The Problem with Branded Content

Some people call it branded content. Some call it advertorial. Others may just straight up call it paid content. But, no matter what name you give it, companies still don’t get it. (And, in my opinion, the publications – online or off – publishing such content are also missing the boat; although some are doing it better than others.)

What is Branded Content?

Wikipedia say this about it: …branded content typically presents itself as something other than a marketing ploy first, albeit simultaneously and always presented as a highly branded property and often labeled as “sponsored.”

You know what stands out to me most here? The phrase “a marketing ploy” – and the definition of a ploy is a cunning plan or action designed to turn a situation to one’s own advantage.

It gets creepier the more you dig into what’s being dubbed “branded content,” doesn’t it?

This subject hit me particularly hard recently as I was catching up on my magazine reading. It had been a couple months, and my Inc, SUCCESS, and Fast Company magazines had gathering a little dust. So, I sat down and read through several over the course of an hour or so.

What I noticed in each was one version or another of “branded content.”

So, what’s the problem?

In all of these examples, there was one big piece missing: VALUE

Instead, they were basically glorified advertising pieces, as opposed to genuine, relevant content marketing. Yes, the goal of any marketing is to ultimately drive some sort of profitable action (see Content Marketing Institute’s definition of content marketing); but, before it drives an action, it has to be relevant and valuable.

These “branded content” pieces told nice stories; one even looked like an actual article (Fast Company) with no real call-out that it was even paid content.

The problem with branded content is that the word “branded” is first!

Andrew Davis talks a lot about a “content brand” versus “branded content.” A true content brand is Red Bull or ESPN or I’d even call Richard Branson his own content brand. Content is the focus – the brand is a part of the content; not the other way around.

Maybe branded content has a place in the world of publishing; but so far, I’m not seeing it done very well. I would suggest to the powers that be at Inc, SUCCESS, Fast Company and others, as well as the brands themselves,that they think more about the audience and what content the audience wants, rather than the brand (the advertiser) and what it wants.

Branded content shouldn’t be used as a “ploy” to trick someone into thinking it’s “real” content; it should be content that’s relevant, helpful, educational, and – oh, by the way – happens to come from XYZ Brand.