Playing with the future - Part 4 - Data is the future of content

A few months ago I had a question from a prospect that had me stumped.

Your product is great with content, but how does it deal with data?

It took me a while to understand - more context was needed - and still today it is somewhat haunting me. To me, content is data, so what in the name of <insert random deity> did they really mean?

Well, what they meant is not exactly what this post is about, but it is somewhat linked. In their specific scenario Data meant semi-structured data feeds they get from their other applications that may or may not be displayed on the website.

How to deal with it is linked to the topic of this post.

You've seen the semantic web at play. For us WCM geeks, some of the first examples of the semantic web were those "helpful links" under a google search result (and now they show with even more detail, like a link to a related blog) and lately with efforts like good relations and schema.org the semantic web keeps on creeping up on us with great results for everyone (and search engines!).

With me so far? Semantic Web is good, content is good, data is also content, but might come from a different source.

Now, why do I say that data is the future of content?

If you've developed websites before (not just snazzy html, I mean really design websites, web experiences, content creation flows, contextual experience definitions, etc) you've probably been frustrated like I have about the lack of metadata on content. Editors seem to just want to use "an html WYSIWIG" editors to create content, but then expect you to do miracles about how the content displays, magically determine which pieces of data are used for your tab names, which images to use for the home page, etc. I had a particularly harrowing experience with a given editor that insisted all content should be classified under "Personal Finance", yet expected the site to be able to sort the difference between auto loans and mortgages (deep sigh).

Summary #2:

1. Content Editors want an easier to use, easier to create content in, simpler UX/UI paradigm that allows them to create semantically meaningful content without having to deal with complex operations or data structures.
2. Semantic content needs proper annotations, schema compliance, and contextual information (used to determine, for instance, when is appropriate to show this content vs when it's not)
3. Both points above are at odds. To create semantically meaningful content editors need to spend more time curating their content.

And this means that the solution is to enrich content with semantically meaningful metadata automatically (with the possibility to be modified/enriched by the editors).

In other words - editors will get what they want: simpler ways to create content; and developers will get what they want: more meaning attached to their content in the form of "data" - metadata, ambient data, structured streams, whatever you want to call it. And that will allow us to start creating smarter UIs that can help you determine layout, presentation and context with less effort. All you need is more data, and we will get more data from intelligent systems that can do most of the digging for us.

Playing with the future - Part 2 - Content Ownership

As a follow up to my previous blogpost, here's the second concept we came up with on the topic of "How will content authors create content in 2020".

This idea might be a bit more radical than the first one... "Content ownership will be diluted".

There are many types of content creators out there, from the marketing-snazzy cloud-sourcing heavy world of "modern social media buzzword compliant marketing" to the corporate workflow-heavy legal review world of most of the customers I work with.

In some industries, it is perfectly acceptable to have someone from outside the organization to create content for you - be it via "endorsed blogging", or "fan content on Facebook", or even comments on specific pages that get promoted to full page articles given its quality. This is something we already see happening today on a regular basis.

But the brand fan of the future is different. The brand defender of the future is possibly 16 years old, and is compelled to share due to sharing being in their DNA - hyper-connectivity does that to you. So companies - including workflow-heavy legal compliance companies - will go out of their way and find methods to assess how much of a fan are you really, and possibly give you special rights to create content on their websites. 

If you believe in my company and brand even more than I do myself, why would I stop you from contributing positively?

Here's how I think this will impact the world of content:

1. Gamification principles and social media tracking will be used to accurately measure a person's brand-awareness level - you want to find those brand defenders out there, and you want to empower them
2. Brand defenders will - from outside your firewall - have special privileges on your content platform - be it by being allowed to review content, or by being able to create content themselves. This process already happens today, but in a rather unstructured way. (I certainly get emails from brand defenders about content published to Tridion World, I can only imagine that Bart Koopman gets even more)
3. Brand defenders will be given access to marketing strategies, campaign ideas, and any other branding material. They will carry the flag for you in exchange for early access to data, exclusive T-Shirts and bragging rights. Why wouldn't you reward them in their own coin (data)?

In other words, brand defenders will become your "trusted content contributors".

I can certainly see a future where even the most legalese of texts gets reviewed by people that are -- at first glance -- completely unrelated to your company, but that know your brand value better than the people being paid to create a brand value. Where content is created for your website by your most loyal fans, and where content management tools are built with this in mind from the ground up. Where content review is done by people outside your corporate legal department (but likely not excluding legal completely), and where you provide your brand defenders with all the tools and data they need to be heard.

Tune in soon for my next non-binding futuristic play: Context Engines.

What is the future of content?

I guess I have said it enough times - I am in a rather privileged position within the WCM space, as I get to see a lot of what really is implemented by our customer base (mostly in the highly regulated financial industry), I get to play with magic crystal balls, and I get to hear about what experts and analysts think content people should be doing now, and in the future.

And I admit, I am extremely confused, because the pieces don't fit together.

Let me try to explain what I mean with this.

On the one hand, we have simplicity. The people who select WCM systems (please note that I am not saying "Content Editors") want a "Facebook-like experience" creating content. They want the simplicity of WordPress or perhaps Blogger (which I use) when creating content.

On the other hand we have compliance and content governance. People want to control content life cycles, trace back the origins of content from its inception to its inclusion on a given page, to its transformation into a Call To Action on the home page, to its decommissioning a year later into the "outdated content" bin.

And finally, on the last hand (yes, I know those are three hands, get someone to lend you one), we want content re-purposing and targeting. We want content that can be used across all channels - Web, Email, Digital Signage, Facebook, Twitter, IOS/Android Apps, Google Glasses and what not.

And this is where I get confused.

Simplicity means one thing - less flexibility. Sure, you can make very reusable content with WordPress, but then you're putting the onus onto your editors to use the correct html mark-up for your content. I agree that a lot can be achieved with some smart plug-ins, but how do you prepare for the next channel that you don't know about yet? And especially, how do you create truly "re-formattable" content when you want simplicity, which by its own definition mixes content and layout?

And governance. Governance is impossible without metadata. Usually, it requires metadata about your metadata (ever tried defining a release policy linked to content models?). Again, sure, we can try having your editors enter that metadata in their simple-to-create-content web tool. Doesn't look so simple anymore, does it?

Creating content that can be re-purposed for various channels, including those that don't exist yet, and allows for personalization is where the whole thing falls apart in my view.
How can you have content that was simple to create - web based, WordPress like interface, loads of drag-and-drop widgets and SEO optimizers and navigation managers and whatnots - and have that content still comply to a strict schema, like those specified in schema.org? Sure, you can look at semantic engines - like Apache Stanbol - to help your editorial team get their content right, but how is that going to help you determine which headline to show on your iPhone app?


Don't take me wrong, I'm not trying to say that creating content should be hard - on the contrary, it must be easy. But creating content that can live beyond the constraints of a web page requires thinking beyond drag-and-drop and easy-to-use (actually, having to use your mouse when creating content is a terrible thing and completely breaks the flow of work) - you have to think about content modularity and new delivery models.

My view on the future of content is that layout and look-and-feel will disappear, and consumers of your content will care about nothing else than the content itself, the layout will be based on their preferences and their own metadata, with smart apps - in whatever is the device-du-jour - taking on the task of formatting that content for display. Don't think RSS, think Open Data+schema.org.

So, unless I'm terribly wrong (which is always possible and known to have happened many times), the emphasis on Customer Experience Management requires more content structure, not less. And more content structure, today, means that editors must have an abstract view of content, focus less on how it looks and more on how it's structured, so that the context in which the content is displayed can adapt to the customer's expectation. And to do that, we have to think beyond pages and re-think content as individual entities that can be manipulated and formatted for display in whatever device or app the customer may chose to consume it in. And that my friends, is against the view that content editing should be a simple, word-editing-like experience. Just like word editors were built for a world in which your main goal was to print that document once it was finished, many WCM tools out there are built to publish web pages, and web pages will be just a tiny fraction of how content is consumed in the future... (just like the number of people that actually print documents once they're finished with their editing).