Positive Content: Should You Shoot for Quantity or Quality?
It’s an age-old debate in the marketing world, especially the SEO marketing segment – should a company or individual create higher-quality content at a slower rate or more low-quality content quickly to make a bigger and more positive impact with potential customers?
When it comes to reputation management, the debate is much the same – should you be creating higher quality positive content related to yourself or your company online, or a high quantity of lower quality positive content, which you can produce much faster?
If you’re an absolute genius and have unlimited time on your hands, it is of course possible to generate a large quantity of very high quality content in a relatively short amount of time – but this hardly applies to anyone in the real world.
So we’re going to consider the issue and give you some advice here like you’re a regular person. This should also give you some insight into how our company works, though our large network and larger amounts of important resources make it easy for us to work much faster than the average individual or company PR department.
When I set out to write this article for you all, I certainly had some ideas about the subject in mind, and those have remained largely unchanged even as I’ve done extensive research. Two of the best articles I read were a Hubspot blog post by Ginny Mineo and a Moz article on quality vs. quantity, and though I had slightly different interpretations than the authors sometimes, I think we would all agree on essentially the same quality vs. quantity philosophy.
And that is that the answer is much more complicated than simply choosing to either produce quality content or a high quantity of content.
If you go wholly one way or the other, you’re likely to fail. The low quality, high quantity approach will probably do great things for you in the short term, but won’t have any lasting effects. The high quality, low quantity approach logically seems like it would play out better in the long term – but in reality it would bring so little traffic to your content to begin with that it would hardly have any impact at all.
Let’s take a closer look at how this would play out, thinking specifically of a reputation enhancement scenario.
We’ll say a staffer at XYZ Marketing sent out a controversial tweet that made the local news media, and that a lot of negative reviews of the company and decreased traffic happened as a result. XYZ tried to weather the storm, but soon found that a Google search of their company’s name revealed a full SERP of nothing but negativity related to them. They have to fix their image, right?
Let’s imagine two possible approaches they might take. In one, a few staffers at the company create blogs related to the company or optimized to show up in searches for the company, and a few more write press releases. They update all the blogs four or five times a day, but can’t really create high quality content.
If their SEO is good, they might win out in the short term, but they’ll likely lose the SERP to negative news again because their low quality content will not invite repeat viewership or generate links.
And if they go the other route and only produce the highest quality content possible, their output will be so low and traffic so sparse that they’ll likely never take the SERP back from negative news at all.
A middle of the road approach would obviously be best for this scenario – and this scenario is analogous to many faced by small companies and their marketers or reputation managers.
We’ll be back tomorrow with a detailed analysis of exactly what a middle of the road approach in the quality vs. quantity debate would actually look like for most companies, so be sure to drop by!