#Why would you settle for the middle man just go to a domain website and just buy it?

[sonicapproves]

why can you buy domains on tumblr why would you buy domains on tumblr

[snifflesthemouse]

Lilibet was a Marketing Mind Trick...

WARNING, THIS IS LONG AND NOT EDITED VERY WELL! SORRY! 

         As you all certainly know by now, Harry and his wife have welcomed their second child into the world. According to the announcement, Lilibet “Lili” Diana Mountbatten-Windsor was born 4 June 2021 at Santa Barbara Cottage Hospital. The announcement came two days after the child’s arrival. While the British Royal Family seemingly learned about the arrival of the second Sussex baby like the rest of us, one could argue they knew of the birth the day it happened. But I will get into all of that in a moment.

Due to the recent stork stop in Montecito, I felt it necessary to pause working on other posts to do this one. To say this author was left dumbfounded – no, completely flabbergasted – by the name chosen for the second child would be an understatement. Why on earth would this couple, especially given their recent claims and accusations, choose such a name for their only daughter?

         Now, I am fully aware the press statement issued by the “Press Secretary for the Duke and Duchess of Sussex” elaborates why each name was chosen, as well as the intentions of calling the child “Lili”. It even says that Lilibet was the “family nickname” for Her Majesty the Queen. One could argue the mystery is solved, that the name was clearly a nod to the child’s paternal grandmother and paternal great-grandmother. One could also argue the real reasons behind naming the child as such go much deeper than the explanation given in the well-crafted, thoughtful press release. This author is the one arguing the latter.

         It would seem a pattern exists with the Sussex family regarding nicknames. After all, Harry’s real name is Henry. His wife’s real name is Rachel. Then we have Archie Harrison Mountbatten-Windsor. Regardless of the media source, most agree Harrison is a nod to Harry since Harrison means “Harry’s Son”. Which seems odd to me; even Harrison is borne from the nickname of the father instead of the actual name of the father.

The meaning behind Archie isn’t so cut-and-dry. Some articles say Archie is version of the Greek word “arche”, meaning “source of action”. Others say Archie means bold, brave, courageous. I’ve even read articles saying Archie was a type of anagram for the name Rachel. It must be mentioned, though, that Archie has been linked to HRH Prince George of Cambridge, as it has been reported several times that Prince George would introduce himself in public as “Archie”. So much so, some argue the name was essentially hijacked from the third in line to the throne.

When it was announced the couple named their daughter Lilibet Diana with the intentions of calling her “Lili”, the world responded with very mixed reviews. They essentially hijacked the personal nickname of the highest-ranking member in the British Royal Family for their daughter’s first name. Then, they decided to tell the world they will call her Lili, yet another nickname borne from the nickname they hijacked.

I know the Queen doesn’t own the name Lilibet, but I also know that the nickname of Lilibet is so personally linked to Her Majesty that billions of people around the world by now understand the link between the Queen and Lilibet. Which brings me to the purpose of this post. Finally. The word association between Lilibet and the Queen is so strong, it is almost commonplace. While everyone else is trying to decide if naming their daughter Lilibet was meant to be an olive branch or a jab, I see things completely differently.

To me, naming the child Lilibet has nothing to do with paying homage to the Queen or taking a dig at her. To me, the name was chosen for a few different reasons. The way I see it, every decision the Montecito Muppets make is geared toward their ultimate goals. Goals like cementing their place as super stars in the United States, as well as ensuring those precious titles and links to the British Royal Family are never removed. Naming their child Lilibet has nothing to do with digs or olive branches; it has everything to do with self-serving, self-preserving motives. It is their way of appealing to the US target audience while ensuring their Royal relatives in the UK are left with no other option but kindness.

Essentially, naming their second child Lilibet is a mind trick meant to remind the world that they are in fact still part of the British Royal Family. It was their way of garnering sympathy from the US target audience by showing “See, look, we have healed enough we can name her after our oppressor! See, look! We are forgiving!” It was also yet another way of using word association trickery to keep people thinking about them as Royals. Which is another future post I’ll be making; why does everyone still treat the expats as Royals when even Buckingham Palace doesn’t? I digress…

Whether or not the Queen was made aware of the decision to use Lilibet for the child’s first name is still unclear. We do know, however, that on the date the child was said to arrive, website domains using different variations of the child’s name were bought up with a quickness. Using the ICANN Lookup website, one can search various versions of the name as a website address and find that lilidiana.com was registered 31 May 2021 before lilibetdiana.com was. Most all the website variations are held by GoDaddy with Scottsdale Arizona billing addresses. A couple variations were registered with Oregon and Maryland addresses, though. You can search domain names and their origins here: https://lookup.icann.org/

I originally wondered if the Palace knew ahead of the announcement and purchased the domain names. But it would seem like that is not the case because of the billing addresses. For example, travalyst.com was registered by the Royal Foundation and has a London billing address. So, if they did buy up the domains, they did so through a third party to hide the fact they did. Otherwise, it seems like the couple purchased them. Still yet, someone close to the couple aware of the name choices could’ve bought up the domains with the hopes of reselling them at astronomical prices later on.

         The thing is, if the Palace didn’t know about the child’s birth until after the fact like the rest of the world, it would mean Harry and his wife cared far more about domain purchases than telling their own families about the child’s arrival. That is in itself, colder than cold. It reiterates my own belief behind why they chose Lilibet. But again, I am off topic. Back to why they chose Lilibet.

         Aside from the fact the name Lilibet has had almost nine decades to settle and resonate in the minds of humanity, there is another reason the name could’ve been chosen. You see, now when people hear the child’s name, they will automatically see the Queen’s face in their minds. That also means when the next in line to the throne becomes the one sitting on the throne, he too will automatically think of his mother when considering his granddaughter.

         What a clever way to ensure the child is on the receiving end of falsely displaced affections and a strong emotional response given by the next in line, even if the next in line never meets the granddaughter. Let me give you an example that better explains this. My husband always said if we had a daughter, we would name her after his father. The name would be varied in spelling to make it feminine, but nonetheless, it would sound exactly like his father’s name. My husband’s father died over a decade ago when my husband was in his twenties. My husband and his father had a good relationship overall, but his father had a serious drinking problem. His father didn’t stop drinking until after my husband was grown. So, there are expected hard feelings that exist within my husband about his late father. It would make sense to say the namesake would trigger those hard feelings, even if unintentionally done, that my husband still has regarding his father. He would think of his dad every time he saw his daughter. Thank God we didn’t ever have a daughter.

         With Lilibet, even long after the Queen is gone, the name will always trigger the emotions, thoughts, and affections held by the thinker. In other words, even though Charles knows the granddaughter is not his mother, when he hears the name Lilibet, he will think of his mother first. So, when it comes time for the future King Charles to decide on what to do regarding titles or involvements of Harry or his children, it will be harder for a sensitive man like Charles to be stern.

         Naming the child Lilibet Diana is a double trigger for Charles. But the first name is enough to surpass the middle one. In a way, naming the child Lilibet is guaranteeing the mother’s future hope for the children regarding roles in the Royal Family. It is not the actual, physical involvement they need within the Royal Family. They simply need word associations and links to the Royal Family to continue monetizing them here in the US; the reason the US is their target audience is simple. The US lacks the basic understanding of monarchy, and there is a common stance if you make it big in America, you make it everywhere else in the world.

         Since the recent attacks coming from Harry greatly reduces the chances for the wife to strengthen these links, the name was her only option. And now we even have stories coming out saying the wife is looking to HRH Catherine the Duchess of Cambridge for help mending fences they themselves ruined. Which makes me believe even more that the choice of name was a marketing tool. Just like people displaced their affections and love for Diana toward Harry, Harry’s wife is hoping the same will happen with their second child. Slick, slick move.

[gabrielcollignon]

Is Your Social Content Picture-Perfect or Merely Taking Stock?

Is Your Social Content Picture-Perfect or Merely Taking Stock?

Attention span in social media can be measured in split seconds, not minutes. While your update hopes to entice me to click or interact with your content, there are hundreds of other posts right below yours also crying for my attention. And should your choice of eye-catching image cause me to pause for a moment, my finger is constantly resting on the screen, waiting to flick-scroll your content up the feed and off my screen with the tiniest of well-practiced muscle reflexes.

Here’s the bad news: This fleeting first impression may be the only opportunity many people have to discover your content. And if you waste that opportunity, it won’t matter how well researched, brain meltingly creative, and all-round wonderful your content might be because we’ll never know.

Sure, you can’t judge a book by its cover but, in a crowded bookstore, covers help us find those books that we might enjoy while skipping over the thousands of others we haven’t the time to “judge” by reading. Similarly, when our social media feeds are choked with content links begging for attention, you better hope your choice of image causes people to stop and take notice.

Can’t judge book by its cover, but it helps. Same with an image in a #socialmedia post, says @Kimota. Click To Tweet

HANDPICKED RELATED CONTENT: Humanize Your Brand: 3 Ways to Create a Visual Social Media Calendar

Out of the picture?

I’m scrolling through my Twitter feed – merrily hitting the heart symbol on tweets that make me chuckle and clicking on the occasional link – when I spot the same image attached to two almost consecutive tweets originally posted only five minutes apart. Two people inadvertently used the same generic stock image to promote two very different blog posts – one a comparison of blogging platforms and the other a listicle of content marketing tips.

Within the context of each post, the generic stock photo of hands typing on a keyboard tells two different stories – is the person installing plugins to WordPress or writing great marketing content? Sure, these topics overlap so it could be both, but it could be neither. The same image could also make sense in an article about bookkeeping, desktop gaming, or online shopping.

The unspecific nature of such stock images means that they can’t stand alone – they need context because they have virtually none of their own. The image only matches the content when placed within or alongside it. Put the same image in a different context and the message it contains (such as it is) changes.

And when shared to social, the context provided by the article becomes far less obvious at a glance – which is all most people will see as they scroll through their feeds. Suddenly that stock image risks being no more distinctive than a black T-shirt at a heavy metal concert.

A stock image risks being no more distinctive than a black T-shirt at a heavy metal concert, says @Kimota. Click To Tweet

How do so many brands and marketers expect their audiences to take particular notice of their updates when they look just as bland, predictable, and uninteresting as all of the other updates they just scrolled past?

HANDPICKED RELATED CONTENT: Say No to Stock Photography and Create Authentic Images

Picture paints a thousand words

Anyone arguing for the importance of images in content, social, or just about anywhere is almost certain to quote the hoary old chestnut that our brains process images 60,000 times faster than text. A big, brash stat like that would make just about any argument a slam dunk. So it’s rather unfortunate that it may be *gasp* fake news, as though many have tried, no one has ever tracked down the original source for this claim. Big claims need big evidence, and a source can’t be just another blog post quoting the same stat – so can everyone please just knock it off with the unsourced and/or misquoted stats? Thanks.

What isn’t in dispute, however, is that we consume visual information far faster than text-based information. I just don’t have a sexy stat for you. After all, we use the same visual system to see the world – or look at an image – as we do to read text, but the brain still has to do additional work to turn those letters on the page or screen into language and meaning.

Say I show you an image of a tiger leaping at a man holding a gun in the middle of a jungle clearing. Your brain would see all of that information (and more) simultaneously, taking in the thrilling scene almost instantaneously. Yet it takes a few seconds to read, understand, and visualize the same scene based on the previous sentence.

Unfortunately, while the power of images is well known, the process of selecting and attaching them is too often an afterthought. I’ve been involved in more than one content project or website where image selection was routinely treated as an inconvenience – a final step to be completed begrudgingly just before the article is published. The content may have taken weeks of dedicated research and creativity to produce, but the first thing most of the potential audience will see is a hurriedly chosen image, selected by overworked marketing assistants who may not have even had time to read the final piece.

It’s not the marketing assistants’ fault. They’re following the agreed process or workflow, forced to do in five minutes what no one else chose to consider. They don’t even have time to get lost in page after page of stock photo hell, so end up settling for the first image that vaguely matches the topic. This one of a keyboard with the letters rearranged to spell out “creativity” will (ironically) just have to do, because there are 50 million other tasks needing urgent attention if the ravenous content beast is to be constantly sated.

As a result, the benefits are undermined by the use of images too abstract or generic to convey the topic or relevance of the content, which is why they fail to capture enough of the potential audience’s attention.

What is that person typing on a keyboard? Why do those shiny business people look so happy in their shiny boardroom? How are those abstract icons and buzzwords floating in a cloud supposed to relate to me?

If you’re going to take up valuable real estate in someone’s feed with images, use that space wisely and make them as informative and as relevant as possible.

If you take up real estate in someone’s feed with images, use that space wisely, advises @Kimota. #socialmedia Click To Tweet

Pretty as a picture

I’m a fan of adding graphic text to the image, such as the title or a key quote from the content, or even a newsworthy stat that gives some indication of the valuable information just waiting behind the click. While this text still has to be read, it is consumed along with the image and is usually much larger than any surrounding text in the feed. This approach treats images in social as more akin to a banner or a preview than the standard blog image many content producers are providing.

A perfect example of this approach is how our very own CMI uses images in social. Each blog post image clearly displays the title, author byline and CMI logo, giving CMI content a distinct visual style easy to spot in the busiest of feeds.

Alternatively, you might develop a distinctive image style through how you select or treat your images. Some brands use filters and overlays, while others might have rules dictating predominant colors or other graphic elements to create a recognizable look and feel.

Lyft — known for its mustachioed cars — projects the same fun image in social. It uses loud, pink-and-purple tones in its visuals, often combined with hand-drawn typography and cartoons. The cars are easily noticed and recognized as uniquely Lyft.

For my own blog, I solved this problem by only using illustrations taken from comic books in the public domain, thereby sidestepping any pesky copyright issues.

This eliminated the need for me to use the same stock-image libraries as everyone else while also contrasting with the dominance of photos filling my feeds. Plus, this restriction also prevents me from ever being too literal or obvious, as there are no smartphones in 1930s comics, for example. Yes, it still takes me a while to find just the right comic frames to be contextually relevant or suitably analogous, but the final result makes my content indisputably mine from first glance alone.

In some cases, it may be more effective to create one image for the blog or website and another for social, possibly even one for each network.

After all, these can be different environments with different design requirements – never mind different audiences and behaviors. (Best practice image dimensions and formats for social do change, so I won’t go into them here. Google is your friend for that.)

Be more effective with your images – create one for the blog & another for social. @Kimota #visualcontent Click To Tweet

While that’s ultimately up to you and your design strategy, creating additional images for social shouldn’t be too much extra work if you have the necessary templates and design elements in place, along with the time and workflow to get them right. That’s why the design of your content, including the social elements, should ideally be worked out alongside content production. If you have an editorial calendar, there really isn’t much reason why it shouldn’t.

I’m a great believer that the need to drive clicks from social should never be the guiding principle of your content – for the road to marketing hell is paved with clickbait – but it shouldn’t be treated as an afterthought either. Even the most talented person can still flunk a job interview by turning up in whatever clothes were closest just before leaving the house.

The road to #marketing hell is paved with clickbait, says @Kimota. Click To Tweet

Your choice of social media image defines the first impression many people will have of your content and your brand. Do you really want the first impression to be your last priority?

HANDPICKED RELATED CONTENT:

11 Smart Marketing Examples That Nail Visual Content

How to Build a Smart Yet Simple Social Media Marketing Plan [Template]

A version of this article originally appeared in the August issue of Chief Content Officer. Sign up to receive your free subscription to our bimonthly, print magazine.

Cover image by Joseph Kalinowski/Content Marketing Institute

The post Is Your Social Content Picture-Perfect or Merely Taking Stock? appeared first on Content Marketing Institute.

[lucyariablog]

Is Your Social Content Picture-Perfect or Merely Taking Stock?

Attention span in social media can be measured in split seconds, not minutes. While your update hopes to entice me to click or interact with your content, there are hundreds of other posts right below yours also crying for my attention. And should your choice of eye-catching image cause me to pause for a moment, my finger is constantly resting on the screen, waiting to flick-scroll your content up the feed and off my screen with the tiniest of well-practiced muscle reflexes.

Here’s the bad news: This fleeting first impression may be the only opportunity many people have to discover your content. And if you waste that opportunity, it won’t matter how well researched, brain meltingly creative, and all-round wonderful your content might be because we’ll never know.

Sure, you can’t judge a book by its cover but, in a crowded bookstore, covers help us find those books that we might enjoy while skipping over the thousands of others we haven’t the time to “judge” by reading. Similarly, when our social media feeds are choked with content links begging for attention, you better hope your choice of image causes people to stop and take notice.

Can’t judge book by its cover, but it helps. Same with an image in a #socialmedia post, says @Kimota. Click To Tweet

HANDPICKED RELATED CONTENT: Humanize Your Brand: 3 Ways to Create a Visual Social Media Calendar

Out of the picture?

I’m scrolling through my Twitter feed – merrily hitting the heart symbol on tweets that make me chuckle and clicking on the occasional link – when I spot the same image attached to two almost consecutive tweets originally posted only five minutes apart. Two people inadvertently used the same generic stock image to promote two very different blog posts – one a comparison of blogging platforms and the other a listicle of content marketing tips.

Within the context of each post, the generic stock photo of hands typing on a keyboard tells two different stories – is the person installing plugins to WordPress or writing great marketing content? Sure, these topics overlap so it could be both, but it could be neither. The same image could also make sense in an article about bookkeeping, desktop gaming, or online shopping.

The unspecific nature of such stock images means that they can’t stand alone – they need context because they have virtually none of their own. The image only matches the content when placed within or alongside it. Put the same image in a different context and the message it contains (such as it is) changes.

And when shared to social, the context provided by the article becomes far less obvious at a glance – which is all most people will see as they scroll through their feeds. Suddenly that stock image risks being no more distinctive than a black T-shirt at a heavy metal concert.

A stock image risks being no more distinctive than a black T-shirt at a heavy metal concert, says @Kimota. Click To Tweet

How do so many brands and marketers expect their audiences to take particular notice of their updates when they look just as bland, predictable, and uninteresting as all of the other updates they just scrolled past?

HANDPICKED RELATED CONTENT: Say No to Stock Photography and Create Authentic Images

Picture paints a thousand words

Anyone arguing for the importance of images in content, social, or just about anywhere is almost certain to quote the hoary old chestnut that our brains process images 60,000 times faster than text. A big, brash stat like that would make just about any argument a slam dunk. So it’s rather unfortunate that it may be *gasp* fake news, as though many have tried, no one has ever tracked down the original source for this claim. Big claims need big evidence, and a source can’t be just another blog post quoting the same stat – so can everyone please just knock it off with the unsourced and/or misquoted stats? Thanks.

What isn’t in dispute, however, is that we consume visual information far faster than text-based information. I just don’t have a sexy stat for you. After all, we use the same visual system to see the world – or look at an image – as we do to read text, but the brain still has to do additional work to turn those letters on the page or screen into language and meaning.

Say I show you an image of a tiger leaping at a man holding a gun in the middle of a jungle clearing. Your brain would see all of that information (and more) simultaneously, taking in the thrilling scene almost instantaneously. Yet it takes a few seconds to read, understand, and visualize the same scene based on the previous sentence.

Unfortunately, while the power of images is well known, the process of selecting and attaching them is too often an afterthought. I’ve been involved in more than one content project or website where image selection was routinely treated as an inconvenience – a final step to be completed begrudgingly just before the article is published. The content may have taken weeks of dedicated research and creativity to produce, but the first thing most of the potential audience will see is a hurriedly chosen image, selected by overworked marketing assistants who may not have even had time to read the final piece.

It’s not the marketing assistants’ fault. They’re following the agreed process or workflow, forced to do in five minutes what no one else chose to consider. They don’t even have time to get lost in page after page of stock photo hell, so end up settling for the first image that vaguely matches the topic. This one of a keyboard with the letters rearranged to spell out “creativity” will (ironically) just have to do, because there are 50 million other tasks needing urgent attention if the ravenous content beast is to be constantly sated.

As a result, the benefits are undermined by the use of images too abstract or generic to convey the topic or relevance of the content, which is why they fail to capture enough of the potential audience’s attention.

What is that person typing on a keyboard? Why do those shiny business people look so happy in their shiny boardroom? How are those abstract icons and buzzwords floating in a cloud supposed to relate to me?

If you’re going to take up valuable real estate in someone’s feed with images, use that space wisely and make them as informative and as relevant as possible.

If you take up real estate in someone’s feed with images, use that space wisely, advises @Kimota. #socialmedia Click To Tweet

Pretty as a picture

I’m a fan of adding graphic text to the image, such as the title or a key quote from the content, or even a newsworthy stat that gives some indication of the valuable information just waiting behind the click. While this text still has to be read, it is consumed along with the image and is usually much larger than any surrounding text in the feed. This approach treats images in social as more akin to a banner or a preview than the standard blog image many content producers are providing.

A perfect example of this approach is how our very own CMI uses images in social. Each blog post image clearly displays the title, author byline and CMI logo, giving CMI content a distinct visual style easy to spot in the busiest of feeds.

Alternatively, you might develop a distinctive image style through how you select or treat your images. Some brands use filters and overlays, while others might have rules dictating predominant colors or other graphic elements to create a recognizable look and feel.

Lyft — known for its mustachioed cars — projects the same fun image in social. It uses loud, pink-and-purple tones in its visuals, often combined with hand-drawn typography and cartoons. The cars are easily noticed and recognized as uniquely Lyft.

For my own blog, I solved this problem by only using illustrations taken from comic books in the public domain, thereby sidestepping any pesky copyright issues.

This eliminated the need for me to use the same stock-image libraries as everyone else while also contrasting with the dominance of photos filling my feeds. Plus, this restriction also prevents me from ever being too literal or obvious, as there are no smartphones in 1930s comics, for example. Yes, it still takes me a while to find just the right comic frames to be contextually relevant or suitably analogous, but the final result makes my content indisputably mine from first glance alone.

In some cases, it may be more effective to create one image for the blog or website and another for social, possibly even one for each network.

After all, these can be different environments with different design requirements – never mind different audiences and behaviors. (Best practice image dimensions and formats for social do change, so I won’t go into them here. Google is your friend for that.)

Be more effective with your images – create one for the blog & another for social @Kimota. #visualcontent Click To Tweet

While that’s ultimately up to you and your design strategy, creating additional images for social shouldn’t be too much extra work if you have the necessary templates and design elements in place, along with the time and workflow to get them right. That’s why the design of your content, including the social elements, should ideally be worked out alongside content production. If you have an editorial calendar, there really isn’t much reason why it shouldn’t.

I’m a great believer that the need to drive clicks from social should never be the guiding principle of your content – for the road to marketing hell is paved with clickbait – but it shouldn’t be treated as an afterthought either. Even the most talented person can still flunk a job interview by turning up in whatever clothes were closest just before leaving the house.

The road to #marketing hell is paved with clickbait, says @Kimota. Click To Tweet

Your choice of social media image defines the first impression many people will have of your content and your brand. Do you really want the first impression to be your last priority?

HANDPICKED RELATED CONTENT:

11 Smart Marketing Examples That Nail Visual Content

How to Build a Smart Yet Simple Social Media Marketing Plan [Template]

A version of this article originally appeared in the August issue of Chief Content Officer. Sign up to receive your free subscription to our bimonthly, print magazine.

Cover image by Joseph Kalinowski/Content Marketing Institute

The post Is Your Social Content Picture-Perfect or Merely Taking Stock? appeared first on Content Marketing Institute.

from http://contentmarketinginstitute.com/2017/08/social-content-picture-perfect/

[hotspreadpage]

Is Your Social Content Picture-Perfect or Merely Taking Stock?

Attention span in social media can be measured in split seconds, not minutes. While your update hopes to entice me to click or interact with your content, there are hundreds of other posts right below yours also crying for my attention. And should your choice of eye-catching image cause me to pause for a moment, my finger is constantly resting on the screen, waiting to flick-scroll your content up the feed and off my screen with the tiniest of well-practiced muscle reflexes.

Here’s the bad news: This fleeting first impression may be the only opportunity many people have to discover your content. And if you waste that opportunity, it won’t matter how well researched, brain meltingly creative, and all-round wonderful your content might be because we’ll never know.

Sure, you can’t judge a book by its cover but, in a crowded bookstore, covers help us find those books that we might enjoy while skipping over the thousands of others we haven’t the time to “judge” by reading. Similarly, when our social media feeds are choked with content links begging for attention, you better hope your choice of image causes people to stop and take notice.

Can’t judge book by its cover, but it helps. Same with an image in a #socialmedia post, says @Kimota. Click To Tweet

HANDPICKED RELATED CONTENT: Humanize Your Brand: 3 Ways to Create a Visual Social Media Calendar

Out of the picture?

I’m scrolling through my Twitter feed – merrily hitting the heart symbol on tweets that make me chuckle and clicking on the occasional link – when I spot the same image attached to two almost consecutive tweets originally posted only five minutes apart. Two people inadvertently used the same generic stock image to promote two very different blog posts – one a comparison of blogging platforms and the other a listicle of content marketing tips.

Within the context of each post, the generic stock photo of hands typing on a keyboard tells two different stories – is the person installing plugins to WordPress or writing great marketing content? Sure, these topics overlap so it could be both, but it could be neither. The same image could also make sense in an article about bookkeeping, desktop gaming, or online shopping.

The unspecific nature of such stock images means that they can’t stand alone – they need context because they have virtually none of their own. The image only matches the content when placed within or alongside it. Put the same image in a different context and the message it contains (such as it is) changes.

And when shared to social, the context provided by the article becomes far less obvious at a glance – which is all most people will see as they scroll through their feeds. Suddenly that stock image risks being no more distinctive than a black T-shirt at a heavy metal concert.

A stock image risks being no more distinctive than a black T-shirt at a heavy metal concert, says @Kimota. Click To Tweet

How do so many brands and marketers expect their audiences to take particular notice of their updates when they look just as bland, predictable, and uninteresting as all of the other updates they just scrolled past?

HANDPICKED RELATED CONTENT: Say No to Stock Photography and Create Authentic Images

Picture paints a thousand words

Anyone arguing for the importance of images in content, social, or just about anywhere is almost certain to quote the hoary old chestnut that our brains process images 60,000 times faster than text. A big, brash stat like that would make just about any argument a slam dunk. So it’s rather unfortunate that it may be *gasp* fake news, as though many have tried, no one has ever tracked down the original source for this claim. Big claims need big evidence, and a source can’t be just another blog post quoting the same stat – so can everyone please just knock it off with the unsourced and/or misquoted stats? Thanks.

What isn’t in dispute, however, is that we consume visual information far faster than text-based information. I just don’t have a sexy stat for you. After all, we use the same visual system to see the world – or look at an image – as we do to read text, but the brain still has to do additional work to turn those letters on the page or screen into language and meaning.

Say I show you an image of a tiger leaping at a man holding a gun in the middle of a jungle clearing. Your brain would see all of that information (and more) simultaneously, taking in the thrilling scene almost instantaneously. Yet it takes a few seconds to read, understand, and visualize the same scene based on the previous sentence.

Unfortunately, while the power of images is well known, the process of selecting and attaching them is too often an afterthought. I’ve been involved in more than one content project or website where image selection was routinely treated as an inconvenience – a final step to be completed begrudgingly just before the article is published. The content may have taken weeks of dedicated research and creativity to produce, but the first thing most of the potential audience will see is a hurriedly chosen image, selected by overworked marketing assistants who may not have even had time to read the final piece.

It’s not the marketing assistants’ fault. They’re following the agreed process or workflow, forced to do in five minutes what no one else chose to consider. They don’t even have time to get lost in page after page of stock photo hell, so end up settling for the first image that vaguely matches the topic. This one of a keyboard with the letters rearranged to spell out “creativity” will (ironically) just have to do, because there are 50 million other tasks needing urgent attention if the ravenous content beast is to be constantly sated.

As a result, the benefits are undermined by the use of images too abstract or generic to convey the topic or relevance of the content, which is why they fail to capture enough of the potential audience’s attention.

What is that person typing on a keyboard? Why do those shiny business people look so happy in their shiny boardroom? How are those abstract icons and buzzwords floating in a cloud supposed to relate to me?

If you’re going to take up valuable real estate in someone’s feed with images, use that space wisely and make them as informative and as relevant as possible.

If you take up real estate in someone’s feed with images, use that space wisely, advises @Kimota. #socialmedia Click To Tweet

Pretty as a picture

I’m a fan of adding graphic text to the image, such as the title or a key quote from the content, or even a newsworthy stat that gives some indication of the valuable information just waiting behind the click. While this text still has to be read, it is consumed along with the image and is usually much larger than any surrounding text in the feed. This approach treats images in social as more akin to a banner or a preview than the standard blog image many content producers are providing.

A perfect example of this approach is how our very own CMI uses images in social. Each blog post image clearly displays the title, author byline and CMI logo, giving CMI content a distinct visual style easy to spot in the busiest of feeds.

http://ift.tt/2vo86pI

Alternatively, you might develop a distinctive image style through how you select or treat your images. Some brands use filters and overlays, while others might have rules dictating predominant colors or other graphic elements to create a recognizable look and feel.

Lyft — known for its mustachioed cars — projects the same fun image in social. It uses loud, pink-and-purple tones in its visuals, often combined with hand-drawn typography and cartoons. The cars are easily noticed and recognized as uniquely Lyft.

For my own blog, I solved this problem by only using illustrations taken from comic books in the public domain, thereby sidestepping any pesky copyright issues.

This eliminated the need for me to use the same stock-image libraries as everyone else while also contrasting with the dominance of photos filling my feeds. Plus, this restriction also prevents me from ever being too literal or obvious, as there are no smartphones in 1930s comics, for example. Yes, it still takes me a while to find just the right comic frames to be contextually relevant or suitably analogous, but the final result makes my content indisputably mine from first glance alone.

In some cases, it may be more effective to create one image for the blog or website and another for social, possibly even one for each network.

After all, these can be different environments with different design requirements – never mind different audiences and behaviors. (Best practice image dimensions and formats for social do change, so I won’t go into them here. Google is your friend for that.)

Be more effective with your images – create one for the blog & another for social @Kimota. #visualcontent Click To Tweet

While that’s ultimately up to you and your design strategy, creating additional images for social shouldn’t be too much extra work if you have the necessary templates and design elements in place, along with the time and workflow to get them right. That’s why the design of your content, including the social elements, should ideally be worked out alongside content production. If you have an editorial calendar, there really isn’t much reason why it shouldn’t.

I’m a great believer that the need to drive clicks from social should never be the guiding principle of your content – for the road to marketing hell is paved with clickbait – but it shouldn’t be treated as an afterthought either. Even the most talented person can still flunk a job interview by turning up in whatever clothes were closest just before leaving the house.

The road to #marketing hell is paved with clickbait, says @Kimota. Click To Tweet

Your choice of social media image defines the first impression many people will have of your content and your brand. Do you really want the first impression to be your last priority?

HANDPICKED RELATED CONTENT:

11 Smart Marketing Examples That Nail Visual Content

How to Build a Smart Yet Simple Social Media Marketing Plan [Template]

A version of this article originally appeared in the August issue of Chief Content Officer. Sign up to receive your free subscription to our bimonthly, print magazine.

Cover image by Joseph Kalinowski/Content Marketing Institute

The post Is Your Social Content Picture-Perfect or Merely Taking Stock? appeared first on Content Marketing Institute.

Is Your Social Content Picture-Perfect or Merely Taking Stock? syndicated from http://ift.tt/2maPRjm