During my 40 years as a producer of business events magazines, it’s been quite rare to meet destinations – be it local, national or international – with a forward-thinking spirit that truly embraces differentiating between karaoke regurgitations and well-written original articles, between amateurish slideshow-style layouts and world-class magazine spreads, between everyday smartphone images and photographic excellence. I find this lack of distinction between the extremes strange.
We recently received an email from a destination we are more than happy to continue working with. They sent us an online survey that they wanted us to participate in, and of course, we gladly obliged. It’s just that there was something important missing from the survey. There was no focus on content. Instead, every question was based solely on metrics.
Topically, we were asked if we use AI. And what editorial office doesn’t, these days? So yes, we do transcription with Cockatoo, translation with Deepl, and text editing with the help of Grammarly. On top of that, AI from Topaz Labs and Adobe also helps with various image-processing tasks. These are all good tools, constantly evolving, but we are just using these services to aid us with certain aspects of an overall process. We don’t use AI for actually writing the articles or otherwise creating original content, only to assist us with shaping said content in certain ways. And some might say that’s kind of an important distinction, worthy of some exploration or nuance, even in an online survey.
— Do you use AI?
— Well, sure, for some aspects of our work. For example, we …
— Your honour, please instruct all witnesses to restrict themselves to ‘yes’ or ‘no’ answers only.
Done, move on.
The survey had no questions, whatsoever, regarding the actual content we create, or even what type of content we can deliver. Not a single one. Not a single time. Nada. This in turn begs the question: Why do measurement and data now appear to be so much more important than the actual content that the metrics stem from?
Why do so few destinations appear to care about what or how we write, or how the writing affects the readers, or which particular readers the writing affects, and instead focus mainly on measuring how many people read what we write? And why do so few destinations use their own channels to, in turn, distribute the content we produce for or about them?
Maybe it’s because they don’t have very active channels of their own, and are therefore looking for third parties to fill the void. Or perhaps they do, but simply don’t track their channels and therefore look to others to supply the data, or at least supplemental data. Regardless, it’s sadly all too easy to get a feeling that too many prioritise quantity over quality.
If analytics is the new religion of choice, why is it more important to show how many contacts you have made than who you have made what kind of contact with? In business, surely the one right contact is more important than any number of irrelevant ones?
Don’t get me wrong, we too agree that big data is essential, it’s just that there are more important things, and steps, than merely generating an abundance of data that we then need help making any true sense of. Could it be that while statistics and big data are major selling points for media agencies, their clients don’t always know what to make of the information, or even that the clients find that making good use of the amassed data is proving a far more challenging task than collecting it in the first place?
We strongly feel it’s time for content to reclaim its rightful position as the true ruler on the throne. As social media grows increasingly antisocial and its level of commentary keeps plummeting, perhaps it’s time to remind buyers and readers what quality content looks like.
