Nearly A Nerd.com

Not content with ‘content’

The term “content” — referring to material that constitutes a publication or document for an audience — is abhorrent. Applying the word “content” essentially cheapens the writing, music, video or whatever other form of media one is taking in and attempting to gain a life enriching experience from it.

The only purpose for casting a blanket term like “content” over every form of consumable media is convenience. It is simply easier to say we need more content on this or that site instead of actually taking the time to discuss what actually needs written or recorded.

Providing content. Content is king. Instead of focusing on gaining knowledge from whatever we are reading, watching or listening to, too many times the Internet community lumps these together and says “content” instead of engaging web communities in conversation by producing things that matter, things of lasting value.

Commodification of information is not at issue here. Many folks make a living off of good art and wanted words. It is simply the sweeping way this livelihood is often referred to.

My argument may come off as purely semantic with a high burden of proof and much chiding, but the point is to urge quality in everything we produce and consume online.

————-

(Updated 5/18/10)

But there’s really no one to blame.  Referring to it as “content” seemed to gradually come in to use and now you’re a weirdo if you don’t use the term.

But by referring to various media as “content” it all but jells one’s consumption of it away from style, substance and meaning and towards other intents for media like monetization.

When was the last time you referred to the music, films and written words you love so much — stuff that somehow helps define you and your beliefs — as “content”?

“There’s this awesome content I just consumed that has completely revolutionized my own life and is changing how people view the world.”

No.