There Is Zero New Content on the Social Web Today

There Is Zero New Content on the Social Web Today

Instead, blogs, videos, podcasts, etc., are merely re-imagining everything that has come before. Originality is a long-gone word and recyclability is the “new original”.

Let’s discuss – the comments are open.

image: Francisco Sanchez

Sign up for free weekly content

Enter your first name and email below to get my free weekly newsletter with the latest posts, recommended reading, content tips and more.

(I respect your privacy and will never spam you)

Blog consulting with Danny Brown

Comment Policy: Your words are your own, so be nice and helpful if you can. Let’s treat the guests (and that includes you) nicely. Otherwise, you will be moderated and deleted where I feel it’s applicable. Please, only use your real name and limit the amount of links submitted in your comment. Apart from that - have at it!

    Share Your Thoughts

    Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

  1. says

    Danny,

    For a long time now, I’ve believed that all art is derivative. And I don’t mean that in a negative way. More in a “standing on the shoulders of giants” way.

    Like you, I’ve been feeling the same way about content lately. But not always in a positive light. I stopped writing my blog because I felt I wasn’t adding anything new to the conversation. As I consider restarting it, I think a lot about how to bring an original and truly valuable voice to the conversation.

    What do you think it takes to be truly original?

    Thanks for the post!
    Manya

    • says

      Hi Manya (love the name!),

      That’s a great question. As others here have mentioned, it’s perhaps our spin that brings something new to the table – yet does that make it original, or unique? I think these are similar words to use, but very different in meaning.

      And perhaps that’s the answer – we don’t strive to be “original”, we simply strive to enhance what was already known by that little bit of lateral thought that wasn’t there before?

      There’s more likelihood to be unique than original, I think – and uniqueness doesn’t have to be new, simply alternate.

      • says

        I agree that “most” of the content that is on the internet is not original, but not that it’s “zero”. There is a lot of valuable and original content being created by many individuals, that’s why the noise on the internet has created value to many in the last few years. From the social networks that have given birth to social movements, to WikiLeaks, to stuff that I never dreamed I’d ever would be able to read or see. Stories that happened to people that are shared in various networks are original to them, and those of us that get to see them as well.
        Sure there are millions of websites monetizing on recycling articles, memes & “viral videos” but to say that there is zero original content it’s a bit extreme. Thanks for stirring the pot.

      • says

        Danny,
        Intriguing thought: uniqueness v originality. Though, as in other comments, people in every age seem to believe there can be nothing new under the sun. Why should we be any different? Perhaps that’s why truly original thinkers are so appealing.

        Love the Twain quote Claudia mentioned: History doesn’t repeat itself, but it rhymes.

        Thanks for the note about my name. It’s Polish and there aren’t too many of us out there (I think)!

  2. says

    Originality is a long-gone word and recyclability is the “new original”?

    “Shakespeare retold many stories. For example, there was an ancient Roman play-write named Plautus, who wrote a play called The Brothers Menaechmi which is essentially the same plot of The Comedy of Errors. I doubt Shakespeare would deny this. In many of Shakespeare you can tell that he was heavily influenced by Greek and Roman mythology and plays, but he didn’t “steal” them, he retold them. I mean, he didn’t use lines from Plautus and claim them to be his own.”

    Maybe that’s all any of us can do – retell old stories using our own lines and perspctive..

    • says

      True – yet at what point does the same story, even told from uniquely different perspectives, eventually merge into one single cohesive one? Think “Chinese whispers” at school (or a variation of it); it’s essentially the same story, just with a different viewpoint by the time it reaches the intended listener.

      Perhaps by trying to differentiate ourselves, we’re just adding to a convoluted mess of a message as time goes on? Ah heck, now you’ve got me going down an even worse path! 😉

  3. says

    First off, it’s interesting that the blog in my Feed just before this one was headlined “How to Be Unique” (at Men with Pens). They argue that anything you yourself create is unique by nature since it’s your voice.

    Second, this reminds me of a long ago quote by David Bowie, who most right-thinking people would surely consider a creative genius. I can’t find it—this was pre-Internet—but I recalled that he kind of eschewed the concept of originality and said that he’s more of a synthesizer, making new use of ideas already out there or putting them together in surprising ways.

    But maybe that’s just recycling, as you say.

    For me, I think originality comes from taking existing principles, thoughts, etc., and putting them in a new framework. So, somewhat hypothetically, if you wanted to teach 5 Lessons for Public Speakers, your tips might not be all that different from others’ advice. But maybe you cast those tips in a new framework: 5 Lessons for Public Speakers from the Game of Baseball. And someone who’s a baseball fan, or understands baseball, might grasp those lessons better than if they were presented in a different form. The evidence and anecdotes may resonate more strongly.

    So a new angle on an old concept. Maybe that’s recycling, too.

    • says

      Hi Rob (and Danny!).

      I think I’m on the same page as you. It’s very hard to discover any truly original strategies or tips to write about, but you can make them original by putting them into a new framework for your audience.

      One example I would add to this is case studies: These will spell out old strategies, but will help certain groups to understand how to execute on them based on the performance of industry leaders.

      • says

        That’s a good example, Nick. I guess the question would be, is it the different strategic approaches that separate the case studies, since essentially many case studies do start off with the same base data (unless it’s vendor/business-specific)?

    • says

      I think that’s where the big difference is, Rob – the unique versus original take. As James over at MWP writes, your voice/take will always be unique from anyone else (although I’m not sold that you couldn’t study someone long enough to imitate their style and line of thinking, but happy to be proven wrong, hehe).

      For me, though – and it may be semantics – for something to be truly new, it needs to be original. Something that’s unique – that doesn’t necessarily equate to original and, by association, new.

      Great analogy of the baseball speakers – each offering different value, even though all are speaking on the same topic. Perhaps we should stop chasing original and instead look for value through unique differences?

  4. says

    Ha! I see where that’s coming from but I disagree. If there was nothing original on the web, then why on earth would anyone read anything?

    This reminds me very much of something a teacher told our class in freshman year of high school : “Grade A students are a dime a dozen” – the statement was made because it was a school which aimed to prep students for top colleges. The statement is very true, and just as it applies to grades, it can apply now to the web and the content being created. You and I could attempt to say the same thing, yet one of us may have a way of expressing it online – through video, art, writing, etc that will bring across completely different understanding. The core concept may be “the same” but the result, the success or the value may be significantly different, and therefore I must insist, it will be different and original.

    The myriads of posts or “content” that do not stand out – are exactly that – the same…but there is always a handful who will look at something and draw something different out of it – that’s who we look for. That’s who we read, that’s who we learn from, and evolve with and take new concepts from. It is not all the same.

    I write quite a bit on my blog about topics that have been “covered” but its not the topic that makes the difference or gives me a reason to write, its the opportunity I see as I read a sea of similar posts, all of them missing details. Details that seem small, but that change the approach, these little details are the ones that make the difference for many businesses between success and failure.

    When different people in different fields, with different employees, or target audiences, or cultures try similar things and share their ideas or experiences, new things are born, new possibility.

    We are born, we live, we die – that’s all the same isn’t it? It’s what we do with that experience that makes it unique – it’s how we try to help people, entertain people, touch people that makes it different – those who are all the same, they are the dime a dozen – it’s easy to keep walking by – do the same differently and there you have it: success. Then it’s not really the same anymore is it?

    • says

      And I think you answer your own question (“no originality”) perfectly with this phrase here, Mila:

      I write quite a bit on my blog about topics that have been “covered” but its not the topic that makes the difference or gives me a reason to write, its the opportunity I see as I read a sea of similar posts, all of them missing details. Details that seem small, but that change the approach, these little details are the ones that make the difference for many businesses between success and failure.

      The difference of any refreshed/revamped content is right there in the details, and it’s these details that can attract someone to your line of thinking versus 1,000 other blog posts, articles, case studies, etc, around the same topic.

      Yet does that make it new, or enhanced? As I mention elsewhere, perhaps it boils down to semantics – I just really can’t see anything that’s truly new when it comes to content and topics on the web today.

      That’s not necessarily a bad thing – just an observation as to how long the same topics can be recycled before the readers really have seen it all and go away…

    • says

      Thanks Danny for this article and to the posters for the conversation. Mila, I completely agree with your statements:

      “You and I could attempt to say the same thing, yet one of us may have a way of expressing it online – through video, art, writing, etc that will bring across completely different understanding.”

      “Details that seem small, but that change the approach, these little details are the ones that make the difference for many businesses between success and failure.”

      To illustrate your point, this is exactly my main concern right now with my business project.

      I’ve been thinking the same thing because my core business concept is good however I’m concerned that my approach to pitching it, from website layout and content to pitch letters, is not professional enough to get me noticed by the right people. I could have the best concept in the world (doesn’t every entrepreneur think so?) but if I can’t present it “the right way” then the whole project is an exercise in futility — a giant waste of time and energy. With a day job that regularly requires 70 hours a week, I can ill afford to waste my time.

      Alas, I’m thinking positive, pushing forward, and reading all I can about “marketing” so I can increase my odds of landing on the “success” side of the equation. Besides a solid concept, I put the customer’s value above “sell, sell, sell” and I’ve got “The 5 Things Every (Great) Marketing Story Needs” from Guy Kawasaki’s site. Still, I wonder if there is more I could do — short of sell the farm to pay professionals to do my bidding. Again, I believe my concept is solid — which means that my project’s success or failure COMPLETELY depends on HOW I present it.

      Maybe this is old news to you marketing pros, but I’m a truck driver by trade who just happens to have a business idea. Thanks for letting me participate in your conversation.

      • says

        Hi there Valerie,

        Checked the link in your name, and definitely a good enough idea to gain traction, if perhaps executed a little differently?

        For example, you have a lot of information to get through, which sees the need for scrolling, and then jumping off-page to the bidding site. Perhaps a simple video (that you can make with a service like Animoto.com or Powtoon.com) can bring together much of that information into a short, punchy video that you can have on the homepage?

        Then, instead of requiring people to jump off-page to see latest bids, you have a simple counter/thermometer, that shows current number of bids and highest bid so far?

        Reach out to partner with complementary suppliers, too, to perhaps drive interest? Truck stops offer discounted meals or 2-for-1; gas stations offer complimentary oil check for the lucky winner, that kind of stuff?

        Good luck, and here’s to you succeeding!

  5. says

    I saw just yesterday a Chase Jarvis talk with Austin Kleon, author of the book “Steal like an artist”. He meant: Take it from one and it is plagiarism, take it from many and it is research.

    But I see where you come from. Same happens in classical journalism today. Most stories aren’t investigative, they come from AP or are copied from the main stream primes.

    To “make” good content needs a lot of knowledge, information, and creativity. You have to walk the mile. It’s hard work. And not all people / bloggers are willing to walk this mile. Some really has something to tell and to show, others want to publish.

    We are living in a “sharing” addicted society. It’s easy to like, share and retweet. Not so easy to take a stand by oneself and to put it in sentences, images and animate it. And this is what multimedia should be.

    Quality or Quantity ? – the very same question since the beginning of contents. As Mark Twain once said: “History doesn’t repeat itself, but it rhymes.” I think the same is fitting for almost everything in our lives.

    • says

      “History doesn’t repeat itself, but it rhymes.”

      I LOVE this quote, Claudia, and I think that is what this post, and the questions built around it, boil down to.

      For every piece of content – news, video, blog post, article, etc. – that comes out with the first line of thinking on something, somewhere there will be an addition to that by someone else, with a slightly different slant.

      It’s not new, but it is different enough to stand alone (for now); not too dissimilar to the rhyme, and how far that can go before you run out of words to use for another rhyme.

      I guess the question becomes, how many rhymes do we have left in us at the content creation rate we’re burning through today?

  6. says

    Perspective adds the context that translates meaning to the reader. In this ever-expanding data deluge, we no longer lack access to content, but rather access to meaning. So while we may not frequently be creating holistically new material, adding our experience, viewpoint and/or direction to the concept makes it unique(er). At least that is the goal. So it is another “Yes, but…” response for your tally. Brilliantly engaging headline and post Danny — thanks!

    • says

      Completely agree, miss, it’s the perspective unique viewpoints offer that makes content consumption seem new. And yet… does unique really equate to new, or is it more of an enhancement? And, if it’s an enhancement, how long until wear and tear creeps in and we run out of enhancements to fix the problem?

  7. says

    I suppose your statement about nothing new on the web is correct. How original can we be when everything is so interconnected. Just try to register that “original” site name and find that it’s already taken *sigh*.

    Some of the best blog posts are roundups of other good blog posts. Commentaries on other posts can bring a new insight or provide a real life example.

    Perhaps this is why we all curate what is out there already. Twists and angles make the difference.

    Let’s find some new, little-known trend and be quick to write about it.

    • says

      It’s interesting you mention the round-up posts, Patricia – the idea of curating others has really taken off in the last 12-18 months, with some really cool new platforms built to do just that, all with different takes on how it should look and feel, and what services should be on offer.

      And you know, maybe that’s what we’re doing anyway – looking at content already out there, and putting our spin on it and turning that into the collection of thoughts (curation) that eventually sees the public eye.

      Hmmm, thinking…. :)

  8. says

    Great topic. For sure we all herald those who are brave enough to first cut the stone without knowing what it would look like – “omigosh that’s beautiful. You did that?” – and yes, I think they’re still out there. But I think there’s deeper, more lasting value in polishing the stone over time and applying different skill sets when riffing off of a conversation that’s already begun. The stone gets shinier and more compelling. And occasionally, when the light refracts just so, we see something in a way we’ve never seen it before.

    I think at the heart of how we respond to “seen it before” is based on the intent behind the communication. Is your appropriation/remix forwarding the discussion and adding to the body of knowledge for knowledge’s sake? Maybe your gift is helping others understand something complex in a more accessible, structured way than I can. We all benefit. At the end of the day, you ripping me off with positive intent raises all boats. Thanks Danny!

    • says

      At the end of the day, you ripping me off with positive intent raises all boats.

      Wait, so I can use the same tactics you used for First Solar and not have to pay you? Sweet! 😉

      The “intent behind the communication” angle is an interesting one, mate – essentially, cutting the wheat from the chaff and seeing who can take existing, well-known ideas and theories and still make it seem fresh?

      Then again, as I mentioned to Dara, even with the most well-intentioned approaches to re-envisioning existing thoughts, does there come a stage when all avenues truly have been exhausted? And, if so, then what?

      Solid thoughts, David!

  9. says

    A few years ago I heard an editor of Yankee Magazine talk at a journalism conference and explain how to successfully pitch a story. He explained the magazine’s been around 70+ years and has an institutional history of receiving nearly every idea out there. To be published, a writer needed to be original, the editor said.

    I always think about his words when I read notions from bloggers such as you refer to the online echo chamber and how there are few unique ideas left. But I also think about the book marketplace and how there are a gazillion books about the same subjects.

    Take two identical subject matters and two different authors — and the authors are the reasons why one book sells and the other flops. Ditto bloggers.

    If you write the same content here as every other blogger, so be it; but if you can provide a different tack or a different voice or history, that’s why people will flock your way like the shepherd you are.

    • says

      See, I think that’s where the thinking behind this post came from, mate – I’m not sure how much originality is left. Uniqueness, yes. Different spin, yes. But true originality? I don’t see it.

      For example, the Yankee Magazine editor: what did he consider original? Something that had truly never been written before? How could that be quantified – even today, with all the search tools we have, it’s incredibly hard to be able to say, “My idea has never been presented before.”

      Completely agree with you on the book space – it’s one reason we pushed so hard to ensure ours could be written the way it was, where we do feel we brought something very new to the table. But original? No. And I’m happy to admit that, while still being very proud of the end product. :)

  10. says

    I totally understand the theory, but I disagree. I think it’s busier, and you have to dig through a lot of repeats – kind of like what Cable TV did to television, brought a lot of crap but then some awesome gems too.

    After these past few weeks with more horrific gun violence, political grandstanding and the awful suicide of Rebecca that I wrote about last week, I was feeling pretty disgusted with it all… until I was reminded that it was all about MY outlook, and what I choose to focus on.

    So I’ve culled the blogs I read, and cut out a few of the highly negative people, and focused on finding the good stuff. Just this morning I read a post On Olivier’s page about Invisible Man by Ellison and thought: I need to re-read that awesome book.

    I know that sounds a wee bit ‘fake it till you’re convinced,’ but I’ve decided that’s my only choice, because I’m not going anywhere.

    • says

      The question is, are the stories and feeds you’re subscribing to now offering anything that’s actually new or original? Changing the approaches you (as in, generic “you”) take when it comes to what you let into your vision is one way to get fresh perspective – but does that fresh perspective actually have truly original thought, or simply another take on a previously written topic or idea?

      For me, this is where the social web – and, to be fair, creativity in general – is lacking.

  11. says

    I remember reading that Hieronymus Bosch and Erasmus of Rotterdam were concerned in the 15th century that nothing new is said or invented anymore. As well, the same discussion was held in the Expressionism circle in the 20th century. I like these kind of discussions, they seem to sparkle great ideas.

  12. says

    Thank you for raising this. Folks who have been around are tired of seeing the same topics flushed over and over again — conferences, books, webinars — you name it. There is too much noise now, not too much signal. Again, expected, given the lower cost of entry.

  13. says

    Although there is no Zero new content, I propose that we may be looking through the wrong end of the Content Kaleidoscope.

    For although we have approached the Zero-point of content generation, distribution, and repurposing, we must now consider the inversion-view of today’s reality, wherein our apprehension can be renewed: Less than Zero.

    Less Than Zero is where we are going. The old powers of media enabled us to see Content as something residing “in a box” to be pulled out at will.

    Now, however, the Social Web of Kaleidoscopic Intelligences the “Content” is not what comes from the box (i.e. the “contents of the container”) – rather Content is what gets tweeted inwards and back into the “box” – the box of surprising delight.

    It is these boxes of surprising delight which have upended the traditional powers of media.

    In fact, “media” are now voltaic currencies of the “Less Than Zero” energies of today’s Content.

    We have reached the End of Content History and stand now at the capstone of novel pyramids of quantum-like conversations, where thoughts, ideas, products, and services can circumvent the status quos of old and generate the palpable apparitions of embodied remarkability.

    Thus: It is not that we have Zero New Content – it is the case, rather, that we are entering the Less Than Zero many-fold Content kaleidoscopes.

  14. Tinu Abayomi-Paul says

    After the first iteration, there has never been anything new under the sun really. The web is a water cooler, bar, playground, haven for bullies, pornocopia – another platform for a love interest to reject me on or annoy all our friends with our love declarations.

    But it’s also still very brand new – the difference is our volume of knowledge of the new is full.

    So we need to make something. I’m not into the collaborative economy yet – as a topic it intrigues but I don’t see the value of the discussion for my tribe yet.

    However, I for one am done talking about the content side of content marketing – I want to talk about the marketing side, distribution, things like the science of spread.

    I have a good friend who is amazing at predicting whether content will be accepted, go viral, be ignored, fail itself but start a great meme… I don’t have the terminology yet but I want to sit down with his years of experience and hear his thoughts.

    But I don’t have time because I have to teach my cousin’s old boss about WordPress. Which is not a bad thing, but the activity directs my thoughts.

    Part of it is filling the need our audience has – we’re writing into the content deficit of what the present known needs are – we need more ideas at the edges to help us stretch perhaps?

    • says

      I think that’s one of the problems, Tinu, is that people are saying, “Well, the audience isn’t ready for this yet, so we’ll stick to the same thing we’ve been saying for the last couple of years”. Like the point made over on Facebook today, re. Jason Falls’ post on speaking.

      Thing is, if we continue with that mindset, we never move on, and we get stuck in a comfort zone that benefits a few, but misses out the opportunity to really begin to change the dialogue around any topic. Hey ho.

  15. says

    being first doesn’t mean it is original. I got into painting and art by seeing stuff in the Museum of Modern Art that anyone could make. Like painting a board red and leaning it against the wall.

    Tweets aren’t original. They are SMS on a public platform. SMS isn’t original. Kids were passing notes in class going way back.

    There are still firsts just not for content because we do keep inventing things. But even these things often existed in some form before the invention.

    Like when I make fun of social business (not the type you blogged about) and mentioned business has been social since the first time people bartered 10,000 or more years ago.

    • says

      Hmmm, I think it depends on how you’re defining original. For me, it’s the original act of making or doing something that’s never been done before – everything after that may be a new or different way of doing something, but the origin lies with that very first action. More often than not, that can remain the best version out there, as those following play safe and rarely stray from the “rules”…

  16. says

    You’re looking in the same social media toilet bowl that everyone else is looking in – that’s the problem. Everybody’s chasing (barking at) the same cars. There is plenty of fresh content on the web, from art to writing, to free music (check out the great free albums offered from the many online record labels) to great videos (peruse vimeo.com’s “Staff Picks”).
    Stop looking where “they” tell you to and looking for what “they” tell you to look for and you’ll be fine…
    Cheers, mate.

    • says

      Yes and no. Completely agree the social media bubble is over-saturated with empty content, that doesn’t really push any kind of thoughtful envelope.

      But because of that, I rarely read any of the blogs I used to subscribe to back in the day, and look for niche blogs, ones that cover a whole host of topics that have nothing to do with marketing, social media, etc. And the lack of newness is evident there too.

      Perhaps it’s simply a by-product of people getting sucked into the “social shares and traffic is everything” mindset – chasing that extra tweet is turning content producers into second-rate versions of who they could really be?

  17. says

    I got sick and tired of the same old content rehashed six ways to Sunday. One person would put out something interesting and insightful and then the bloggers, gurus, mavens and experts would add their spin…attention-grabbing titles, summaries, slideshare mods, infographics, pithy podcasts and video-interpretations of the same piece.

    When I looked at my online network, I realized that I read, followed and connected with the same people as others in my network – primarily marketing/social media people. My online behaviour was not consistent with my offline behaviour. Offline, I always tend to connect with strangers in different industries and from different walks of life. When I started to do this online, I found a much richer array of content.

    There is some pretty cool stuff out there – but you gotta get ‘out’ there.

    • says

      Yep, as I mentioned to Dan Perez, I changed my reading habits to move away from the same Marketing/Social 101 stuff that seems to be so prevalent. Traffic chasing has made reading less fun.

      Though I do still see a lot of laziness in other niches, where bloggers are trying to emulate “leaders” in that vertical, by doing exactly what you highlight – reposition a thought into something slightly different, to try and grab a slice of the traffic pie.

      Maybe that’s what the web is coming down to?

  18. says

    Well I think about this all the time, and to prove your point, I’ll just regurgitate all of these comments with which I mostly agree. :)

    But truthfully, when I relaunched my blog almost a year ago, I wondered the same thing – the world doesn’t need another digital marketing blog so how can I be original in content? Sometimes I won’t be – and that’s OK because my readers aren’t reading all the same stuff we all are.

    But more important to your point, being original is about making connections and drawing new conclusions. It’s also about the creator being the only expert in their own story – so each creator has that going for themselves. And lastly, it’s about taking ideas and hopefully elevating them. I read something very cool by Erin Weed over the weekend and I’ve been trying to decide how to take that and do more with it.

    Where originality fails is people taking something and doing the same with it.

    • says

      That’s the problem right there – I know when I’m writing a post, I’m immediately wary of it being “different enough” from something that’s already been written on the topic. But then, there are millions of blogs that I know nothing of, so how can you possibly be aware of what’s already out there and strive to be different?

      Maybe we should just give up, read Perez Hilton, and reminisce about Happy Days… 😉

  19. says

    The problem is that so many people are obsessed with social media that they forget to actually live their lives. It’s very easy to get stuck in the loop of just repeating what everybody else does when there’s no accountability or need for originality. People will blame this on “everything being done already” and other similar excuses; but those same excuses have been around for centuries yet some visionaries break through. Not everyone can be a great creator of new ideas, but the notion that it cannot be done is simply sad.

  20. says

    It might seem that way but that is really not the case. There are still a handful of creative people. These are the shakers and originators where other ideas come from. After all, there will be no clone if there is no original. I can agree if you say that MOST people are recycling ideas. But ALL is an over-generalization.

    • says

      I’ll agree that all is too all-encompassing – yet at the same time, what was the last truly original thing you experienced (brand, product, experience, etc)? These are getting few and far between and is where the viewpoint of this post was born.

  21. says

    Originality is a long-gone word and recyclability is the “new original”, this sentence is truly thought provoking. All brands are running behind the numbers by wanting more likes, more followers and connections compared to their competitors. But they are forgetting a important key point by gaining the “Social Media Numbers” no doubt they are connected to their fans and followers.
    But the main essence being the engagement , value and relationship which cannot be maintained with numbers but with content which should be original and organic has been ignored sadly.

    • says

      The number chasers, and the platforms/consultants/agencies that spout this as the most important metric, are missing a much bigger picture, and certainly play their part in the lack of originality. After all, why stir the pot when the boring numbers game is working, right?

      Except it’s the pot stirrers that are finding real benefits, while the number chasers continue spinning the same sorry wheel. I guess it’s up to us to continue to push past the numbers, and showcase the real gems that are looking ti do something new.

  22. says

    So imagination is the key to providing content – the ability to combine elements already out there, just presenting them in a new configuration … That allows for a great sense of play; it’s a form of artistry where individual personalities provide originality and colour.

    That’s why we love offering our Coach Approach workshops as a team of two, and participants say they receive great value. It’s not brand-new hot-off-the-press material, it’s the way we’ve chosen to assemble the elements and weave them together that creates such an engaging texture :)

    Cheers!

  23. says

    Hi Danny

    I own a real estate brokerage in Sacramento. I believe I have some original content, although rarely too much new to find on buying and selling homes. For general real estate content I curate from an abundance of available material (to your point).

    My original content is original as it applies to my market, addressing Wall St. practices and Fed policy and its impact on the average homeowner. http://www.SurvivingTheAmericanDream.org is meant to bring to light fraud, abuse and manipulation in the mortgage and housing markets. The future of housing and homeownership is going to change. It is an artificially manipulated market and, as it is today, is ultimately unsustainable. Our instinctive desire to own our own homes needs to be re-examined more critically. Much like the stock market, residential real estate has become a target of opportunity for more informed, influential and funded participants than the average homeowner.

    I often feel a bit isolated in this perspective.

    Bill

    • says

      Hi there Bill,

      Thanks for the thoughtful comment, and the insight into an area I have no real knowledge of. You know, in hindsight, perhaps my statement of there being zero new content was a bit harsh (or, at the very least, too encompassing).

      Like you and others here have mentioned, it could just be semantics (“new” versus “new take”). As you share in your comment, there can be times when the content we put out is new but, because of its isolation, may not be seen until it’s deemed not new (if that makes sense?).

      Thanks for the reminder, sir.

  24. says

    With the millions and millions of new blogs and websites popping up by the minute, it does seem there is a redundancy of content rampant on the web. The frustrating part is working hard to create valuable content and finding it nearly impossible to build a tribe as people are already subscribed to gazillions of blogs already. Danny, this is the first time coming across your site and can see the engagement is fantastic. Congrats on putting out content that gets people talking and sharing.

    • says

      Hey there Mike,

      Yep, I hear you on the social noise – it’s one of the key reasons I typically search out bloggers that may talk about the same topics, but do it in a unique way that you just can’t ignore. I think a revisit to this topic may be in order.

      And cheers – great to have you here!

  25. says

    Hi Danny,

    Thanks for this thought provoking “thought”.

    You see, online world has matured a lot with advancement of hardware (cloud storage and unlimited hosting) and internet speeds. Both of these factors enable people to create other forms of content (info-graphics, videos, slides) which are easily “consumable” by the readers than skimming through lines of “text”.

    After all, a well served dish always wins the heart :-)

    Regarding originality, there is nothing called “100%” original on this earth. Whatever we do, is inspired by someone and what we do , inspire someone else.

    So it’s cycle which recycles itself.

    My 2 scents. I am 99.99% original here :-)

  26. Mike Faircloth says

    This is the way of the world. A handful of people creating “new” and the rest manipulating it in so many ways until it isn’t new anymore. What’s left is an opportunity to repurpose the “old” and create a whole new “new”.

  27. says

    I think Danny is right, originality is rare, copycats are all there. But from start man is copycat, tried to fly like bird! swim like fish! climb on trees like monkey!! Man started learning from copying!! And people after them added some and recycled rest of them!!

    In the world of web, inspiration has become a basic part of life. If you don’t what is happening and can’t follow the trend then you will be out!! What you think?

  28. says

    Buying a franchise is not an
    overnight job. Instead, it requires
    proper planning and expert knowledge. The business practice comes over with
    several risks that you are likely to face in case of negligence. Dr. John P. Hayes is a franchise expert who lets you
    overcome your issues and earn productive results through easy yet effective
    steps. To know more about the relevant experiences simply visit http://www.howtobuyafranchise.com/

  29. Chirag says

    Hey Danny. Came across your blog and this one’s a bit unique for me. Anyway, with all the new platforms coming out these days, article content can easily be recycled. Content is king I should say and the best thing to do is just to keep going with originality.

Trackbacks

Comments