COMMENTS
Great post, and true. I believe effective content marketing is a careful blend that must be included in the mix, along with great content: SEO + syndication + sharing + realistic expectations. Content is a part of the total package, but a powerful component.
Good post, but I don't think many people differentiate between content marketing and inbound marketing. For many of the marketers I meet, these are both new concepts to them. A content marketer who doesn't practice inbound marketing is going to fail, though, I agree with that 100%.
Excellent post Corey! I agree with @Greg Mischio in that I don't think many people differentiate between content marketing and inbound marketing. I've had so many people say "Content marketing, what's that?" to me.
You had me convinced at Montgomery Clift.
Nice post - so true that content marketing fails without the optimizing, sharing, converting, measuring and refining pieces.
Corey.... let me retitle your post for you... It should read "Confessions of a *Bad* Content Marketer". Because, if this is really what you think content marketing is - then it's clear that you don't really understand the scope and purpose of content marketing as a practice.
Certainly there are overlaps at the top of the funnel between IM and CM - but CM goes well beyond lead generation, and into lead nurturing, customer retention, upsell, customer service and areas that Inbound Marketing just doesn't cover. To draw it into your metaphor - it sounds to me like you were a "sunday content marketer" only going to church on holidays and barely mouthing the words of the hymnal. You should spend the time to learn the depths of CM - you may be surprised at how much salvation there actually is. I'd suggest a couple of "good books" (sorry couldn't resist that one) on the topic - but that would be self-serving.
Cheers,
~rr
Robert,
I would argue that we shouldn't be arguing. What you described in your comment is inbound marketing. Inbound marketing DOES include lead nurturing, customer retention, upsell, customer service as well as marketng analytics and sales and marketing alignment that is often forgotten in content marketing.
What you are telling me is that you are an inbound marketer, not a content marketer.
@Kipp...
Wait what? Is then Corey is a failed inbound marketer? Because if the two are equal then... Okay, now you have me really confused...
No... In the post Corey describes content marketing as a "subset of inbound marketing"... And inbound marketing working toward customer retention and service is a new one for me... Hubspot's own vision says it is focused on:
"get found by more prospects shopping in their niche, convert a higher percentage of prospects into customers and analyze the results to figure out what works for their target audience." Maybe I'm wrong - and maybe in your opinion inbound marketing ALSO covers these areas - but I certainly don't see it...
But, really to draw a distinction between the two and imply that one is "more comprehensive" than another - and then to say that both are synonymous is just confusing.
Hi Corey,
I find you post to be a huge generalization about content marketing without basis in fact. Rather, I think it's more of a "How to Fail at Content Marketing" rant.
Interestingly, I was on a Focus Roundtable panel with Mike Volpe - who talks about how HubSpot was built from the ground up on content marketing.
You may wish to listen to it:
http://www.focus.com/roundtables/expert-best-practices-content-marketing/
I think the problem here is that it's not either or, but both. Inbound includes content marketing (why else would someone come?), just as content marketing includes inbound (people must know to come).
Two different flavors. That's all.
I totally believe this .. thats why I focus on analytics see how people are organically finding me and then working that angle to get my presence better known.
Thanks for the article.
I suspect a large percentage of marketers are just discovering the whole idea of "Content Strategy" and "Social Media Strategy" (witness the number of lamentations online about the lack of accountability of social media . . .)
Companies ideally have a Content Strategy that addresses:
1. Where the content hub(s) are going to be
2. How are we going to drive traffic there
3. Which content can become trackable offers
4. What other format(s) can we use to distribute this content, etc.
If Content Strategy is driving "Content Marketing", then there shouldn't be any distinction between that and "Inbound Marketing." The Content Strategy itself includes Inbound traffic-driving elements.
But if, like many social media efforts, you focus only on the tactical "Content Marketing" actions, it's likely you'll have that "just can't see the results" lament once again.
Strategy first -- no matter how sexy the tactic, no matter how electronic or digital or online or interactive. And no matter how young of a marketer you are.
Corey, I find it poor choice that you've written this post and not continued the conversation in the comment section. C'mon man, if you're going to write it, defend it.
I don't know any marketers, much less "content marketers," who fit the stereotype set forth in this post.
I'm also fairly confident most recognize that content without SEO, social sharing, e-mail and other optimization, promotion and distribution techniques will only get their business and a brand so far.
Having said that, I'd be willing to bet that if you asked a group of marketers which is the subset of the other -- "content marketing" or "inbound marketing" -- the majority would say inbound is a subset of content.
In fact, some of us, me included, believe even attaching the word "marketing" to branded content is somewhat limiting. That's because smart strategy, and relevant/engaging content, can also make a big difference for a brand when applied in such areas as customer service, sales support, corporate social responsibility and employee communications.
I'm a fan of HubSpot technologies and methodology -- and a relatively new HubSpot partner. HubSpot has done a terrific job offering marketers proven methods and tools for turning "remarkable content" (a favorite HubSpot term) into marketing results.
But I see very little to be gained by drawing over-generalizations and artificial boundaries between content marketing and inbound marketing.
In fact, I won't be surprised if some HubSpot customers who consider themselves content marketers take umbrage at being tarnished with such a broad and condescending brush.
Totally agree with Rob and the Sales Lion here. The post basically aligns itself with a definition of content marketing where those who do it apparently don't care about any other metric other than traffic. Which I suppose serves the premise of the article, but that doesn't make it true.
I suspect the REAL purpose of this post is to drag down the term "content marketing" as incomplete, as a way to build UP the concept of "inbound marketing" as something superior. Considering the source, and that HubSpot and Inbound Marketing are pretty much synonymous, it's actually a great piece of CONTENT MARKETING when you look at it that way.
I'm a big fan of HubSpot and agree that what they do with inbound marketing is incredibly powerful and important, but belittling content marketing and those who align themselves with it just to make that point seems a little unnecessary.
You're absolutely right. Not only is there plenty of excellent content out there, but not all "poor quality" content as Google likes to call it sinks to the bottom. Competition is fierce. Good and even great content will not surface spontaneously, no more than good products jump off the shelf. I call this competitive environment one of "Content Inflation" where 700 million online publishers are forced to spam/become inbound marketers http://return-on-clicks.com/index.php/2011/08/facing-content-inflation/.