I’d like community input on where and how Barnacles draws a line between content marketing and outright spam.
I’ve previously deleted articles that are pure lead-gen - no article, just a signup form. In the last week it was Justin Jackson’s “Tiny Marketing Wins”, a little while ago it was the landing page for Amy Hoy’s “Year of Hustle”. I know Hoy’s email course was solid and expect the same of Jackson’s, but I previously drew the line there. The rule hasn’t been tested yet by a submission with a razor-thin paragraph of content and a hard signup squeeze, but I’d lean towards deleting it.
When I just opened this article it attempted to send notifications, then a full-page popover (without an “X” to close it, but at least it doesn’t have a shaming “I want to stay ignorant” microcopy on the close button). This article is a retread and not well-written, but everything’s new to someone and I figure voting can sort out quality. But I’m not especially happy about it.
I mentioned in a recent comment I’m increasingly displeased by this level of intrusive advertising. I know if you track signup counts it works (especially if you don’t track Net Promoter Score or another trust metric…) but it’s unpleasant.
I don’t have any illusions about how content marketing works, or that it does. Most of the excellent blogs are written by folks who sell marketing tools and services and want readers to be aware of them, maybe enter the top of a sales funnel. There are also plenty of people who want to exploit “wantrepreneurs” and the less-savvy (and I’m strongly resisting naming examples because I know opinions differ on who’s a guru vs. huckster and don’t want that deliciously gossipy tangent in this thread).
So I’d really like to hear your opinion on where and how Barnacles should be drawing this line.