I have been in rooms where folks argue that people's attention spans have reduced, and only shorter content stand a chance of gaining viewership or readership. TikTok and IG are always cited as good examples.
That is not how I see it. We need to ask deeper questions [as intellectual minds]. Why do people prefer shorter forms of content?
Hold this in your right hand.
I have also been in rooms where people argue that people no longer like to read. That is, reading culture is becoming history. Beyond casual reading, even technical industrial content also suffers from this—there is an argument that no one wants to read anymore.
Another question we must ask here is, what makes people disinterested in reading?
If you are a marketing leader or writer, this should interest you. If you are also a technical founder in Web3 who has not been gaining conversion through content marketing, this is a thousand-dollar solution for you.
Everyone is Saying the Same Thing, so People are Tired
I think we have taken “there is nothing new under the sun” too far. Originality is getting really scarce.
This reality dawned on me some years back when I tried to read up on a technical topic. Of course, Google was my friend.
I entered what I wanted to learn about into the search engine and smashed the Enter key on my laptop. Then, about ten websites or blogs came up, claiming to answer my curiosity.
I read the first one, which was helpful, but I wanted more, so I read up on a few more blogs on the search engine.
Yes, that is where it all starts to feel weird…
Your guess is right. It was more like the rest of the blogs copied the first one, which is not robust enough to explain my questions sufficiently, as expected.
This is the age where most information on the Internet is mainly regurgitated—nothing new for readers.
Apart from informational deficiency, there has been—in my opinion—a sharp decline in the quality of writing lately. I mean, writing should be engaging; you should nod your head a few times when you can relate to what the writer is saying.
The figures of speech need to be carefully used at necessary intervals so information can be communicated in the most interesting and engaging way possible. And yes, a few side humor here and there sets the right tone.
But quite a good number of writings today are a bit dry. Meanwhile, people have quite serious things going on, so if a piece of content cannot bring good energy, it will have to read itself.
And no, I am not criticizing writers. At least, not yet. But I hope you get the point.
Contribution to Knowledge - Fresh Air
I heard about the phrase “contribution to knowledge” for the first time when I was writing my final-year long essay in the Uni.
My professor had a brief session with us before we commenced our research work. She highlighted some things supervisors consider when grading long essays and theses so we can bear them in mind as we write.
Among all the qualities she mentioned, there was one that—according to her—carries the greatest amount of mark relatively, and that is contribution to knowledge. What does that even mean?
It means the fresh perspective an essay or thesis brings to an industry or a topic. It should stem from research but also produce a tangible method of practicalization.
For example, assume one is researching the Blockchain Trilemma, which posits that a blockchain can only solve at most two of three legendary problems—decentralization, security, and scalability—and trade-off one.
Contribution to knowledge in this regard will be creating a unique modular protocol that can help blockchains fix these problems even though no researcher has been able to recommend a working solution for years successfully.
That right there is a contribution to knowledge - a fresh perspective.
How to Write What People Love to Read
Y Combinator has a popular slang term for creating something people want. That shows you something: product and content creation must tickle people's interest and trigger them to take action.
I have heard cases of writers who say they publish and don’t care whether or not people read their works. I consider that to be sheer intellectual dishonesty. Writers emotionally connect with their works, so they love it when people read them. Inversely, they might be concerned no one reads at all.
Secondly, that mindset is terrible for those running businesses or protocols. Imagine writing a tutorial guide to onboard more developers to use your Web3 product, but not even one developer will eventually read it.
How does that sound?
It means your protocol is not getting the right attention, which consecutively means you have a higher chance of making little or no revenue. Meanwhile, you can’t stay in business for long without revenue, even if the greatest VC backs you.
So we have established a common fact: you should care about people reading your work. Genuinely do.
Now, let’s talk about writing what people love to read.
Identifying Problems
First, you must identify their problems or what will make them look for your product.
For example, consider a case where someone hears about crypto wallet hacks and gets scared of being a victim. They will look for ways to protect their wallet from hacks or a wallet that does that for them.
That leads me to my next point. Follow closely.
Providing Unique Solutions
The second thing is providing robust answers to their questions or concerns and recommending unique solutions.
This is where contribution to knowledge comes in. Beyond what everyone else is saying on the internet, research novel ways people can protect their Web3 wallets by recommending working extensions that help or even Multi-party Computation wallets, which are believed to be more secure.
There is no watertight definition of what contribution to knowledge is. It applies to different contexts.
The main goal is to bring unique, interesting solutions to your readers and engage them while doing so—like I have so far, no brags.
You Have to be in The Game
Apart from being a practicing writer, I am also a content manager. While managing content sometimes, I discovered that some blogs can be dry and similar to others on the internet simply because the writer has no skin in the game.
It will amaze you that some writers do not even have an idea of what they are writing about. Not their fault because they are not even in the industry, and you can’t give what you don’t have.
You must be in the game to write what people want.
Being in the game will make you feel the pain people are feeling, and people will be more eager to read your work when they see that you understand their frustration or concern.
But it doesn’t end there; they didn’t come to your blog for mere therapy sessions - they want answers.
By being in the game, you will not only know about the problems but particularly answers to those problems. Your answers can even be polished from your own experiences.
For example, you cannot write about stateful and stateless fuzzing unless you are quite deep into smart contract auditing and are very comfortable with Foundry; you can’t make these things up.
That means you should have been an auditor yourself. The fact that you do what you are writing about makes you more authentic, and your content becomes more helpful to the readers.
How about getting technically sound Web3 developers to write for your protocol?
I’ve come across a couple of protocols that could have amassed a greater audience if their blogs were not too surface-level.
As someone who doesn’t like to complain but rather solve issues, this was why I founded Blockchain Alpha - a technical content studio for technical Web3 protocols.
We have skins in the game—juggling VS Code and Google Docs—so we know what we write. We can write for a crypto trading protocol because we trade ourselves.
We write insanely based Web3 security content because we still participate in audit contests. All I am saying is that I am building a team to help you connect more with your technical audience and onboard them with technical content.
Let’s grab a cup of coffee one of the days if you’d like to keep in touch!