When sharing quality content on your social channels, there’s the option for using a third party system to curate content that supports your efforts. We’re moving away from aggregated content, and here’s why.
Our Current Process
We’re advocates of experimenting with software tools where there is potential value to your business. Whilst a small amount of time can be spent doing this, the upshot is that now and again, you’ll implement a tool that changes your process, creating a better way of doing things.
Naturally, we’ve explored the tools available to make social sharing the process possible. Riselabs has found real value in scheduling content (for which we use Buffer), but we believe in creating as much of our own content as possible.
Connecting with Others
After trialling aggregated content and the frequency of posts we share, we have found that our social reach almost always goes further when we produce our own content. Why? Well, much of our aggregated content receives poorer engagement than the content we’ve generated ourselves. This isn’t limited to blog posts and other media content – even the likes of personal tweets go much further.
Riselabs has found that generating our own content is really valuable within our network. We are better positioned to talk to businesses we know about software, or process, or tech and say “We actually wrote something about this that you might find insightful.” This personal approach is powerful because that reader knows us, and understands our experience with that topic.
Riselabs was already generating content for social, as well as relying on Quuu to support our efforts. There is certainly a case for content sharing working better in some industries than others.
However, in the world of software development and technology (as it likely is for other industries), much of the content available is written by experts to share knowledge with others operating in the same sphere. If your readership is comprised of other industries, you’re at risk of alienating a reader by making things far too complex. Perhaps, then, the best way to consider a readership is to speak to them directly as often as possible.
When it comes to using the content of others, quality control is everything. Whilst we are in a position to review all posts before they are shared with our social channels, there are many factors to be aware of. There’s the journalism itself, and how well the tone aligns with your business. Another trap that’s easy to fall into is simply sharing too much content without driving real value.
What still works?
Buffer is still exceptionally good at scheduling our currently existing content, so we will continue to use this in conjunction with producing new content on an ongoing basis. Whilst we certainly wouldn’t advise against experimenting with aggregated posts to see how you get on, we still think there’s nothing better than speaking to your followers directly, whenever you can.