Why do your Shitposts Get More Engagement than Content that Took Hours to Make?
Hi Friends!
I don't often do "response videos" but I ran across this super interesting read from Asher (@abh12345) on how "shitposts" seem to get more engagement than content that took you hours to make. I thought he brought up some really interesting points and gave some great examples. I'd highly recommend checking out that POST and reading through it.
To start out... let's define what I mean when I say "Shit Post". After reading through Asher's post and the comments left on it - there seemed to be a general consensus that it wasn't the amount of words in your post, or the length of your video - but how much time it took you to prepare.
For example - My random gym selfie and a professionally shot self portrait from @eveuncovered are both technically "a photo"...but one clearly took more time than the other!
Comparing My Latest Two Posts
To kick the video off - I do a screenshare comparison of my latest two posts. One of which was an interview with the lovely @llfarms about a hot topic in the eco-system right now - the @steemalliance. (Ps... today is the last day to register to vote!) The other post is a quick photo I took at the gym chatting about how I'm going to start lifting weights.
If one piece of content was an interview that resulted in a post that took hours to assemble, while the other one was a quick photo and few short paragraphs - then why does it have over three times the amount of engagement?
Here's your Shitpost Cliff Notes...
Ironically... I end up chatting about short posts for almost 13 minutes... and so in the interest of keeping this "shitpost friendly", here are some cliff notes from the post. Check out the video for the full explanation though!
.PNG)
.PNG)
.PNG)
Does this Mean Shitposts are Better Than Longer, More Detailed Content?
I think that's a personal decision on why you are making content and what you are hoping both you and your audience will get out of it.
One thing I try to do, is look at why a shorter post got more engagement - and then try to incorporate some of those elements into my longer content as well. Could I make my main points clearer and more accessible? How could I break down the message to make it even more relatable?
I always do my best to end my posts with some kind of question to the audience as well - no matter the length or quality of post. This can help spark conversation and gives people something interesting to talk about.
So here are my questions to all of you...
Would you add anything to this list? Do you prefer consuming quick posts, digging into longer posts, or having a mix? Which type of content are you more likely to engage with?
I am trying to make shorter posts, because I find get tangled into long ones and I post much less than I should, I'm rather picky and think too much, I posted today after a while (fair decent post I hope) but I want to shout out, it's world rats dayyyy (and drop some of my ratties there in the mix cos I love rats and it's rat's day) should I shitpost (shortpost!) would I feel guilty if someone vote for it, should I not share then? the quandaries, the quandaries!
for the things that you do, you really can't do them every few days. so if you want to shout it is world rats day, you probably should :)
I actually did, XD squeak!
I loved seeing your rat day posts!! So fun!!
I think short posts can be a nice way to stay engaged with people and check back in. Especially If it's a long time between those bigger posts. Mosts people post on many different platforms. For example a podcaster may only come out with an episode once a week, but she may post 3-5 pictures a week on instagram to stay connected with her followers between episodes.
The paradox of the Steem blockchain is that they all dump into one landing page, even when posted on totally different dapps. So this can be harder to differentiate because it isn't as clear as "instagram content for instagram" and "videos for Youtube".
That being said... I think people really do enjoy a variety of different content and I've started to mix in a few shorter posts here and there with my videos. I think it comes down to making what you want to make and sharing when you feel inspired!
Anyway, thanks for the thoughtful comment and for the shout-out in your rat post! :)
Hello @coruscate. Totally agree with you in that everyone is focusing on one or maybe two things. They take the information in and are ready to move on. And, yes, mobile technology adds to this.
Good call out.
Thanks @guysellars! Glad you enjoyed the post! Mobile phones have definitely changed the way we consume content - which in turn has changed the type of content people want to see.
Firstly, NONE of this is directed or applies to you at all.
I feel that 30 minutes of creation time as a criteria for judging the quality and merit of a post to define it as a "shitpost" is a bit off base. To each their own of course, but as you said, a post's value is in the eye of the beholder. Either way, I think it's a terrible qualifier to push as it punishes people who may be efficient writers or bloggers, and degrades their work. Some may take offense, and some won't care because they don't need validation from others.
Personal Examples:
I post a 5 minute drum video cover that looks like I just recorded myself for that long and put a little blurb with it that took me 5 minutes to write. It took me 3 hours to get that 5 minute take. I almost always get no engagement from these. Aside from doing video editing and snap photo work (which I don't feel the need for), this is max effort. However, if I get lucky and get a perfect take in the first 15 minutes, and upload it within 30, it's now shit in the eyes of this criteria? Hell to the no.
I write a joke punchline to a gif or picture that's two sentences, with a clever title and a funny tag or two. This may look like it took me 1 minute to write, but trying to create intelligent jokes from scratch with small hooks and puns woven in most might not get takes a while. Getting the right flow and word choice down also takes a while. It also takes a while to surf around for the write gif to inspire the joke, or to fit the joke I had in mind. Sure it may take me 10 minutes at best, but sometimes it takes me 30 or more because I'm lost having fun in the process or stuck laughing about it. A few people reply laughing, joking back, and/or saying thanks for the laugh they needed during a bad day. I tend to get the best engagement from these. Technically, all of these would be classified as shit by the first definition above and that's unfair.
I post exercise update progress posts with before and after shots to promote fitness and dedication. The post certainly took me less than 30 minutes, but I spent countless hours exercising for months to show results good enough to help people see that it's possible. Does this mean I'm trying to get cheap upvotes and engagement by showing my body? Nope. It's about giving people inspiration to dedicate themselves since I led by example. Not shit in any way, but it technically could be if people use 30 minutes as a criteria.
I've spent hours on other posts that get nowhere with rewards unless one whale happens to see it. However, I do find that when I open up about very personal/emotional stuff, the engagement flows more naturally. Obviously, these are quality posts, but they often get rewarded like shit, because most larger stakeholders have tunnel vision for promo-steem stuff, even if it's pure fluff.
True Shitposts:
I personally think the Instagram-story-like snap posts are turning into the "shitposts," promoting less effort for the same rewards. I see people changing their posting to be more of this style, and I personally disagree with the value these vanity posts generate for very low effort. It's shortcut city. It's training people to do it more and call it "adoption of a new app," while humble-bragging more often about mostly nonsense. I also don't view applying enhancement filters and blemish correction editing as quality effort.
Posts obviously and transparently part of a voting ring or for self-voting purposes. Can't miss em.
Great engagement topic. You got me hook, line, and sinker.
oooh bring the FIRE. I love it. Sometimes I enjoy making posts like this that are slightly controversial to give people a space to share their thoughts!
Ok here's a couple response I have to thinks mentioned in your comment:
First of all, I think you are totally right about the 30 minute mark being a poor marker. After seeing a few people use that as a marker, I thought that seemed kinda reasonable -but you are right that time spent really shouldn't be how things are judged. It just doesn't encourage people to work "smarter not harder". When in reality, people get more efficient and proficient at their craft and are able to cut down the time it takes to create something and that is a GOOD thing.
Second... I'm actually going to disagree with you on instagram-story like snaps! Instagram is quickly becoming the "king" of social media and it's because tons of people actually enjoy consuming content that includes a photo (although yes, somewhat vain) and an inspirational statement. That being said, I am seeing a shift on instagram where more and more creators are writing several paragraphs to go with their photos because they are realizing that it creates stronger bonds with their audience and gives them a chance to connect. I would also point out, that if someone is taking the time to apply filters and blemish removal etc.... then they probably (well, maybe) put in a little more effort to the photo in terms of finding good lighting, putting on a cute outfit, finding a good background etc. I'd way rather see photos that have some filters and intention behind them than a photo that was shot quickly with no thought and posted up. But that's just me. :)
Thanks for the thoughtful response! I really enjoyed reading your comment!
Round 2. Ding ding!! Ha.
RE: Intagram-like stuff, I hear you, but you (in a good way) also see this through the lens of someone who puts MAX effort into anything to ensure its quality. I know there are others who put a lot of thought and unseen effort into those types of posts, but I think you're a rare breed on Steem in this respect.
I'm talking about the other types of posts I'm seeing on Steemit where people are taking any random picture/selfie of them doing any random daily task, putting a descriptive or copied inspirational sentence, and calling it a post for their voting rings.
I won't name names, but it's them strictly being lazy in my view and a "shit post" to me nearly every time when it's rote material. In the past, these people at least wrote a bit more, now it's a low grade pic with a sentence about them doing something normal, posted with appics to "adopt it," and virtually nothing else. Perhaps the demand for this is sadly there, but I've seen their posting habits devolve into more of this shallow stuff and much less writing or effort. Others see this and then follow this hollow strategy. I feel people are abusing this significant shortcut to earn the same rewards they would via their normal posts. I think this could be ok for me IF there was some deep symbolism or artistic intention behind the shot, but it's often hard to find. Also, I'm talking about this on Steem only.
As for the filters/blemish removal, it wasn't so much about the effort in hindsight. I'm coming from the angle that I personally loathe when people use filters to make makes themselves appear unnaturally different than who they really are. People remove lines, soften features, make themselves look younger, etc., and that feels wrong to me. There's a difference between enhancing the light or tone, and reshaping who someone is cosmetically to deceive themselves and others as to who they really are. I also feel that this is training people to be insecure and hyper-critical of themselves for no reason, just to fit into this shallow thumbs up/down culture where people don't feel secure presenting themselves without erasing parts of their features.
In sum, if someone has to take a picture and has a pimple or a fresh cut on their face or arm, sure go and edit it out. But if someone needs to keep removing wrinkles/bags under their eyes with filters and brush tools, perhaps they should drink more water, treat their skin from the inside, and actually try to improve themselves instead of presenting that they don't have them, which is deceptive when you see them in person. Or, they can just accept that aging is part of life and can be celebrated, versus a laugh line being the end of the world for content consumers of this ilk.
I'm not convinced your premise (that short form posts get more response than long form posts) is generaliseable to all people - it depends who your followers are.
Although if you work on the 80-20 'herd' and 'elite' ratio, then 80% of the population don't have the mental capacity to understand long-form posts, so you're likely to get more of a response to gifs and memes just on sheer numbers.
Maybe the reason why you're not getting any engagement on the @steemalliance video is that it's just too heavy for most people, or too much like hard-work?
I think those three points above sum it up quite nicely too. When it comes to content online - think three minutes - if it takes longer to read or watch it than three minutes, cut stuff out!
ooh man 3 minutes would be hard for me! (I'm way too long winded) but I bet you are right! If something is a quick read, or a quick watch - people are definitely more likely to click in.
There definitely is a time and place (and audience) for both. There are tons of people who i'm sure would rather dig into the meat and bones of something. Maybe it's just a personality thing. :)
It's interesting, a lot of good points are made here about shorter posts getting more engagement. And on Steemit, maybe this is true.
But as far as the internet at large is concerned, long-form content increases engagement. There's too much empirical evidence proving this point to count. Just see Buzzsumo's research for starters - https://buzzsumo.com/blog/long-form-content-improves-content-marketing-conclusion-7-recent-studies/
Written posts that have 2,000 - 3,000 words or more get far more engagement than all the rest. So while it seems to make sense that people won't take the time to bother with super long content, it's just not true.
oooh interesting!! Thanks for sharing that article. I'll have to go read it. Maybe the differentiating factor is that short form content gets more "mass engagement" with simple replies, but long form content gets much more substantial replies.
I don't define a "shitpost" by the amount of time it took to make it, but rather the intent of the post. If I'm a whale and I'm posting a picture of my toliet just so I have something for all my bidbots and my self voting to make me money on - then that is a SHITPOST - literally. And the trending feed is filled with them, which is why I never go there. I hate for newcomers to go there too because it gives the entirely wrong impression of what the content creators are here for. Now if you make a quick post, like you did, of a gym post, and encourage people to get more active, and end it with a quetion for engagement - no, that is NOT a shitpost. But what do I know - I'm just a minnow who likes to write fiction....
You "literally" comment made me laugh out loud!! haha
Yeah like I said in the video...i actually don't think my gym post is actual shit because I think there is value - but was more using it as an example of "quick posts" vs. posts that took a lot of time.
I think you make an awesome point though!! The intent behind a post should be weighted in this discussion too.
Thanks for the thoughtful response!
I totally agree with BlueEyes here... I totally think that if it's a quick post designed just to collect autovotes, then yep... and you can usually tell these by the lack of comments or the lack (or shortness) of replies to those comments.
You could literally just post "How are we all feeling today?" with no other content and if it created a ton of interaction and conversation then I'd absolutely say it adds value.
I'm glad I'm not the only one that thinks of Chris Trager when I hear the word "literally". 😂
I don't think me or my partner can actually say the word without the Chris Trager emphasis.
Glad you caught the toliet vs shitpost reference, lol. You just gotta laugh at the situation sometimes. 😀
Haha i've haven't seen a toilet post yet but i juts started back on steemit. Does anyone think they are going to fix this bot issue anytime soon?
#3 - Posts that relate.
Let's face it, we all have different tastes - things that are interesting to some are boring to others and vice versa.
I don't think there is any right or wrong answer. I hope that the majority of folks simply pass by the posts they aren't interested in instead of typing negative comments.
Some folks really like to bid bot themselves, this is their choice.
Other folks have multiple accounts and use one account to vote for the other. The best example of this is trafalgar. In the beginning, he tooks a big risk and invested a significant amount of fiat into his steem account (> $100K AUS) He started a second account that only posts memes (traf). Traf posts, waits 6 days at around $2, then trafalgar gives himself a $20 upvote. - This was discussed furiously for a while, but the consensus was, if he was willing to take the risk of investing that much at the beginning, then he deserves the massive upvote now.
Part of the beauty of anarchy is that shitposts or self voting are a choice. No one individual really has a right to say whether it's right or wrong.
if i am not wrong, it is kinda respectful for people that vote on his posts to wait for that 6 days as than all that voted get a cut from it (i could be wrong, i suck at that curation rewards :) )
hehe, I haven't been able to keep up with the changes in the curation algorithms. But, you are correct in that you would definitely want to upvote before the power vote to get a piece of the pie. Which then leads to the question of upvoting simply for curation rewards vs upvoting for content you enjoy ... Arguably, we all like content that makes us rewards. :-)
I think this is one of the most recent curation algorithm posts ... https://steemit.com/curation/@miniature-tiger/an-illustrated-guide-to-curation-from-the-simple-to-the-complex-with-real-examples-from-past-posts-part-1
that brings less votes on posts that are older, but from his point he is doing nice thing for his voters by waiting the 6th day, so he is also rewarding people that follow him.
i can't follow all that changes, sometimes i just don't care, if i like something i vote and that is it.
100% agree with this! The point of this post wasn't necessarily to say whether people "should" be making shorter or longer posts ... but just comparing why the shorter posts often seem to get more engagement. I've just seen a lot of people scratching their heads at that lately and thought I'd add some of my thoughts to the conversation!
And I would actually agree with the general consensus on the traf thing too. I know that self voting, and draining the rewards pool are big topics - but generally speaking, if someone owns stake - then they should be able to do what they want with it.
Great engagement here as it seems from the last week or two the subject has been a hot debate! I do think that it is related to the length and depth of the post that does not permit some to engaged. Remember, there are many that do not completely dominate the language barrier either which can hinder capabilities to understand and engage.
Posted using Partiko iOS
oooh great points about the language barrier! I didn't even take that into consideration, but you are totally right.
Yeah this has been a hot button topic lately! Thought it would be fun to give people a space to share their thoughts while I layer some of my own onto the convo.
I would say, in your example, the major difference is how "relatable" the content is. I mean, not everyone likes to hear/see an interview (supposedly more boring - associated with school habits) while your "instagram style" post is more "relatable" and a lot of people actually do that activity and also many share/agree your opinion. (Ups, exactly as you said on point 3 ... I was writing this while listening to your points)
It seems unfair, but it is as you said, we are living in a "busy" world and people only have a few minutes free at a time, so it immediately becomes easier to engage with something short and easy to read/watch.
hahah I LOVE that we came to the same conclusion on relate-ability! It doesn't mean that there isn't space for long form content - because that's where a lot of value gets translated...but as people just have a few moments here and there for social media - shorter consumable content is just gonna get more attention.
I know I do this... I think i'll come back to watch a longer piece of content and then I forget. haha
I would say that´s a "good" thing because it means we are not very far away from the concept of "social media" that attracts the masses...
Me too, it happens to me every once in a while. To avoid that, I usually go for a re-steem so I don´t have to search the entire platform to find that post and I won't forget it either.
Oooh that’s a good idea! I’ve been taking a screenshot photo so later I’ll find it in my photos and remember to go check it out. I swear I have the memory of a gold fish sometimes if I don’t give myself reminders. 😂
Oh, a screenshot, why haven't I thought of that earlier?!? :D That's really good/easy!
Hahaha, ye, it happens to me too.