Even when I was starting out as a freelancer, where any sane person wouldn't dare turn down a client, I had one rule: I don't write content. I've written website copy, promo copy, manuals, handbooks, product descriptions, blog posts, but I have never accepted a client that pitched their project using the word content. The reason is this: Even if the thing I end up writing could be described as such, someone who pitches content to me is demonstrating a diminution of the importance of creative work. This reason may seem mostly (or entirely) semantic, but semantics is important, and understanding the impact a subtle linguistic change can make is crucial to understanding the larger cultural shifts of the 21st century.
This is the first part of a series of indefinite length and undetermined frequency about the larger impact of Silicon Valley culture on the arts, language, writing, and the capitalistic compact.
The Semantics of Content
I was looking for consulting work the other day when I came across an ad on the website AngelList, which is (to use the stereotypical Silicon Valley "but for" descriptor) Monster.com but for startups. For your profile, they ask you to select your current position from a dropdown box, and understanding that there is no option for other, here are your choices:
Obviously something like writer or editor was probably not going to be there, but I was hoping for at least communications or editorial manager, or even something tangentially related to the act of creatively smashing words together other than Creative Director. But of course, the closest thing that I could find to what I did was probably Content Creator. But I'm not a content creator, I'm a writer. I don't create content, I write.
Okay, so what's the problem with content? I'm italicizing the word because it's the word I'm referring to, not the concept. Of course websites need to be filled, blogs need to say things, marketing campaigns need to have messages, and of course those editorial pieces are the contents of that framework. I have no problem with that. The problem arises when those things are gathered under the blanket of content, rather than what they actually are: Creative works, pieces, articles, et cetera. Shoving those things under the umbrella of content dehumanizes the act of creation, mechanizes it. It implies that these things are not especially saying anything, and are just filling space on the page. It ultimately diminishes their role in (here's the groan before saying it) value addition. It places the creative below the engineer or the entrepreneur under the assumption that what is really the creation, what is really the hard work, is the construction of the vehicle, and not what goes inside of it. The website, the platform, the marketing campaign--that's the hard work, and you, the creative, you just churn out the contents of it.
While it may be the case that a person first visits a certain website or uses a certain platform because of its utility and design, and not for its writing or video production, the use of the word content nonetheless subordinates the writer, the designer, the producer, to the engineer, devalues the production of creative work to something mechanical, algorithmic (more on that phrasing in a later post), something that, ultimately, anybody could do, and you're lucky that we're hiring you to do it (but it's only because we're too busy to deign to do it ourselves).
SEO and the Commodification of Words
This is not the commodifications of Words writ large, but individual buzzwords. Now, it's nearly impossible to get a content writing job unless you're familiar with and practiced at SEO. SEO is the holy grail of freelancers who do most of their work online because if they're not careful, it's all that they'll be hired to write. It has a more subdued role in traditional journalism, but when that journalism is online, it still plays a role (I can't remember what comedian said, "If there's a question mark at the end, it isn't news," but boy would they be disappointed).
This takes the creativity out of creative work, not because the people hired to write it are less creative (creators are not considered such by their success at being creative, but by their intent), but because SEO actively discourages creativity. Creative syntax, creative semantics, creative lexicology, these things don't show up in search engines precisely because they are creative--if everyone could search for them they wouldn't be particularly novel.
This doesn't create a huge problem for established writers, even established freelancers. The woman writing for the Atlantic or the guy writing for the Washington Post will still get those jobs and can still be creative at those jobs, but for the up and comer, for the guy (cough cough) who moonlights freelancing to fund other creative writing endeavors, there can be no recognition of creativity, because such creativity is discouraged in smaller markets who won't take chances. This is making it harder and harder for writers to establish themselves because they're forced to write homogenous, engineered language.
The Wider Impact of Content
The word content has spread so far and wide that it's now the first listing on Wikipedia when you search the word. Now not only are websites and platforms using the term to describe their words, but blogs, online periodicals, places that you go to first for the words they write are now calling those words content. The subordination of creative work has expanded into places nobody would visit if they weren't interested in the creative works those companies produce. The pervasiveness of this semantic change has devalued writers, editors, designers, artists, all over the country to the point where most companies don't bother to hire in house editorial managers anymore (who, aside from the obvious experience and linguistic care they bring to their work, would do things like establish a consistent style guide) and instead either go with freelancers or forgo the professional altogether. It would overplay my hand to say that this has caused the deemphasis of lexical mindfulness in conversation and led to a general semantic disregard, but it may be a contributing factor thereto.
But I don't think it overplays my hand to say that Silicon Valley culture devalues the creative, and that because of that culture's pervasiveness in society, creative endeavors are overall subordinated to STEM and business endeavors. This isn't because of the word content, but the use of that word both represents and helps cultivate that mindset.