents (and even humanoid delivery robots!) that are quickly becoming intermediaries for everyday purchasing decisions.

Imagine a robot delivering your pizza, choosing your drink, setting your table … Who is the true “chooser” in this experience: the human or the algorithmic assistant? Will P&G start marketing dishwasher soap to the pizza robot’s parent company, or keep marketing to households? The lines are already blurring.

The Next Generation: AI as Brand Builder (and Best Friend)

There’s another layer: The next generation of buyers — raised on Roblox, TikTok, and personalized AI companions — are already developing affinities through digital worlds. Sandy’s daughter knew to ask for Adidas after encountering it in-game, not through traditional ads or family habits. In many cases, the most influential “friend” or recommender may be an AI personality.

Let’s not underestimate the psychological shift underway. As AI companions move from functional assistants to social confidantes, their product recommendations carry new emotional weight. In fact, social AI companions already outpace ChatGPT in certain engagement metrics. That’s a transformational shift in the trust landscape—one that marketers must start preparing for now.

So, Where Do We Go from Here?

We’re moving from a world of *interrupt and persuade* to one of *predict and facilitate*, with AI agents as both gatekeepers and guides. As marketers, the urgent priorities are:

• Build and maintain accessible, accurate, and richly detailed references (Wikipedia, Reddit, media hits)
• Double-down on authority and co-occurrence in natural language (not just backlinks)
• Lean into transparent, conversational engagement with your audience and communities
• Embrace the necessity of “marketing to agents,” not just customers
• Never lose sight of the human: generate enough love, trust, and loyalty for your brand that customers ask for you by name — even when AI presents alternatives.

If there’s one lesson I took from our conversation, it’s that the era of “attention as currency” is giving way to intention, and the path from intention to purchase is no longer a straight line—nor is it exclusively under human control.

Stay sharp, stay engaged, and keep your brand both technologically visible and unmistakably human.

Please support our sponsors, who brings you this fantastic episode.

Bravo for Brevo!

This episode is brought to you by Brevo (formerly Sendinblue). Brevo gives you the tools to attract, engage, and nurture customer relationships.

Now, any business can build automated customer experiences, email marketing workflows, and landing pages that guide your customers to your main message. We are here to support businesses successfully navigating their digital presence to strengthen their customer relationships.

Go to https://www.brevo.com/marketingcompanion to sign up for Brevo for free and use the code COMPANION to save 50% on your first three months of Brevo’s Starter & Business plan!

Unlock your brand’s full digital potential with SEMrush, the all-in-one marketing toolkit trusted by professionals worldwide. From uncovering competitor strategies to tracking keywords, optimizing SEO, and managing social media, SEMrush gives you the insights to outrank and outshine. Imagine having the power to spot opportunities before your rivals, sharpen your content, and drive measurable growth—all in one intuitive platform. Whether you’re scaling a startup or leading a global enterprise, SEMrush equips you with data-driven tools to win online. Don’t just compete — dominate your market with SEMrush. Start your smarter marketing journey today.

The post Attention to Intention: How AI is Rewriting the Rules of Marketing and Sales appeared first on Schaefer Marketing Solutions: We Help Businesses {grow}.

The introduction of AI as our friend / co-worker / companion / enemy has heightened the emotion in our marketing discussions, but perhaps nothing has fanned the outrage more than the idea that AI survives by stealing our content. Protecting our content from AI has become a global obsession.

One company just posed a solution that raised eyebrows. Cloudflare, a technology company that helps websites secure and manage internet traffic, introduced a new permission-based setting that enables customers to automatically block artificial intelligence companies from collecting their digital data.

The company, which handles about 20 percent of all internet traffic, has seen a sharp increase in AI data crawlers on the web. It has proposed setting up “toll roads” where AI companies would pay to access content.

A cry of “YEEESSS!” undoubtedly echoed through the halls of many publishers and authors. Finally, the mighty economics of this revolution are tilting in our favor. But has it?

Before you sign up for this sheath of protection, consider the big picture.  If the crawlers refuse to pay for your content, do you want to be out of the search index? We gave away our content to appease Google. Now we have to do it again to make the AI overlords happy. I, for one, will not adopt the Cloudflare policy.

Two years ago, I published an article that now seems prescient: Protecting Your Content from AI: A Contrarian View. The insight from this post bears repeating in light of these important developments, so here is a re-cap:

The Contrarian View

There has been a flurry of panicked posts about protecting your content from AI. There have been lawsuits, probes, and new software that prevents sites like ChatGPT from accessing your content from being absorbed into large language models. Within 14 days of the availability of code that can prevent AI data scraping, nearly 20% of the top 1,000 websites in the world began using it.

What should you and your business do? Should you keep AI away?

My advice today seems counterintuitive. Maybe when AI comes to suck up your content, you should say, “suck away.” Actually, we need to come up with a better phrase than that. But you know what I mean.

Let’s pause, take a deep breath, and rationally examine the issue of protecting your content from AI in the context of your future business success.

Acknowledging complexity

First, I must acknowledge that this is an insanely complex and evolving issue. The legal, ethical, and economic considerations for large enterprises, newspapers, movie studios, and other media companies are unique.

When it comes to protecting your content from AI, any individual artist, author, or other creator may disagree with me, and I honor their right to make their own decisions.

My post today specifically aims at content creators, entrepreneurs, and businesses trying to rise above the noise and achieve business benefits from their content marketing.

The bottom line is that I believe more business benefits will accrue to you by NOT protecting your content from AI, even if it is copyrighted. To understand why, let’s begin by reviewing an important content marketing philosophy …

Unleash your content

Here is a fundamental truth: The economic value of content that is not seen and shared is zero.

Chances are you’re working hard to create amazing content. You post on social media and engage with fans to build your audience. All good. Now, your job is to get that content to move through your audience and beyond, and that means focusing on content transmission (This strategy was the subject of my book The Content Code).

I’ve been against gated content, and the ridiculous notion that you shouldn’t publish on “rented land.” Of course you should. My view is, publish your content everywhere your audience could possibly find it, consume it, and share it! Unleash your content!

The first consideration: If you protect your content from AI — a technology that is becoming the foundation of search and content discovery — and your competitors don’t, will you be better off? Probably not.

An old dilemma

The argument about protecting your content from AI is strangely familiar. This is the same debate we had in the early days of content marketing — “What??? You want me to give away my content and best ideas for free?”

Yes, we all had to do that because if we didn’t provide free and helpful content, the competitor down the street would. Their content would be highlighted by search, discovered, and shared … and we would lose.

Publishing free content was a radical idea. Before the internet, many businesses generated revenue from their proprietary content. Research firms built profitable businesses by selling original reports for hundreds of thousands of dollars. That business model is now nearly obsolete. For better or for worse, information flows freely on the web. Once you publish anything, anywhere, it will probably find its way to the open waters of the web.

Let’s get specific about what’s happening to copyrighted content today, with or without AI. I put tremendous effort into my books, and making money from a business book is no easy task. Every month, I discover some nefarious group selling illegally digitized versions of my books. There are even sites that sell my blog posts as aids in writing student term papers.

For a while, I tried to fight back. But it’s like that arcade game Whac-A-Mole. Every time I try to take a whack, another illegal site pops up somewhere else. If people truly want to access and share your content, there is no recourse, no stopping it.

So, even if you create a wall around your content, it will probably seep into the AI machine anyway. If you use software defense against AI, what would prevent someone from manually cutting and pasting it into an LLM?

Let’s put the issue of attribution aside for a moment. If you’re not freaked out by Google using your content for free, why are you freaked out about AI using it?

My first business from AI

A few months ago, I secured my first consulting contract from ChatGPT.

A new client found me by searching for “top 10 marketing experts.” I tried this myself, and the list would shuffle on each query, but I was usually in the top 10. Friends tried this in Europe, and the same names came up.

Let’s be honest. Am I one of the top 10 marketing experts in the world? No, I’m not. I could easily name 10 people in my circle of immediate friends who are smarter than me!

How did I make that AI-generated list? It’s the same way I show up on “best-of” blog lists and Google search results — I’ve had the tenacity and courage to put my content into the world with fierce consistency for 15 years.

AI is the future of search — it’s called Search Generative Experience (SGE). It’s already incorporated into Google.

My new client found me because I’m present on the web, and now I’m also present on AI. I believe that will serve me well as search evolves.

The cost of invisibility

Beyond revenue, there is an implication for impact and influence.

One of the organizations fighting AI content practices is The New York Times. This news organization is arguably the newspaper of record in the United States and one of the most important news sources in the world. As more students, researchers, and others turn to ChatGPT and other platforms for knowledge and research, is it in the best interest of The New York Times to remain unaccountable?

If you’re protecting your content from AI, you’re no longer part of the public conversation, at least as it is represented on ChatGPT and other AI platforms. Your view is invisible. What do you risk when you and your business are unaccounted for?

My smart friend Aleksandra Pimenides recently commented in our RISE marketing community:

“AI is an important source of knowledge transmission. Teachers take something and pass it on to their students. Libraries have books for people to read and learn. Likewise, LLMs act as an intermediary of transmission. Do Newton’s descendants get paid every time a student is taught the principle of gravity? Do libraries get fined when people go there to read and learn about subjects for free? To what extent should information and knowledge be monetized? Maybe there’s a distinction to be made between knowledge and information?”

A view of the true risk

I think much of the anxiety on this subject comes from an image of some AI bot cutting and pasting your unique content without attribution. That’s not exactly how it works.

Here is an explanation from Benedict Evans, which appeared in his wonderful newsletter (edited slightly for style):

“LLMs are not databases. They deduce or infer patterns in language by seeing vast quantities of text created by people — we write things that contain logic and structure, and LLMs look at that and infer patterns from it, but they don’t keep it. So ChatGPT might have looked at thousands of stories from The New York Times, but it hasn’t kept them. Moreover, those stories themselves are just a fraction of a fraction of a percent of all the training data. The purpose is not for the LLM to know the content of any given story or any given novel — the purpose is for it to see the patterns in the output of collective human intelligence.

“This is not Napster. OpenAI hasn’t ‘pirated’ your book or your story and it isn’t handing it out for free. In Tim O’Reilly’s great phrase, data isn’t oil; data is sand. It’s only valuable in the aggregate of billions and your novel is just one grain of dust in the Great Pyramid. This isn’t supposed to be an oracle or a database. It’s supposed to be inferring ‘intelligence’ from seeing as much of how people talk (as a proxy for how they think) as possible.

“If this is, at a minimum, a foundational new technology of the next decade, and it relies on all of us collectively acting as mechanical turks to feed it, do we all get paid, or do we collectively withdraw? It seems somehow unsatisfactory to argue that “this is worth a trillion dollars, and relies on using your work, but your own individual work is only 0.0001% so you get nothing.” Is it adequate or even correct to call this ‘fair use?’ Does it matter, in either direction? Do we change our definition of fair use?”

In the United States, copyright rights are limited by the doctrine of “fair use,” under which certain uses of copyrighted material for criticism, commentary, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, or research may be considered fair.

As an example, I took a snippet from Benedict’s copyrighted newsletter, provided proper attribution, and used it today to teach. That’s fair use.

Here’s the problem with AI. Think of your copyrighted content as a lovely cake that you baked. It is your original and distinctive work. But inside AI, your work isn’t a cake. It’s an ingredient put into a blender to make a new cake. What’s fair use in that environment?

I dabble in watercolor painting. Seeking credit in an AI model is similar to the maker of my paints wanting attribution credit for this painting:

Even if I used one unique type of paint patented by a supplier, would I give them credit for the painting? No. I actually sold this painting. Should I give part of the revenue to Arches, the company who supplied the paper? I literally could not have made this without the paper and paint yet it is my original work, period.

Attribution

“Originality is nothing but judicious imitation.” – Voltaire

I think most of the “protecting your content from AI” conversation would disappear if we were assured we get credit for our work, in the case where credit might be important — like a meaningful, original idea. After all, we’re OK with Google scraping our content if we get credit for it in search results, right?

Let’s go back to the current state of the internet for a reality check.

In 2014, I wrote one of the most famous blog posts in marketing history, “Content Shock.” This is not idle bragging. The numbers back it up. “Content Shock” — a phrase I coined — has appeared in books, speeches, conferences, college classes, and millions of pieces of content. If you Google the term, there are 610 million results, like these:

Writing a bold post like this did its job. It helped establish thought leadership and provided thousands of links to my original article.

However.

I assure you that I have not received 610 million links back to my site! Even if I received a million links, that would mean I have attribution on just .002% of all references to my original idea.

Clearly, people are using and abusing my work without attribution. Does this mean I should block Google from accessing my post? Of course not.

As Tim O’Reilly said, data is sand that is only valuable when aggregated into something bigger. My blog post is a grain of sand in the content economy. If you want to be part of that economy, you must put pride aside.

No matter how protective I might feel about my intellectual property, it’s sand. And even if I am credited, who reads the footnotes?

In any case, I believe the problem of attribution will be resolved. It’s already happening. There are academic AI sites and writing assistants that allow you to search with references. I use an AI-powered tool through BuzzSumo that creates writing briefs with legitimate and relevant references. Very helpful, and it leads me to smart new content I can quote with attribution.

The option to learn original sources for attribution will be a more common option across all platforms eventually.

Conclusion

Comparing how content works on the web today versus content integrated into LLMs and AI search enables us to draw a rational conclusion, allowing AI bots to scrape content from our sites, at least for most businesses. AI will be a major component of search going forward.

This is a complex and evolving issue, but I believe that regulations and best practices will favor creators who allow their content to be used in LLMs over time. The attribution problem will likely be solved on many platforms and regulations will adjust to a new framing of “fair use.”

Having an effective presence within AI models and AI search utilities could result in business benefits that outweigh the risks of misusing your copyrighted content.

I’ll say once again that this is a complex issue but for most businesses, I think it makes sense to be part of the machine.

Need a keynote speaker? Mark Schaefer is the most trusted voice in marketing. Your conference guests will buzz about his insights long after your event! Mark is the author of some of the world’s bestselling marketing books, a college educator, and an advisor to many of the world’s largest brands. Contact Mark to have him bring a fun, meaningful, and memorable presentation to your company event or conference.

Follow Mark on Twitter, LinkedIn, YouTube, and Instagram

Image courtesy Mid Journey

The post Protecting Your Content From AI: Not So Fast! appeared first on Schaefer Marketing Solutions: We Help Businesses {grow}.

This headline isn’t clickbait. And I’m not selling you any LinkedIn consulting services! But I just had something really weird happen to me and it points to a few important LinkedIn growth secrets nobody talks about.

The crazy thing that prompted this article was, last week I had a LinkedIn post receive 100,000 impressions (104,833 and counting). On the surface, it looks like I’m killing it. Obviously, there was some luck involved. Nobody can plan viral. However, there are bigger lessons here about LinkedIn success, and I wanted to use this as a teachable moment.

The surprising post

It’s important to start with the actual content, and you’ll be surprised. The post that went viral was under 100 words. It wasn’t an in-depth article — I wrote it in five minutes. It wasn’t controversial. It didn’t have any photos or illustrations. And I posted the darn thing late on a Saturday night!

Before I tell you why it picked up steam, here is the entire post:

I have a sinking feeling of being left behind.

I’m reading about big companies and their AI re-invention and startups being “AI first.”

But here I am as a small business, fully immersed in the smart ideas of AI and using GPT as my sidekick every hour of the day. Yet the foundation of my business is Word, Excel, PowerPoint, and a WordPress blog/website. This is CRUDE.

AI is creating iterative improvements but I am not TRANSFORMING. I am augmenting, not reimagining. I sense that as a small business, I don’t have the ability to really LEAD with AI except to maybe be a little better at prompts than the next guy. Thoughts?

Not that exceptional, right? So let’s see what happened …

The first rule of LinkedIn growth success

First, let’s remind ourselves of the first rule of LinkedIn success — create conversations.

The number of likes doesn’t really matter. The number of shares doesn’t matter so much. Are people leaving lengthy comments? That represents a conversation, and LinkedIn loves that.

Specifically, when you first post content, LinkedIn only shares it to a small percentage of your followers. It wants to see if people are interested … do they comment? So those first few hours are key. If conversations (meaningful comments) happen, LinkedIn shares it to more of your followers, and if the comments continue, it might even get shared beyond your audience. Open waters!

Why did people start leaving comments on my post? Because I ended the post with a question. People just love to answer questions. If they leave the post without answering the question, it seems like the interaction is incomplete.

The post itself was honest, relevant, and vulnerable, something rare for LinkedIn, where everybody seems to be only interested in selling stuff. So, interrupting the flow with a short vulnerable post ending in a question started the conversations. And the first rule of LinkedIn success is, START CONVERSATIONS.

The other key is that I responded right away. This encouraged other people to converse, and then the ball was really rolling.

The viral moment

I’ve had many posts on LinkedIn create conversations and earn 30,000 views and more, but I think tipping 100,000 was a record for me. I can only guess why, but here is my theory.

1. First, it was short. There seems to be a trend on LinkedIn toward exceedingly long posts, but who has time for that?
2. It was a sincere cry for help that hit a nerve. It was unusual in its raw humanity.
3. It was timely. Let’s say I posted a little rant about an algorithm change that happened a month ago. Nobody wants to hear about it. It’s old news. But at this moment, much of the world is feeling a little stressed about AI and keeping up. So my timing was right. Be current.

The outfall

On several occasions, I’ve written that “engagement” is a lousy metric, and this viral hit was proof. With more than 300 comments, this would be deemed a major success by most businesses, but answering even most of them in a meaningful way was a distraction for my business. I’ve often said that you can engage yourself broke.

I tried my best to keep up because I always do. It’s an honor to earn a person’s attention and I don’t take that for granted. But another part of LinkedIn success is, don’t be fooled by engagement as a meaningful metric. There is no research I can find that correlates engagement to profitability or loyalty.

The responses were pretty evenly divided into:

• You’re doing OK as you are
• You’re doing it all wrong
• Let me sell you something

The business benefit

I had a viral success. What was the business benefit?

I certainly earned some awareness and about 1oo new followers. But the true benefit is unknowable. Allow me to explain.

I once had a client who told me, “Blogging doesn’t work.”

I asked him why.

“Because I wrote three blog posts in 2017 and nothing happened.”

Well of course not. Creating content that leads to a powerful personal brand is the long game. I teach a Personal Branding Master Class and I repeat over and over that “consistency is more important than genius.”

The LinkedIn post that went viral was not an act of genius. It was act of perseverance.

If this was my first post on LinkedIn, or my fiftieth, it would not have gone viral. But I have been publishing several times a week for 20 years, and I always provide helpful, quality content. I’ve built an audience who looks for my content and is ready to respond. That takes time.

The long-game nature of LinkedIn growth

Let me conclude with a final thought about benefits of content over the long term.

Many years ago, I received an email from a person who said he had been reading my content for three years. And based on his affection for my articles, he bought one of my books. He just wanted to tell me that this was the best business book he had read in 10 years. I didn’t know this person. As far as I knew, this had been my first contact with him, and the email was signed with his name and title — he was the CMO of a Fortune 100 company.

About two years later, I heard from him a second time, He wanted to hire me to help him re-organize his corporate content marketing effort. I didn’t have to bid on the contract. After reading my content for what was now five years, he knew I was the right person for the job and I just named my price.

And that’s how it works.

There is no get-rich-quick scheme for LinkedIn. You build an audience. The audience trusts you, and they become your customers.

The greatest secret of LinkedIn growth is perseverance.

Need a keynote speaker? Mark Schaefer is the most trusted voice in marketing. Your conference guests will buzz about his insights long after your event! Mark is the author of some of the world’s bestselling marketing books, a college educator, and an advisor to many of the world’s largest brands. Contact Mark to have him bring a fun, meaningful, and memorable presentation to your company event or conference.

Follow Mark on Twitter, LinkedIn, YouTube, and Instagram

Illustration courtesy MidJourney

The post The LinkedIn growth secrets nobody talks about appeared first on Schaefer Marketing Solutions: We Help Businesses {grow}.

Last week, a friend asked me to review a new research report he compiled as a lead magnet for his business. But I knew his strategy was flawed before I even saw the report. I had to provide an email address to access the research. I didn’t want to become part of his email “lead nurturing” program, so I never downloaded the report. “Gated content” killed his content marketing strategy.

I know that sounds counter-intuitive. Most marketers point to the high cost of making exceptional content … Asking for an email address seems like a small price to pay for this value. But by making it difficult for people to access your content, you’re leaving the true value of your marketing on the table. I’ll explain why.

The current state of gated content

Here are some points to provide a perspective of our marketing world today.

• People hate gated content. Even marketers who gate their content know this. Research shows more than 90 percent of the people interested in the content abandon the sign-up process because they don’t trust what happens next to the email address.
• Many marketers justify gated content as a fair value exchange but research shows this is not true. Consumers state they are “resigned” to annoying marketing practices and more than half immediately unsubscribe to a site even after they opt-in.
• Acquiring email addresses in exchange for gated content may not be compliant with privacy laws in Europe and many U.S. states.
• We are clearly in an era of Content Shock where the competition for content views is vicious. One of the visible manifestations of this trend is BuzzSumo research showing how social shares on a topic decline precipitously as a subject becomes saturated. In other words, unless you are among the first to create content on a topic, getting your content to be seen and shared is extremely difficult.

A new content marketing philosophy

In my book The Content Code, I provide an updated view of content marketing strategy.

The philosophy behind the book revolves around the practical idea that the economic value of content that is not seen and shared is zero. Therefore, we must develop competency in not just producing content but igniting it so that it is seen and shared by the most people possible. The most economic value of content marketing doesn’t come from the content, it come from the transmission of the content.

Creating great content is no longer the finish line; it is the starting line. The book outlines six possible strategies to remove barriers and give your content the best possible chance to flow and reach the most people possible.

Requiring people to provide an email address to access your content is about the worst thing you can do in this new view of “content success.” In essence, gated content places a stop sign in front of your content flow. It is an anachronistic way of thinking.

The value exchange

The decision to provide a barrier before your content must boil down to this: Are you going to receive more value from a trickle of people providing their email address, or the flood of people seeing and sharing the content freely? Let’s look at a case study to figure this out.

My friend James Carbary provided this example of how the gated content value exchange played out for his own business. He wrote:

“It took five months for us to get 295 people to sign up for the gated opt-in offer on our website. This progress seemed incredibly slow, so I tried something different.

“A couple weeks ago, I published a status update on LinkedIn explaining that I’d developed a list of 67 content topics that work well on that site. If people wanted the ideas, I asked them to leave a comment that said ‘I want it.’ Then I explained that I would turn the ideas into a free PDF if 100 people left a comment.

“In three hours I had over 150 comments. That post has now been viewed more 160,000 times, and 692 people left a comment saying they wanted the content ideas. We turned the ideas into a PDF, and replied to every comment with the link.

“In five days, my content spread to 692 people, compared to to 295 people in five months. We collected ZERO email addresses through the LinkedIn content but I’m beginning to see why un-gated content might be a smarter strategy.”

The case for amplification

James told me that the most tangible benefit of the ungated strategy was a connection with a high-potential customer and a podcast interview with this powerful new connection.

Some implied benefits in this un-gated content example would probably be easy to track down:

• Of the 692 people who asked for the content, how many were entirely new LinkedIn connections for James? He didn’t get an email address, but he did get a signal of interest and arguably these new LinkedIn connections might be more valuable in the long-term than an email address.
• How many of the 692 people responded to a call to action at the end of the report and visited a website, or organically subscribed to receive more content?
• How many shared the free content with more people inside and outside the company? How much additional flow did this receive because it was free?

Even if the percentage of people sharing content is the same whether it is gated or ungated, you will reach many more people with a base of fans numbering 692 versus 295. And that is happening in a matter of days versus months!

Finally, I shared James’s story, and linked to his website. I can’t recall ever linking to gated content that would require my readers to sign-in to something. So the benefit created by this post would have never happened if he hadn’t given his content away for free.

If you subscribe to my philosophy that the company that moves the most content will win, there is no question that un-gated content provides more potential value.

Branding and trust

I was discussing this issue with a colleague and she said “gated content annoys me. Why would a brand want to be annoying? The company is making me distrust them because I have no idea what will happen to that email address.”

A few years ago, I gave up my email address and (shudder) phone number to access a report from a company I loved and trusted. The next day, I was interrupted at a birthday party from a sales rep calling me from this company. My email was placed on lists for newsletters, webinars, and holiday sales.

Even after I “opted out,” of communications, I was still receiving phone calls and spam from this company.

By abusing me in this way, the company ruined its brand. It went from a company I loved to a brand I would never work with again.

A simple thought exercise: If you’re in a hotly-competitive field (like SEO or digital marketing) and one company has gated content and the other gives their best content away for free, which one will have a more positive brand view?

The research supports un-gated content

Roger Dooley is an expert in the field of neuroscience and marketing. In a post, he points out that from a psychological perspective, un-gated content is the undisputed content champ. Roger writes:

Requiring a user to give up his info before viewing good content is a reward strategy – give us your info, and we’ll reward you by letting you see our wonderful content. This is an appealing strategy at first glance – 100% of the people who use the content will have completed the form, and the information should be a powerful motivator for visitors to proceed.

In fact, most users confronted with a form won’t complete it. If they arrived at the site looking for some specific information, they will likely hit the back button and see if they can access it without the aggravation of form completion and without the risk of getting spammed later.

It turns out that a reciprocity strategy works better – give them the info they want, and then ask for their information. The research shows that twice as many visitors gave up their information if they were able to access the information first. It’s counterintuitive, perhaps, but even though these visitors were under no obligation to complete the form, they converted at double the rate of visitors seeing the “mandatory” form.

The neuromarketing takeaway here is that if you invoke reciprocity, you’ll be working with the way our brains are wired and will be more likely to get your visitors to do what you want them to. (And, as an added bonus, your SEO person will be happy that along with your visitors, Google will be able to see your content, too!)

Gated content and measurement

A compelling argument for gated content is measurement. Providing a tangible demonstration of the value of content marketing is difficult. It’s intoxicating to tell a client or your boss that an eBook (or whatever) resulted in a countable number of sign-ups that might be stretched into a claim of “leads.”

Measuring content marketing can be exceedingly hard. Most can’t do an adequate job. I acknowledge that gating your content may be the politically correct thing to do even if the strategy is flawed based on today’s market realities.

However, I think “social shares” is a more powerful measurement than “number of email addresses.” An email address may translate into … nothing. But a social share represents organic advocacy — better than any ad you could pay for.

An unpopular view

I’ve had many negative reactions to the idea of un-gating content. Here is one of them:

I think if you understand Funnels and the importance email still plays in the sales process then you wouldn’t have written this article. It’s not just about sharing good content — it’s also about turning your audience into customers. How do you do that when you never ask for an email address to move the relationship forward?  It’s all about moving folks through your customer journey. 

I would politely suggest this is an anachronistic view of a world that works in “funnels.” It’s not “your customer journey.” It’s THEIRS.

Most marketing today is not your marketing — it’s the sharing of information that’s going on without you. And if you have a gate, that clogs up the information you want to be shared. Let’s do the math and generously assume that 10% of the people who see your post will call for an appointment. We know that 90% of the people who come across your gate will go away. So for every 100 potential customers, you earn just 10 content views, and one call.

If I un-gate the content, I get 100 views and 10 calls. I am 10x more productive. Also, I have 100 people potentially SHARING my article instead of 10 for you.

By the way, what will you do after getting that email address? Spam your way to glory? That’s why people don’t trust gated content in the first place. You’re part of the problem.

I realize it’s a new way to think, but I can’t imagine a business today working hard to get customers to their site and then letting 90% of them walk away. If you ask people for an email AFTER they see the content, research shows it works better.

In any scenario, the numbers work in my favor, not yours.

A simple rule of thumb

One of the themes in my recent writing is that we have lost our way in marketing. Often, those setting the “standards” we follow aren’t marketers; they are SEO experts, statisticians, and IT professionals. I am not diminishing the worth of these resources, but maybe a statistical evaluation is not always the best guidepost for a marketing decision. Perhaps we need to get our heads out of dashboards and spreadsheets and look at what is happening with our customers in the real world.

Just because something seems favorable because of an A/B test or backlink strategy, it doesn’t mean we should do it … especially if people hate it.

So I’ll end this post with a simple piece of advice. People hate gated content. Don’t do things people hate.

Instead, dig deep to discover what your customers love. Now, go do that thing better than anybody else.

Need a keynote speaker? Mark Schaefer is the most trusted voice in marketing. Your conference guests will buzz about his insights long after your event! Mark is the author of some of the world’s bestselling marketing books, a college educator, and an advisor to many of the world’s largest brands. Contact Mark to have him bring a fun, meaningful, and memorable presentation to your company event or conference.

Follow Mark on Twitter, LinkedIn, YouTube, and Instagram

Illustration courtesy MidJourney.

The post Why Gated Content Kills Your Marketing Success appeared first on Schaefer Marketing Solutions: We Help Businesses {grow}.

Too short for a blog post, too interesting to ignore, here are some quick thoughts from the Schaefer-verse:

Is it really a personal brand on TikTok?

I’ve been teaching about personal branding for nearly a decade and probably have studied this subject as much as anyone on earth. But a new development has me flummoxed.

Increasingly, “personal brand” is becoming synonymous with performers on TikTok. I’ve seen this connection creeping in, but it slapped me in the face when I saw sessions on “personal brand strategy” at SXSW run literally by teen TikTok stars.

I’m not against teen TikTok stars—go for it. But is this building a personal brand … or achieving personal fame? There’s a difference.

The term “personal brand” was popularized by a 1997 Fast Company article called “The Brand is You” by Tom Peters. He stressed the importance of curating your own professional brand (just like a corporate brand) to succeed in business.

In my popular Personal Branding Master Class, I make the distinction between fame (like Kim Kardashian) and a personal brand, which means you have the

• presence
• reputation
• authority

… to make your professional dreams a reality. You probably won’t be famous (and don’t need to be), but you will be known in your industry, and that’s a HUGE advantage.

By the way, I think you can create a professional personal brand, instead of personal fame, on TikTok just like any other channel. I’ve seen some great marketing and business content there.

But today, TikTok’s meme-merchants with brand deals seem to be lumped together in the “personal brand” category by the popular media. I think that’s confusing. Am I splitting hairs?

I broke my own rule

In many of my books and speeches, I implore marketers to stop doing what people hate — interrupting, intercepting, and spamming, for example.

Here’s one thing that I know people hate: pop-up ads. The research is overwhelming. In 2014, Ethan Zuckerman, the inventor of the pop-up ad, wrote a lengthy apology for his creation in The Atlantic. He called it “The Internet’s Original Sin” and pleaded with businesses to “ditch them.”

And yet, I now have a pop-up on my site. One attentive reader called this irony to my attention, so I thought I would explain it.

Subscriptions to my blog had been stagnant. Long story short, I am fighting the math of large numbers (the bigger the email list, the more I need to grow to keep up with natural attrition).

I needed to upgrade my email strategy, and one recommendation was to add a pop-up to gently remind people to subscribe. I resisted the idea for years but finally succumbed.

I hope I have done this in a kind way. It only pops up after you have been on the site for a while, so it’s not on your face, and it only happens once. Bottom line, it worked.

So I have a “gentle pop-up!”

No sugar-coating

In my last roundup-style post, I had a number of sobering observations about AI and our future. One reader chastised me for not being more positive.

I do think positivity is important, but the truth is even more so. If I don’t tell you the truth, I am cheating you, deceiving you in the long term to make you feel good in the short term.

If you believe projections from Accenture, Deloitte, and McKinsey, between 40% and 70% of marketing tasks can be easily automated. My friend Paul Roetzer, who studies this more than anyone, ranted in his podcast this week that job displacement is coming fast, and he’s worried that nobody is prepared for it.

I do not think mass job displacement is inevitable, at least in the short-term. There are many financial, legal, ethical, and political hurdles for AI to overcome. And, as I wrote recently, I believe is always a place for human creativity.

But change is coming. That’s what’s real right now. We can’t see the truth through a sugar-coated lens. Let’s grow together based on truth and lift each other up along the way!

Word-of-mouth marketing is where it’s at

Word-of-mouth marketing (WOMM) is probably the most important marketing genre. But it has been relegated to a marketing sideshow because it’s difficult to execute and even more difficult to measure. And frankly, it’s just not as sexy as a celebrity-filled TV ad.

But I’m convinced in this deep fake age of mistrust, WOMM will emerge as an incredibly important strategy. It’s not that hard. Give people something cool to talk about!

It can be this simple. I dined at the wonderful Oasis restaurant on the Caribean island of Saint Martin a few weeks ago. At each place setting, there was a little card to give you a fake smile. Donning the fake smile was irresistible of course. Don’t you think kids would love this?

The simple word-of-mouth marketing idea becomes complete with unique stories on the back of the card. About 10% of the population are “super-sharers” who will take a cool story and share it with family and friends. That ignites WOMM. So, feed them the stories and it will spread.

Don’t overlook visual prompts like the smile card to remind people to talk about you.

What are the stories you’re sharing about your business? How are you getting them out into the world so your business becomes conversational?

Need a keynote speaker? Mark Schaefer is the most trusted voice in marketing. Your conference guests will buzz about his insights long after your event! Mark is the author of some of the world’s bestselling marketing books, a college educator, and an advisor to many of the world’s largest brands. Contact Mark to have him bring a fun, meaningful, and memorable presentation to your company event or conference.

Follow Mark on Twitter, LinkedIn, YouTube, and Instagram

Illustration courtesy Unsplash.com

The post Are you really building a personal brand on TikTok? appeared first on Schaefer Marketing Solutions: We Help Businesses {grow}.

This week marks the tenth anniversary of the most famous blog post I’ve written, and arguably one of the most well-known blog posts in marketing history. I am not one to reminisce or grow crazy over anniversaries, but publishing this post ten years ago was a unique, unexpected life experience and cultural moment worthy of explanation.

Today, we’ll look at the impact of Content Shock and lessons from one of the most widely shared business blog posts in history.

The idea behind the blog post

It was the summer of 2013. I was on a plane to give a speech in Montreal, but I couldn’t relax because I was uneasy about my talk. The topic was familiar enough — social media and content marketing. But something was wrong.

Back then, producing corporate content was still a novel idea. Content fueled this concept of inbound marketing. Instead of cold-calling customers (outbound marketing) we could produce relevant content that would auto-magically bring leads to our website.

But it wasn’t working, at least not as easily as it had in the early days. The leading purveyor behind the idea, Hubspot, had never turned a profit (ironically its OUTBOUND sales costs were too high!). Niches were filling up with blog posts and podcasts and infographics competing for attention. We had to spend more of our budget on quality and promotion just to get a few views. And it was just getting worse.

The world was flooded with content, and the easy days of content marketing were coming to an end. On the plane to Montreal, I scribbled a note — “The world is in content shock.”

The premise

When I have a new idea for a book or blog post, I never go with it right away. I let it sit for months to make sure I’m right.

I didn’t publish the Content Shock post until January 06, 2014. I had seen enough by then to know I was right. It was simple economics: Any time there’s a huge surplus of a good, or a scarcity of a good, there has to be a response in the economic system. And we had a surplus of content!

Here’s a simple example. In the earliest days of TV, anybody could walk down to a studio and create a cooking show or a craft show. The entry barriers for success were low because the channel was so hungry for content. Similarly, in those early days, it was easy to advertise and support a show.

As television became more popular, the channels filled with content. Competitors appeared, not just on the local level, but nationally. Networks were created that attracted the best writers and the biggest stars. Content became more expensive to produce and sponsor.

Television entered a never-ending content arms race. You can still see it happening today. An episode of The Mandalorian cost a staggering $15 million to produce. A few years later, Wanda Vision cost $28 million per episode. The Lord of the Rings TV series cost $60 million per episode.

And so it goes.

This is exactly what is happening on Facebook. On Instagram. On Tik Tok. On every place we publish, whether it is B2B or B2C.

And so, I decided to write about this pattern. Content marketing was moving into a new phase, and it wasn’t going to be easy.

The outfall

Today, this idea of Content Shock is taken for granted. Of course if there is more competition, it becomes more difficult and expensive to compete. In fact, it becomes impossible for some.

While I knew this idea was true, I nonetheless sensed it would not go over well with the people in the industry actually selling content marketing as a red-hot, can’t-fail idea.

The post attracted thousands of comments — more like long conversations! To my surprise, about 95% of the comments were positive and suggested that I had tapped into a market reality, like this one from marketing expert Doug Kessler:

And yet, my blog post was characterized as “controversial.” If 95% of the people agreed with me, why would it be controversial? As I explained to my wife, if 95% of the people in our country agreed with something but the president disagreed, it would be controversial.

In this case, almost every content marketing thought leader took aim at me.  I was fine with it. I have a thick skin and enjoyed the great debate. That’s how we grow. But there was one comment I’ll never forget …

The laugh

The commentary didn’t end at my blog. My post sent a ripple of conversation into seemingly every blog, podcast, and video in the marketing industry. It was great that a professional debate was happening … with one exception.

On a well-known podcast, one of the hosts was asked whether my article had any legitimacy. He paused … and then laughed. “NO!” he said emphatically. He went on to describe the practice of content marketing as having unlimited potential. There was no concern about content saturation or the economic viability of content marekting, he claimed.

In my 15 years of blogging, this is the only comment that ever truly, deeply pissed me off. It wasn’t because he disagreed with me. It was because this was a respected voice acting as a charlatan to protect his own business interests. He was lying to an audience I cared about.

This comment was the primary reason I wrote The Content Code book. I needed to insert some rational truth into the content marketing madness. The premise of the book: “The economic value of content that is not seen and shared is zero. Here is a plan to ignite your content in an era of Content Shock.”

The laugh launched a book. And I’m still a little pissed : )

The legacy of a blog post

The Content Shock post generated tens of thousands of comments all over the web. For three solid weeks, I spent almost every hour of the day responding to comments. An important point — this most viral of posts had no measurable impact on my business. It did not even result in a meaningful boost in new subscribers. Goes to show that “Viral” is an overrated goal.

Hundreds of blog posts have been written about the original post. Thousands more linked to the article. I continue to get links to that post every week. “Content Shock” is still among the top 10 posts on my site every week, 10 years later!

Over time, the industry adopted the term as a way to describe the overwhelming competition in a world saturated with content. It has been featured in books, conferences, and speeches around the world. I’ve had people describe Content Shock to me, not realizing I was the one who came up with the term.

Two years after I wrote the post, Buzz Sumo did an analysis of marketing content trends, showing that content saturation was eating into the success of some of the biggest sites in the industry like Copyblogger and Moz. Founder Steve Rayson stated that “content shock is here.”

Battling the difficult economics of content saturation is a fact of life today in the marketing world!

Spiky content

Why did this post go viral? It was timely, it was relevant. But it was also spiky.

In my Personal Branding Master Class, I teach about the importance of “spiky content,” a phrase coined by Wes Kao. Spiky content provides a bold point of view that cuts through the clutter. It goes like this:

1. A spiky point of view can be debated.

2. A spiky point of view isn’t controversial for the sake of it.

3. A spiky point of view teaches your audience something relevant they don’t already know.

4. A spiky point of view is rooted in evidence, but it doesn’t have to be a proven fact or universal truth.

5. A spiky point of view requires conviction. 

“Content Shock” is a great spiky case study!

When I wrote this post, did I know I was absolutely right? I thought so, but there was no way to know for sure. The argument was built on evidence, but of course, it could be debated. And I wasn’t taking a stand to start a fight. I thought about this idea for six months before publishing. I wrote this post because I’m passionate about marketing, and I care about its future.

If you care about something, try creating some spiky content of your own. It’s really the only way to stand out today.

The future, the solution

After the initial post, I had another insight about Content Shock. It’s not just a trend. It’s a pattern (I explained this here). Every channel eventually fills with content, driving up the cost to compete. It’s a repeating pattern.

I wrote several follow-up posts, including one framing Content Shock as the most important content marketing strategy, instead of being a problem.

If Content Shock was becoming an issue in 2014, you can only imagine what is happening today in a world overtaken by AI. Some project that in a year or two, 95% of the content on the web will be created by bots. Bots don’t sleep, they don’t get writer’s block. Their ability to churn out content is infinite.

One of the counterarguments to Content Shock was that the world wasn’t being saturated with content; it was being saturated with bad content, so true artists still had a chance. Perhaps that was valid for a time, but most niches are filled with great people doing great work, or AI bots that are not far behind. The world is filled with so much great content, all of it vying for our attention.

Content Shock is here to stay.

I think there are two solutions to Content Shock.

The most common path is the inevitable arms race. Just look at what is happening in the battle between Netflix, Apple, and other streaming services. The demand for quality content, and the cost to produce that content, goes up, up, up. That is the inevitable pattern in every content niche.

There is another solution. What if you cared for the content and even more for the person or brand producing it?

Why are you reading this today? If you’ve made it this far, it’s because you’re interested in the topic. But maybe you subscribed to this blog in the first place because you believe in me. Maybe you will share this post on LinkedIn because you consider me a thought leader, or even a friend. The content matters and cuts through because I matter to you as a person.

This is a solution available to any business of any size, and it’s why I shout from the rooftops every day that you MUST be working on your personal brand.

I don’t have the resources to compete with the biggest media sites and cut through the Content Shock. You probably don’t either. But you can be the most human company in your niche and nurture an audience who loves you as a person.

Thanks for obliging me this Content Shock retrospective. It was a weird time in my life, but overall, it produced positive results and I’m proud of the blog post.

Go forth and publish some spiky content! Thanks for being here and supporting me through these many years.

Need a keynote speaker? Mark Schaefer is the most trusted voice in marketing. Your conference guests will buzz about his insights long after your event! Mark is the author of some of the world’s bestselling marketing books, a college educator, and an advisor to many of the world’s largest brands. Contact Mark to have him bring a fun, meaningful, and memorable presentation to your company event or conference.

Follow Mark on Twitter, LinkedIn, YouTube, and Instagram

Image courtesy Midjourney

The post The Blog Post That Shocked the World appeared first on Schaefer Marketing Solutions: We Help Businesses {grow}.