Previously, in this series of posts on corporate website content and its strategic importance to PR and marketing professionals, I have discussed why public relations may be placing too much emphasis on social media instead of corporate website content. The next post will feature strategic and tactical insights and tips on this topic from a panel of global experts.

There is no guide, or overarching process, for how one should go about producing the content that goes on corporate websites…from strategic business planning, public relations or marketing perspectives. This is an almost unbelievable ‘informational gap’ due to the power that has been placed at corporate websites’ discretion due to the mind-bending capabilities of search engine optimisation (SEO).

So, this is my attempt to extend what discussions on this topic have occurred. (I haven’t found any of real substance along the communication/marketing line, but I am sure they must exist!).

There smatterings of information all over the place but, seemingly, no central resource that integrates all the parts; nothing that addresses the full picture of website content and social media and how you push ‘out’ to generate awareness of your new content. Or whether that is even an approach that will yield results.

Strategic approaches for corporate website content

Is the purpose of new website content constrained to Google spiders recognising it as new, and relevant to searches, thus ranking the content/web pages higher for organic searches?

Is the purpose of it limited to it being up-to-date, thus more likely to be relevant and useful to the needs of those searching for information? The implication of both these questions is that the content is only waiting for those who come to it – not content that is actually reaching out to those potentially interested in it.

Or is an option to repurpose (or just duplicate) it for other forms of communication like newsletters, e-newsletters, media programs, speaking programs et al, so it can be leveraged through those mediums?

But then, I presume, you can put Feedburner social media sharing options on each page (e.g. Digg, Reddit, Twitter etc) and thus give ‘human browsers’ an opportunity to easily share the content in a broadcast manner (and editorialised with their own comments, for that matter).

Hmmm, the lines between old-timey broadcast and new age social media sharing approaches are sometimes pretty arbitrary, aren’t they?

The face-off between social media, corporate websites and digital ‘traditional’ media

As for the face-off between social media, corporate websites and digital forms of traditional, hard copy media as to who wins the ‘most influential’ status, for me organisations have a real opportunity to win this battle. Or at least be a competitive participant.

If they are smart.

Smart, as in organisations recognise that all opinions count and all opinions/perspectives should be recognised.

Smart, as in recognise if they invest time and money into this opportunity then they have the opportunity to rank highly in organic searches, then get human browsers to advocate them.

Smart, as in providing content that is above and beyond being purely self-serving (i.e. helpful information that assists human browsers do whatever they want to do that is relevant to the organisation’s essential remit or purpose – no need to be too uptight here. People go for helpfulness, not brand handlers freaked out by the fool’s gold of brand frigging essences and other such bollocks marketing blather [um, apologies, a pet dislike going on here, obviously...]).

As strategic PR counsel Sean Williams pointed out, however, one of the great values of traditional media and social media (in fact, any opinion sources that are not from the organisation in question), is that they are 3^rd party opinion. Supposedly objective. Supposedly with nothing to gain. Supposedly this generates enhanced credibility for the organisation.

Essentially, I agree with this notion in most cases. It’s one of the reasons I espouse the forming of strategic alliances as a PR 101 approach.

But, as Sean himself points out, there is increasing doubt regarding the trustworthiness of both social media and traditional media sources. Everyone, it seems, has an axe to grind. If you know the source personally, sure, you know how much to trust and rely upon their perspectives.

But the web is a many-peopled world. Why should you trust people you will never meet and you will probably only have a web-relationship with? Sounds a bit, um, naive, does it not?

Corporate websites should be better at public relations

Organisations, of course, have the most resources to dedicate to their own profile (through marketing and/or public relations, for instance). They certainly should have the greatest motivation and focus on their own profile. And they should have the acumen and intelligence to take the broadest, most strategic and most realistic possible view of their place in their world.

So, really, they have no excuse to be beaten to the punch by other communication mechanisms when it comes to organic searches. Nor do they have any excuse not to form and/or enhance relationships (by both behaviour and communication) with their stakeholders.

Yet, they continue to allow this to occur because of a lack of recognition of the primacy of organic search and, very importantly, because they fail to recognise it is one thing to use technical SEO trickery to get highly ranked. It is quite another to get human browsers to like and advocate you because of the value-adding insights and resources you freely provide.

This is the telling factor in website content success. Is it making stakeholders do what you want them to do? Advocate you? Buy your products? Support your stance?

Resources is a key issue here. Traditional media is losing them. Social media never really had them; and though this is changing to some extent, we are talking an explosion of a chattering class that is great at accusations and sarcasm, but isn’t really setting the world on fire with providing scientifically reliable and assiduously generated proof for its observations, is it?

There may well come a point where the credibility of both sources of information (traditional and social media) lower themselves enough for organisations (through their corporate websites – which can lift themselves up in the credibility status) to be considered at least in the credibility ball park with them. It is an interesting dialectic. And it is certainly an opportunity for organisations that respect their stakeholders to gain a POD over their competitors that accelerates them along the road to long term, meaningful stakeholder relationships.

This, in turn, must inevitably lead to results such as meeting organisational objectives, increasing profits and minimising regulatory, media and political criticism/scrutiny.

Public relations value from corporate website content

So what is generated from getting positive results from providing corporate website content of value and utility to stakeholders/human browsers?

Authority. Respect. Leadership. And you know, getting the POD from this means a funny little thing called…‘increased sales’.

Looking for strategic communication answers on corporate website content

As there is not an authoritative guide to corporate website content and its implementation, I asked a question on LinkedIn and reached out to a number of digital, SEO, marketing and public relations professionals whose views and expertise I respect. Fortunately, many of them responded and their comments and insights are included in my next post on this issue.

Check out my next post on these issues to get some useful tips. But in the meantime, what strategic and tactical tips can you provide for marketing or public relations professionals on website content? And what did you think of the issues raised in the post and my views on them?

PS: I’d welcome you joining networks with me through my LinkedIn profile. Send me an invite!

PPS. And don’t forget you can subscribe to this blog via email or RSS at the top of the blog’s page, or Tweet about this post using the handy RT button, adding your own editorial two cents worth!

Tweet This Post