We need a name! I have heard “Brand Journalism.” I have heard “Custom Media.” And I have heard “Content Marketing.” Whether it’s B2B or B2C, Lead Generation or Brand Awareness, tactics that use content to engage prospects and customers is nothing new.
Most of us are not old enough to remember when P&G started “soap operas.” Marketers were television producers. In the age of online marketing, publishing websites focused all marketers on the practice of publishing. The rise of blogs took this to another level because everyone could easily become a published author.
This year, MarketingProfs along with Junta42 will soon publish a benchmark study of B2B marketers’ use of content to drive revenue. Plus, Ann Handley, Chief Content Officer of MarketingProfs, will have a book published by John Wiley titled Content Rules, which focuses on how to create great content. Some companies like Radian6 have started to hire Content Marketing Managers.
Marketing with great content works, but to recognize it as a valued profession, we need to name it. I vote for calling it all “Content Marketing.” What do you say?
Tags: Marketing, MarketingProfs
What we don’t need is another name for marketing. “Content Marketing” is a technique not a profession. We are finally getting to a point where some people are starting to think of e-marketing as just marketing or marketing communications, why create a new name for any of this. If you really need a different name how about Public Relations.
How about “Relationship Engineering” Isn’t that what we really do? We build relationships between a brand and a consumer, or we enable a brand to develop a relationship with its consumers.
Content is king in sparking the relationship, but at the end of the day it’s really about nurturing that relationship.
I’m with Harry on this one. Content marketing is, as he says, a technique, not unlike social media marketing or email marketing. It’s really nothing new either. SEO’s have been focused on content creation for a long time. But, then again, maybe what’s old is new again.
Both sides (new name or as is) is interesting. Marketing will always change and it’s up to us to stay current. As far as a name, I’m not sure it really needs it. I think you it’s unofficially been changed to “content marketing” or “social media marketing.” In the end, it will all be lumped under “marketing.”
I think the headline of the post is a bit confusing. The issue is using content to market is becoming universal and of critical importance with the dramatic increase in digital communications vehicles. With the increase in distribution vehicles comes the need to understand WHAT content will be effective in the effort to engage prospects and customers. And with the dramatic increase in distribution vehicles, we need an umbrella name, I think, that communicates what it means that marketers are now publishers.
Roy, I agree that we need to have sub-titles in the marketing profession – if for no other reason than for recruitment purposes. If you want to hire a content marketer, then that’s what the job title should be. In the days of soap operas, all marketing was called advertising. And now look at all the different specialty areas we have within this professional marketing umbrella.
I agree with Andreea. Marketing will continue to evolve as technology does. When I first starting blogging for MP in 2006, the concept was brand new. The word, “blogger” hadn’t previously existed. Now, it seems like eons ago.
Imagine what’s coming around the bend for us? That’s the exciting part.
Thanks all for the great discussion. Not sure this marketing technique is about technology. Rather I see it as a recognition among marketers that buyers are in control, and the way to ingratiate your company and solution to buyers is to give them valuable information they can use in concert with their stage in the “buying cycle.”
Our new methods of distribuing content — including social media, blogs, podcasts, etc. — all have names. But these communication media are effective if the content delivered connects with consumers.
I guess the question is do we need an umbrella name, such as “content marketing” to explain this way of building relationships with customers and prospects? I think we do.
Blogging, which we markerters may think is old news but certainly a part of marketing with content, is growing, if registration running 50% over last year is any indicatino. The name “blogs” or “bloggers” has recognition and value.
As the marketing profession and expertise evolves, we need to “market” what we do to make sure we satisfy our “customers.” In this effort, naming our work, I believe, is important when we communicate the value of marketing.
[...] a marketer, I’m constantly inundated with advice on what I should be doing. Apparently, marketers are now publishers, but not the old-fashioned magazine publishers who only needed to worry about one issue for the [...]