It is hard to know exactly how to respond to two such polarized opinions. I gather both appreciated the writing which is a good thing, I guess.

To the anonymous poster who thinks I’m a genius. Thank you but methinks you overstate as much as Martin thinks I understate.

Martin. I hear ya. The memory and metaphor were too rich to pass up but they put me on a forest path of sorts with a very real deadline to meet. In some cases I wish I had been able to expand on points and in others I can think of two or three more I would have liked to have introduced.

In the example you sited, learning about your clients’ ISPs, there is obviously a lot more to say. I’m not going to quantify it (would take some research) but we find a lot of solutions when we ask questions and build relationships with the folks who operate our ISPs. (Huge thanks to lots of folks our team will likely never meet in person but work with from day to day.)

Another issue noted is a lack of focus in regards to the audience. You have a point there. I try to imagine who is reading the material I write. From what I gather, readership runs the gamut from management to marketing to production. Primarily, I try to write for my perception of the average knowledge of our clients. That’s who I started writing for originally and I think they represent a good cross section of business on the ‘net.

One has to make a lot of assumptions when trying to meet what they think the “average” reader will read. I figure most people reading my articles are pretty smart and already know a lot about search marketing. They are either clients or potential clients, or they are other techies.

Clients and potential clients (not necessarily ours) need to know what we (and by extension, other SEO/SEM firms) are thinking and why we are thinking it. I need to tell them we are on top of things and paying attention to the industry.

Sometimes I use writing to warn and inform consumers of the changes in our industry. Sometimes I use them to try to influence the trajectory of the industry. However I use it, I try to understand it is a privleged space and that I owe something to everyone involved in the industry.

It should always be assumed I am trying to showcase the smarts and talents of the StepForth team but that assumption sort of goes with the territory.

When writing for the techies who might read my stuff, I try to drop a bunch of hints. I figure the techies are already on top of most subjects I choose to cover so a detailed explanation is wasted on them. If they are not up on new stuff, they should be. I do write heavily focused technical material from time to time but that sort of writing involves a huge commitment of worktime and research. Given the pressures of column space and daily deadlines, it is far more practical to leave a trail of breadcrumbs. (I do agree with you on the ISP example though)

thanks both for commenting.

The content was useless.

The subject is treated at such a high level as to be generic and absolutely inactionable. This is pretty much the type of pablum fed to CIO’s everywhere, to give them a sense of understanding and connectedness. Bah!

Example:

SEOs should also continue to learn as much as they possibly can about how their clients’ Internet Service Providers set up their servers.

That was meaningful. NOT!

What a waste of time.