Why is everyone using a word that hardly means anything anymore to signify an increasing number of things?
Brace yourselves. This may get contentious.
Hearing ‘content’ in the sense of ‘text, audio, images, video or a mix of the above’ takes me to a state that’s very far from being contént. This state is not on a map. (If you answered ‘Washington State’ before you read that last sentence, take a cookie from the jar.)
Content, typically used in the plural (contents), refers to stuffing, innards, what’s inside the envelope. There’s another connotation.
Martin Luther King Jr. famously said, “I have a dream that my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin but by the content of their character.” A master of language, Rev. King used ‘content’ advisedly, to mean ‘core substance, essence’.
Now, the rationale for using ‘content’ in the context of media to mean ‘what’s inside the envelope’ is clear. In the case of, say, a newsletter, the text is what’s inside the envelope; the newsletter genre—the envelope itself; the way that newsletter comes to your inbox—the postman.
But that’s all back-room, back-office stuff. Your audiences are reading blogs, ads, sales pitches, following along with pitch decks, snoozing over a white paper.
Knocking back brewskis at the local (dive) (bar) with the marketing team? Call it content all night. Call it gruel, call it bolus, call it chyme. Consume it, digest it, eliminate it.
Technical terms may be fine when shop talk’s on the menu. The average person? Wants the meat; does not want to know how the sausage is made.
What to do?
What if we called things by their names?
text (a unit of writing; also plural, and not just to denote instant messages)
a note (a heartfelt one, please)
a message (to your clients)
a letter (remember those?)
a script (for a podcast or video)
a blog post (like its starched-collar cousin ‘article’, only more off the cuff)
a position paper or research report (let the readers decide whether they rise to the level of ‘thought leadership’)
etc.
Contrarian Agrarian: Us farmers are a practical lot. We’re also used to suffering. (Google ‘farmer’s carry’.) When I hear these sensitive artistic souls getting all torn up about someone using a concept that’s a little too abstract, I just smile a weary smile.
And yet, there’s hope in those facial creases. After all, I’m contént—whether someone says ‘content’ or not.
Now, what about you?
If your goal is to be corporate, cookie-cutter, and full of bovine excrescence, use ‘content’ to your heart’s content. If, like me, you’re feisty, energetic, full of life—and want to stay that way—put some thought into what you’re actually saying. Be specific and precise. And don’t ever ‘consume content’. It’s the GMO of the word world.
P.S.: Would you dare call the contents of that overcoat ‘content’?
