Self-Devpt. Nuggets™

This post is probably going to be a bit controversial, because I actually end up advocating a line of action at variance with what many “recognised” blogging and article marketing experts appear to favour.

Well, I guess I just have to be true to my (contrarian) self

Some Say 700 Words Maximum, Or Your Article Will Fail

Over the past six years or so, as I actively used article syndication (and more recently blogging) to promote my products and services, I have periodically come across articles and blog posts recommending that writers aim for 400 to 700 word length for their write-ups.

There are apparent benefits to be had from adhering to this rule.

For instance, the 400 to 700 word length is said to meet the needs of the typical impatient or click happy internet reader with an appetite for instant gratification.

(They say…) She does not want to read through volumes to get to the meat of your content.

(They say…) Quite often, she would have found your article via an online search. That would imply she would most likely be looking for answers to specific questions, and may have other search results to read through.

(They say…) Therefore, if your article is “too long” I.e over 700 words, she could regard the prospect of reading it as a waste of time.

Now, proponents of the above school of thought argue that following this rule will not only make readers fall in love with your writing, but that you’re also likely to have more publishers willing to syndicate your write-ups in their newsletters etc – because of the “brevity”.

I should add here, that many of those who advocate this view are regarded as experts, and recognised for their achievements as writers on the web.

But I Argue That Their Reasoning Is Not Generally Applicable

I have never questioned or quarrelled with the above mentioned line of thinking.

But I also have never accepted it, talk less of letting it influence my writing habit significantly.

And before now, I never really considered writing to share my contrarian perspective on the subject.

However, a few days ago, I came across a blog post by a highly recognised article marketing expert, and one additional reason he gave as providing justification for sticking to a maximum 700 word length article simply did not go down well with me.

He claimed anything longer would bore readers, and could over time make them lose interest in reading more writing by the guilty author.

Really?

Well, I beg to disagree.

I explain why I differ below, and propose the adoption of a more balanced perspective that will enable business writers get more beneficial rewards for the writing they do.

This Faulty Reasoning Is The Possible Result Of Tunnel Vision

We must be careful to avoid letting “expert status” make us develop tunnel vision, or “one-track” minds.

Those who insist on the 700 word limit are guilty of making the above error.

Here’s Why I Say So:

It is important to ALWAYS remember that there are different kinds of readers online.

The kind(s) that choose to read your writing may not ALL have the same needs.

And THAT (i.e their individual needs) is really what will determine how they react to the length of anything you write.

This is where, I believe, the experts I disagree with are getting it wrong.

They assume only one kind of reader exists and that her needs are unchanging.

Not so in the real online world.
I’ve given this matter a lot of thought, and I suspect that the experts who argue for the 700 word limit are viewing the issue mainly from the perspective of “readers” who are “web publishers” looking for content to republish or syndicate.

Now, if you as a business person, are writing with the primary motive of getting your stuff republished/syndicated, then of course the 700 word limit rule could hurt your prospects if you flout it.

However, many business people who write are often looking to kill as many birds with one “article writing” stone as possible.

Take me for example.

Since 2006 I’ve enjoyed the multiple benefits of having my writing republished (recently I began earning income for some of that), even as many of my articles directly led prospective clients and customers back to me, resulting in sales of my products and services.

Interestingly, less than ten of the over 200 articles I’ve written are less than 1,000 words in length.

Indeed, most of my best performing articles in terms of page views and also sales leads generation have been at least 1,500 words long!

However, if the criterion of having those articles picked up for syndication is considered, most of those same articles would be judged to have performed poorly.

But then the question I ask is:

If my article generates decent sales leads for me in line with my business goal, what do I care if more publishers fail to use it? It really does not bother me.

It could of course be argued that more syndication would translate to increased exposure, and ultimately more of the leads and sales I want.

And that would be true, to some extent.

However, I believe a business person’s primary obligation – when writing – is to her target audience of prospective clients and customers.

And not to the “middle man” content publisher whose drive to optimise space capital in his medium can result in your being unable to deliver impact-FULL content to your target reader, in a way that would make them contact you for business.

CONSIDER THIS ANALOGY: A CHILDLESS COUPLE IN SEARCH OF A MEDICAL SOLUTION

Let’s dispense with my use of a personal example.

Consider instead, the following real world relevant analogy of a childless couple desperately searching online for alternative medical solutions to their problem, after all doctors they’ve seen have told them there’s no hope.

If a Google search produced a link to a 2,000 word article about a number of new procedures touted to offer potential breakthroughs, do you think that couple would mind reading every single word in that article to learn more?

I’m sure you believe – like I do – that they would not mind at all!

And even if they were in a “hurry”, printing out the valuable article, or saving it to a flash drive (if no printer) are options the couple would readily consider – for obvious reasons.

But what if they stumbled upon a 700 word article that featured similar findings about the same new procedures described in the 2,000 word article?

Do you think they would drop the longer article in favour of the shorter one?

I doubt it.

And that’s because people looking for answers or solutions to real problems they (or those they love) are facing, are rarely fussy about learning as much as they can about what they can do to elimimate the problem!

Publishers who come across the 700 word version of the childless couple’s article are however more likely to prefer it to the 2,000 word version, because they have a different use in mind for it.

Now, consider the fact that many other couples and publishers are likely to see both article versions while searching online, and the point I’m making should become clearer to you.

In other words, individual readers will respond differently to your writing based on their “felt needs”.

Final Words: Make Your Articles As Long As They Need To Be

“Need” as used above being the operative word.

Business writers must strive to write as concisely as possible, without sacrificing completeness of their content.

The tendency to be “wordy” in my writing is one that I continually work hard to overcome.

However, the name recognition, leads generation and selling success that my writing has so far brought me, serves as a firm reminder that many (“non-publisher”) readers put QUALITY of content offered by a business writer well ahead of her ability to stay within a 700 maximum word limit.

As I have shown in this write-up, different kinds of readers, with different needs, will independently evaluate your individual articles in terms of their value adding potential.

And each reader will choose the version that she considers more useful in addressing her felt needs.

Word length is therefore unlikely to always be the over riding determinant of how readers respond to an article or how well it performs.

What’s your opinion on this?