Comments on: Why “Content” Has Become a Dirty Word

By: poli poquer

poli poquer — Sat, 08 Mar 2008 10:32:30 +0000

Beaucoupde www.pacific poker.com presion menos gerencia hablar jugar omaha poker en linea kansas afuera paga millon representar reverso juegos on line poker hablar vigorish manija fanfarronee?

By: Bonnie Conrad

Bonnie Conrad — Wed, 24 Oct 2007 00:51:28 +0000

I agree wholeheartedly with the sentiments expressed here. The sheer volume of poorly written articles proliferating on the web will lead Google, et al to alter their search algorithms to punish those seeking to game the system. Real content with real value will be in great demand and real writers will profit.

By: How to Write a Web Page | Word Sell, Inc.

How to Write a Web Page | Word Sell, Inc. — Fri, 31 Aug 2007 19:29:12 +0000

[...] recent post and discussion on Copyblogger about Web content raises important [...]

By: There’s Never Been a Better Time to Be a Business-Savvy Writer | Copyblogger

Tue, 27 Feb 2007 19:20:51 +0000

[...] It all goes back to something we started talking about last year—are you creating content to fill up space, or are you producing something that readers determine is a resource? [...]

By: Fool for Five :: Why are Priests Like Bloggers?

Fool for Five :: Why are Priests Like Bloggers? — Sun, 10 Sep 2006 16:35:21 +0000

[...] I think though that lots of priests need to work on their delivery. Rambling through writing isn’t necessarily bad, but rambling speeches can be boring, and that still doesn’t matter. Since most Filipinos are devout Catholics, we flock to our churches every Sunday. It doesn’t matter if the priest creates compelling content (or is that copy, since he’s selling a lifestyle?) or if he’s the worst speaker in the world; he’ll still enjoy an audience of thousands in a day. [...]

By: John

John — Sat, 09 Sep 2006 18:42:55 +0000

Its only a matter of time until Google and other SE find a way to ban “bad” SPAM content. Sites like Constant-Content will most likely flourish because these Spammers will have to pay real writers for real content.

By: Content is Dead and Resource is King | blogHelper

Content is Dead and Resource is King | blogHelper — Sat, 19 Aug 2006 23:42:36 +0000

[...] Damn right. But no, not that definition of “content”. We’re talking about what Brian Clark defines as “…something that simply fills empty space in a receptacle.” [...]

By: Are You a Resourceful Blogger? | Copyblogger

Are You a Resourceful Blogger? | Copyblogger — Sat, 19 Aug 2006 22:03:07 +0000

[...] Dan Zarrella nailed it when he simultaneously affirmed the value of resources and rejected the “content as filler” philosophy: Content is dead and resource is king. [...]

By: Chad Pensiero

Chad Pensiero — Fri, 11 Aug 2006 19:45:51 +0000

Great piece. I completely agree.

It also bothers me when the person or organization that owns a good piece of real estate in a great domain name throws up a splog. I think that I could do so much more with it.

Also, since the barriers to entry are very low, it is very easy to copy a good idea, throw a new name on it, and try it.

Eventually the good stuff will rise to the top, but it still bothers to see the splogs and garbage sitting on a great name.

By: Romerican

Romerican — Fri, 11 Aug 2006 18:50:17 +0000

Interestingly, that’s the first time I’ve come to see content in the way you describe it. And I think you’re right point it out as a warning to those who don’t care for such a definition of content.

I like the set up.