Let's Talk About What Exactly 'Quality Content' Means

"Quality content is key! Quality content is king!" This is something I've said numerous times in any number of conversations. Heads nod in agreement. Always. Every time. But what exactly does 'quality content' mean?

Much like my relationships during my 20s, the explanation can be... complicated.

To keep this narrative under reasonable control, I'm defining "content" around digital media and excluding music, art and book publishing.

Quality content is original

This may seem like a no-brainer, but the easiest way to judge content's quality is by its originality. Some videographer, editor, producer, writer or photographer really put the work in to creating something new. They told a story that hadn't been told before, discovered a product on Etsy that hadn't been covered yet, dug something up in an investigation nobody saw coming, created a sensation with a new kind of super simple hack that nobodys' thought of yet.

Originality is hard. It is one of the hardest things to achieve in a saturated content space. How hard is it to be truly original? I've had editors and writers spend hours and hours coming up with ideas only to have 99% of them get sent back for revision, research or shot down because upon review, the pitches had been done before, or were at least too similar to something else already out there. It's hard to be original. But when it works it pays off like nothing else.

But content being "fully original" doesn't automatically mean it is "quality" content. So many things can go wrong...

The story is told in a compelling way

So you've got something that is original but completely miss the mark on copy editing, flow, multimedia and execution. That content has just gone from quality to worthless. Attention to detail, refinement, copy editing and story flow also heavily contribute to whether any piece of content should be considered "quality" or not.

Even if a piece is not 100% original, but if it is told in a compelling way with a fresh take on an already used theme and has strong story flow, editing support, a tight style and unique voice, then quality content can be achieved without having to hit that fully original mark.

It's easy to tell if a piece is rushed, if the effort wasn't put into it from the very start. This can follow any content type format and isn't restricted to the written word or article format. If a publisher cuts corners with a video by reusing the same stock music over and over again on a video that has original footage, they've just hurt themselves. If a news aggregater publishes a story by just restating the points from the other story without adding anything new, then that isn't quality content.

If poor image, gif or supplemental embed choices are made it knocks it down a peg. If a story leaves the reader or watcher wondering "Wait, what? Why did I just read that?" then that isn't quality content.

Speaking of aggregation...

Quality content cites and gives credit to sources

Whether pulling from Flickr creative commons, Reddit, Etsy, opinions from YouTubers, other news sources, whatever...copy pasta content that sucks in from others without giving credit will never fit into that quality label. There are minimal ways of giving credit that some use where they don't have to lose as many readers by those readers clicking out. For example, reporting on a trend on social media like marble lips, which over the last couple weeks really took off.

Neither of those two linked articles above give any kind of call out or hat tip to other publications that first reported on the trend. That's weak. A simple Google search points to articles from Allure and Teen Vogue as far back in time as April 26th or April 27th. There's no way that either Elite Daily or Bored Panda discovered this trend on their own without having seen it pop up elsewhere first. But by not linking back or giving a hat tip link to where they found it, they've essentially stolen the story away. That's bad form. That doesn't make you a reporter of trends first, that makes you a trend thief and takes you out of any discussion of having quality content.

Quality content does not include cringy product placements

Uggggh. What were they thinking? Designated Survivor is a decent show. It's no "House of Cards" but it fills the little hole in our hearts that HoC usually occupies at least until One Nation, Underwood returns. Still, this is 18 episodes in, and without any previous episode having any product placement. Suddenly this abomination appears and dear lord is it jarring. Especially so on Netflix where consumers pay a monthly premium to not have ads or commercials.

That is not quality content by either the service (Netflix), the producers (Designated Survivor) or Ford (their marketing department. Seriously guys, wtf?) The only thing this product placement achieved was annoying viewers and inducing eye rolls. Quality content does not annoy people. Quality makes people think, gives them a reason to engage with a brand or take action to make the world better. Quality content does not induce eye rolls.

Brands can have an especially hard time understanding this at times.

Brands have come out with some amazing sponsored content and campaigns, but when they miss they miss hard. Advertising is still content, even if it is trying to sell you something you might not want. But when brands start venturing into product placement or sponsored content territory, it can be especially treacherous. Selling somebody something and providing narrative and informational value at the same time is exceedingly difficult.

For any of those folks out there who've been on the editorial or content side of a conversation with an agency representing a brand that's looking for their "message" and new product to come across in a sponsored content format for a publisher understands how amazingly challenging it is to please their audience and the client.

Brands take note: editors, producers and content creators have an awful lot of patience when it comes to working with you or your contracted agency on sponsored content campaigns. They want it to be quality, they really do care how it turns out.

Quality content is forward thinking

Let's go back to the stone age, the dawn of content! Before the written word! Is it possible that Thag The Weak gave Og The Strong a hard time for not painting enough legs on his woolly mammoth depiction? Maybe, but probably not as Og would have ripped his arm off and used it as a brush to finish his mural.

So Thag kept his mouth shut and Og painted a triangle-legged woolly mammoth. The fact that Og was even painting at all is inspiring and would probably give archaeologists pleasure seizures if they found his triangle-legged mammoth painting tens of thousands of years later. Og just needed to stop worrying about whether he could measure up to Thag.

The act of trying something new should be heralded and supported and not mocked. VR and AR are a prime example of a fledgling new industry that is capable of reaching new heights of immersion in quality content that we haven't seen yet. It's easy to say "but look at the stuff coming out now, it makes you nauseous, the experience is too short, I have to wear this crap on my head and you know what screw this..."

Step back for a moment and consider the effort that went into you even being able to play around in a virtual world in the first place. This is the stuff of science fiction not even 30 years ago made reality. Maybe the technology or storytelling isn't quite there yet, but you could soon be riding a woolly mammoth in virtual space.

Quality content is content that attempts to take those steps towards new ways of telling stories and giving us new ways to express ourselves, entertain and inform.

Quality content inspires, challenges and moves

If you've ever read something that made you want to immediately want to donate to a cause, call your congressman, or generally take action in some way that you believe would better yourself or the world around you... that's quality content.

The ability to challenge and inspire must be recognized as a form of quality content, even if originality and refinement are missing. This is why social media is what it is. We are all content creators. Every photo or video we share, every carefully crafted 1300 character LinkedIn post, every bit of life we put out into the ether is content.

That's why the Chewbacca mom video can have as much of an impact as a thoroughly reported piece from a The New York Times journalist. Her little slice of life was original and inspired laughter across the world. That's quality content. It stands up right next to any long-form piece in the New Yorker written by established authors. Just in a different way.

Now what would not be considered quality content is taking Chewbacca mom video and reposting it a month after it hit with spammy clickbait headlines and pointing people to buy your rip off version of the mask.

There's always a line that can, and will, be crossed.

Some recent examples

Lets look at a few specific examples of what I'd consider quality content from what I've read and watched the last day or so and why I think it works.

I Got Rejected by Apple Music… So I Redesigned It

The author took a personal experience and created something out of it that is both compelling, shows hard work and talent and serves a definite purpose. That purpose being the author likely intended to show he has enough talent to work with the big boys. He had to back it up with his design work and the presentation of his un-solicited redesign of the Apple Music service. If you read the comments you can see he won over a notoriously tough Apple fan and design audience.

Your 15 minutes of game - Justin Charity, The Ringer

Author Justin Charity put together this complete, interesting and easy to read for even non-gamers story on the challenges video game streaming presents to gamers, streamers, video platforms and game publishers. This is a story about interactive media and media consumption without actually including any of the discussed content to consume, and it still works. I would argue that the story could have used at least a few more actual examples of the types of game streams referenced such as speedruns, walkthroughs, and Let's Play.

China's New World Order - CNN

I give CNN a bit of grief from time to time, but hey credit where credit is due. This lengthy explainer on China's rise is gorgeously formatted, informative, features a great mix of sources and is supported with a variety of media types without being overwhelming. The one issue I do have with it is that it does seem to go quite deep enough. China is a complicated place and China's place in the world just cannot be sufficiently summed up in a story like this. But it does the job of introducing a "big China picture", even if it does a bit glaringly leave out human rights concerns and any mention at all of Hong Kong.

Protect like a mother - Lysol ad campaign

Yes, an ad. My wife, sitting next to me on the couch last night turned her phone to me and said "Look at this," showing me the above picture from the Lysol ad campaign. I said to her, "You know that's an ad right?" To which she responded, "Yeah I know, but so what? It's true and it's still good." Fair point. And she's right. Ad or not, this is an example of good, creative advertising content. Looking at the comments on some of these videos on Facebook you'll notice some men getting their boxer briefs in a bunch. "Hey, is this supposed to mean dads aren't capable of protecting their kids?" No, no guys, doesn't suggest that. It suggests to mothers, that mothers will let nothing stand between them and their kid. No coincidence this is hitting around Mother's Day now is there? Now relax and wait for the Father's Day ads if you're so worried about equal attention.

Giants Lose, 3-2 - Grant Brisbee, The McCovey Chronicles

"I like to play a dumb game, where I look at how many games the team is below .500 and think, “Gosh, if they win (x) in a row, they’ll be right at .500.” About two weeks ago, this made me feel better. Because the Giants most certainly could win seven games in a row, at least in Theory Land, where the rides are free, but the cotton candy is made out of hair."

If you're not a baseball fan but want to be then Brisbee is the writer you need to start reading right now. He covers every game for the San Francisco Giants on SB Nation day in and day out, and he's absolutely hilarious. He's one of the few beat writers who can consistently even make writing about a loss and a losing team entertaining every single day. That isn't easy. Brisbee is required reading if you want to understand about establishing a consistent and entertaining voice, tone and style.

Net Neutrality II - Last Week Tonight With John Oliver

No matter your political views, and really it doesn't matter if you hate the man and love Trump, John Oliver is consistently producing his own brand of quality journalism that has impact. His latest episode is the perfect example of when Oliver is on top of his game and it all comes together. He's able to break down what is a difficult topic to explain with facts and end a segment with an action that viewers can take to make a difference if they're moved to do so. In this case, it was to go to the FCC website and leave comments in support of Net Neutrality via his custom URL redirect gofccyourself.com along with detailed instructions on how to leave a comment.

The FCC website crashed because of the barrage of traffic.

ˉ\_(ツ)_/ˉ

Aspire to be creative, to inform, to entertain, to be original and insightful and don't be afraid to try new things. As long as you do those things then it doesn't matter if you can't exactly define what quality content is, because you'll already be doing it.