But I don't think it's that simple. After all, the deal is based on reciprocity. If one side only gives and the other only takes - which one might initially assume - then there would be something seriously wrong with the content strategy in question.
One gives …
Content marketing is the discipline that probably doesn't need to be explained in detail. The company provides valuable content. In return, it gets attention, reach and demonstrates expertise. "Give away what you know - to sell what you can": That's how I summed it up in my book "The Free Principle" several years ago .
But there are of course many more reasons to publish something viber data on the corporate blog, in social media channels, as a video or podcast and in other media that is free to access and for which the recipients do not pay anything. For example, it can be about bringing topics forward, i.e. setting the agenda. Stimulating discussions. Spreading information because others urgently need it. And often you can't really separate the two, because topic leadership also contributes to the perceived expert status.
… takes the other one?
But content is only worth something if someone notices it and reacts to it - be it with direct answers, by sharing it, or even just by gaining a positive impression of the provider's expertise. This may be free on the surface, but it is not for nothing.
Time and attention are now more rare and valuable than ever. Those receiving them therefore bring something to the table, especially if they spread the content and use it as a starting point for discussion. And certainly even if they don't immediately become new prospects or even customers.
Even those who subscribe to a newsletter invest time and attention – and are rightly annoyed or at least annoyed if their expectations are not met.