“Content” is a word that gets tossed around a lot. It’s an umbrella term that leaves a lot to interpretation, and for writers like myself and my colleagues, finding the right meaning behind the word, and using it properly, can cause a lot of headaches.
Filmmaker Christopher Nolan, in an op-ed piece in the Wall Street Journal, said the word was a “reductive term,” which “pretends to elevate the creative, but actually trivializes differences of form that have been important to creators and audiences alike.”
From a creative standpoint, the word content can be synonymous with “filler” or “padding” – it runs the risk of offering no innovation or creativity – it’s simply, as Nolan puts it, whatever can be imported to any screen, be it a computer, smartphone, billboard or movie theatre.
For analysts and editors like us, the challenge is in making sure our writing doesn’t feel stale or lifeless. In a strange way, we need to take our cues not only from journalists and researchers, but from artists and storytellers. Tracking markets and trends sometimes requires a certain artistic flair to make the information engaging. When writing about a news story, don’t reduce it to mere “content,” engage your reader with a story, and they’ll keep coming back for more.
This article was originally published on ShiftCentral, now part of LAC Group.
Mario Thériault
Latest posts by Mario Thériault (see all)
- Build v. Buy - October 21, 2019
- ShiftCentral’s Mario Thériault on the evolution of CI and MI - July 11, 2019
- The history of information overload and your law firm’s market intelligence - September 20, 2018