Human behavior is so predictable*, except when it isn’t. Someone somewhere somehow convinced writers and editors that if you can explain it in a 12 steps or less,
do it. And write a headline with the number in the first, second or third position.
Now everyone is doing it. It’s the publishing gimmick that is beyond the ridiculous. It’s so prevalent in social media that it’s almost comical, if it weren’t so annoying. Every day, dozens of tweets stream through feeds teasing readers with posts like this: 6 Simple Steps to Becoming a Master of Social Media, or this: 7 Interview Tips That Will Get You Hired.
Here’s a sample from my Twitter feed today:
5 Easy Ways to Build Your Writer Platform
Credit Card Fraud Protection: 7 Instances When You Should Call Your Credit Card Company
5 Principles of Innovation
6 Marketing Myths
8 Bold Resolutions For Marketers
Top 6 Social Media Marketing Trends of 2011
10 Smart Money Moves To Make Before New Year's
Top 10 Small Business Predictions for 2012
Of course, most of these tweets link to articles in large publications. Not to be outdone, mass media followed suit (or perhaps it’s the other way around?). From mass media websites:
5 Ways to Winterize Your Salad
Top 5 Disappearing Places
12 smart ways to spend $1,200 in 2012
4 Ground-Floor Ways to Invest Globally
Whoever wherever and whyever wrote this unwritten rule needs to take it back.
*sorry about the sweeping generalization, Randy.
Reading rates on these kinds of articles is high. The thinking is that busy people will read 12 tips as opposed to something that sounds like an article. The trade-off is that those "busy" readers show that they don't have a big enough problem to actually invest their time in; ie. they are poor quality traffic. Ultimately, it depends. Measuring the effectiveness of a post or article based on conversions is a better measure than the number of visits it generates.
ReplyDeleteBAM... Yes, it does depend on the purpose of the article. Where the objective is to educate or explain, "articles by numbers" may be a satisfactory formula, but where the reader is expected to take some action, I suspect this style of writing generates poor numbers. You've apparently seen the data that supports this notion.
ReplyDelete