Why you always need the original source

By Ariella Brown

Always, always go to the source cited to judge how relevant it is. That's my rule of thumb -- not just for my journalistic work but even for my content marketing. And it never ceases to amaze me how many people don't bother with that even while positioning themselves as authorities on the subject.

I knew I'd regret it, but I gave into temptation and clicked on an article with the title "How to Write Headlines That Grab Attention and Convert"

It gave the usual advice that most seasoned writers already know, including writing the title only after you've finished writing the article, being specific but not giving everything away, etc.

But it also sought to add insight taken) from "Data Driven Strategies for Writing Effective Titles & Headlines," the 28 page report put out by HubSpot and Outbrain.

Instead of putting in the title and link properly as you should do for anything you cite, it introduced the information this way:

Lessons from a 3-Million Headline Study

HubSpot and Outbrain analyzed more than 3 million paid link headlines from Outbrain’s network of 100,000+ publisher sites to find out what kinds of headlines can increase CTR, reader engagement and conversions, and this is what they found:

It then proceeded to share stats and insights from that study for the next 16 paragraphs. (I'm not exaggerating; I counted them). Despite drawing heavily on the study, the article never puts in a link to it.

In fact, it never even shares the title, which made it a bit more difficult to find. But I am nothing if not persistent when it comes to research and tracking things down.

I located the original source, which says that it was based on headlines in the time period of 2013-2014. That's right, the data is form nearly 10 years ago. In the world of online content, I wouldn't bank on anything more than two years old to still be current.

So why did the writer of an article published in August 2023 not include the link? It's possible that he deliberately intended to obscure that bit of historical context by not linking directly to the source. What's more likely, though, is that he came across another secondary source that cited those figures and takeaways and so didn't even know when the original study came out.

Unfortunately, that is often the case for writers who just go with the first Google result, which is more-often-than-not not the original source. You have to dig more to get the source in context.

Related:

A matter of degree

How to get everything wrong in a pitch

Add a pinch of salt to creative claims for AI

The perils of prompt engineering

Visit WriteWayPro.weebly.com  Like and follow on Facebook and on LinkedIn

Where HubSpot messed up

                                                       Photo by Kai Bossom on Unsplash

As I mentioned in What Edison can teach us about SEO, the first rule of writing is following through on what you promise in the title. If you fail to do that, you're guilty of bait-and-switch, or what is commonly known as clickbait.

                                                      Photo by Justus Menke on Unsplash

The promise the reader is not just about the topic covered but the approach and extent promised in the title. Consequently, if the title promises to explain a concept in 300 words, how long should it be? Just 300 word, not 500, and certainly not over 1800 words. Yet that's just what HubSpot did with its article entitled What Is an API? The Answer in 300 Words or Less.

That's Application Programming Interface (API) which connects many functions across many forms of business.

In truth it's a very thorough article that's been updated more than once to grown more comprehensives since it was first published in 2013. However, the promise of the title is not "Everything you need to know about an API" but a super-short overview that can be read in under a minute. For the current length, the article is described as a seven minute read.

What HubSpot should have done in this case is retain whatever short form the article may originally have held and then offered a link to the longer form with a CTA introduced along the lines of, "That's APIs in a nutshell. If you want to understand more about how they work for marketing, take a deep dive into the subject here."

Merely saying, "Here's a brief definition of an API, followed by some key information on how to make one work for your business" as a transition to the extensively detailed explanation that appears under the same title doesn't cut it as following through on the expected KISS (keep it short and simple) content.

Related:

Think Marathon Rather Than Sprint When Planning Content Marketing

Make Your Content as Accessible as Possible

What Edison Can Teach Us About SEO

Churchill's Guide to Writing

7 Ways to Grab Customer Attention in Subject Lines 

CRO is Like Basketball 

Most Memorable Brand Slogans 

Make your content as accessible as possible

 

The certificates above show that I have just completed the HubSpot Academy courses on content marketing and SEO. I did pick up a few tips, but the best part of it was the feeling of gratification that my understanding of best practices from years of experience was spot on. Unfortunately, the businesses I sometimes worked for often deviated from such best practices.

Unlock those gates!

For example, I'm generally not in favor of gating good content. You want it to be read, so why create barriers to getting it read? I fully understand that you want to force people to give you their contact information to follow up with potential leads. However, as the course points out, you can encourage some kind of opt-in even without blocking the content.

Semrush, the online visibility platform, agrees that introducing a layer of friction -- even if it is as simple as entering an email address -- will turn away readers. That is not something you want to do in the awareness stage when you wish to attract as many eyeballs as possible.

"You usually wouldn’t start a relationship with gated content. You have to woo your readers first, showing that your content is worth their time and — later on — their personal information." - Semrush

HubSpot's course suggestion was to have the content accessible with an option for the reader to download it as a PDF. People will voluntarily download content they like to have available to read at leisure, particularly longer form content. My guess is that seeing things first the first time on a smartphone likely contributes to that practice even more.

Keep it simple!

I also felt particularly gratified about another explicit guideline it gives that I've clashed with some clients over in the past. That is to use clear, direct language rather than jargon or what you believe is a very impressive vocabulary filled with the types of words students used to memorize for the SATs. It's a mistake to believe that you sound smarter by using big words, as the really confident person will explain even more complex topics as clearly as possible (think "explain it to me like I'm five").

I still remember what my composition instructor said about Winston Churchill, who was a highly capable speaker and writer. As the British Prime Minister during WWII, he didn't say, "The received communication from France is extremely unfavorable." Instead, he said, "The news from Paris is very bad."

The contrast to Churchill's direct and honest approach appears in Emperor Hiroshito's observation after the devastation of two atomic bombs, "The war situation has developed not necessarily to Japan's advantage."

Consider which statement you would consider more trustworthy as a source, and remember that when crafting your own content.

screenshot from https://app.hubspot.com/academy/21390613/tracks/15/377/2059

I took the liberty of grabbing a screenshot from the HubSpot video as proof of what I tried very tactfully to convey to a few of my recent clients. Unfortunately, they refused to get the point. In one case, they insisted they have to avoid using "layman" terms. In the other, they insisted that really smart people speak that way.

P.S. Semrush also corroborated that point in a tweet that went up just today. Here's the final step in its short thread on how to format your content for search engines & target featured snippets:

✍️ Finally, tighten up your page’s copy. Try to use short, direct sentences with language that isn’t too complicated. Good luck 👋

— Semrush (@semrush) February 9, 2022

Related:

Where HubSpot Messed Up

Think Marathon Rather Than Sprint When Planning Content Marketing

What Edison Can Teach Us About SEO

Churchill's Guide to Writing

7 Ways to Grab Customer Attention in Subject Lines 

CRO is Like Basketball 

Most Memorable Brand Slogans