If you’ve been paying attention to the chatter in the SEO space recently, you might have noticed that “brand marketing” has become cool again.
Due to the Google “leaks,” many SEO pros have come to the conclusion that building a strong digital presence will yield SEO results.
Also, water … is wet.
Leaks, floods, and drips aside, there are better reasons why you should be focused on brand marketing right now.
Allow me to explain. [Warning: This post contains excessive amounts of snark.]
Building The Case For Brand Marketing
I’m not going to do the whole “5 reasons why you should focus on brand in 2024.” It would be off-brand for me.
What I would like to do, if you’ll indulge me, is first build up the case by looking at where the ecosystem we call the web is currently at.
I’m less focused on “the benefits” of the brand and more concerned about why the ecosystem itself demands a focus on this type of marketing.
It’s less a matter of “you’ll get X, Y, and Z” by focusing on the brand and more a matter of why you’ll be out of sync with your potential audience as a whole.
The Web Is Moving To Be More Conversational
The internet has become more conversational, and it’s only going to get more conversational.
One of my soapbox points is that content is one of the most quickly changing things on the planet. What we consume, how we consume it, and what we expect out of it are rapidly and constantly changing, and the consequences are often underappreciated.
My classic example of this was the first televised US presidential debate, which took place in 1960 and pitted John F. Kennedy against Richard Nixon.
If you listened to the debate on the radio, you tended to think Nixon won. Those who watched on TV tended to think JFK won.
Why? Well, Richard Nixon comes off as Richard Nixon, and JFK, well looks like JFK. I’m being a bit facetious, but it is true. Nixon famously looked pale, had a five o’clock shadow, and didn’t look directly at the camera.
The evolution of content has extremely understated consequences.
Like in 1960, we are at one of those pivotal moments in the history of content.
Think of the internet like TV commercials. Over time, what once resonated becomes campy and sem, if not downright, spammy.
Could you imagine Coca-Cola running and trying to sell its product using its 1980s Max Headroom “Catch the Wave” commercial?
Try selling my kids a sugar-infused breakfast cereal using a TV commercial from the 1950s. Good luck.
It’s not because those commercials are “bad.” It’s because the language and tone that resonates changes over time.
It’s a simple enough point … unless we’re talking about web content. For some reason, we feel web content and its consumption trends should eternally stay the same.
We write the same kind of content in pretty much the same way and balk at any changes.
But that doesn’t change the reality.
The content we create doesn’t speak to users. It’s not positioned correctly. The tone is off. The goals that support the creation of content, to begin with, are distorted. And more. There are a lot of problems – and to me, they all begin with content not being conversational.
In fact, I will go so far as to say Google should stop saying, “Write for your users,” and should start saying, “Have conversations with your users.”
We all think we’re “writing for our users” – I mean, who else are we trying to lure and convert?
It’s very easy to fool yourself into thinking you are “writing for your users.” It’s harder to convince yourself you are having some sort of dialogue with your users – which is what I think Google really means anyway.
All this said, what do I mean by content not being conversational and how do I know it’s even a problem?
What I Mean By Content Not Being Conversational
It’s not hard to see that we are not engaging our users in a conversation or dialogue.
All you need to do is head over to your nearest landing page and have a look at the language.
How much of it is just the company throwing out jargon or borderline nonsense?
Here’s what I came across in literally less than five minutes of digging around:
Is it really without limits? Can I literally do whatever I want without any limitations whatsoever? I don’t get it – are we talking about God or graphic design software?
Is the below really a new way to run high-velocity sales? Does it literally refine the entire process like no one else is doing or has done before? Or is the company just saying this and spitting out whatever they think will drive conversions?
You see this all the time in PPC ads:
No nuance. It is the best accounting software, and I should trust that it is without any form of qualification.
This kind of copy, while it may have worked in the past, doesn’t (and if it does now, it won’t in the relatively near future).
This kind doesn’t actually talk to users in a real way. It actually treats the user like an idiot.
The average web user is far more savvy than they once were, far more mature, and far more skeptical.
Not taking a more genuine approach is starting to catch up with brands.
How Do I Know Not Being Conversational Is Even A Problem?
Greenwashing.
It’s when a company claims to be more environmentally conscious than it is. It’s spin and PR nonsense.
Companies thought they could pull a fast one on unsuspecting users. However, folks are now savvier and are catching on to brands positioning themselves as being “green” when, in reality, they might not be (or at least to the extent advertised).
You cannot get away with it anymore (and you never should have tried). The only thing that works is being genuine.
If your product is not actually “the best,” then don’t say it is – or, in fact, realize there is no “best” or “ultimate” or “fastest” or whatever. There is only what meets the needs of users in what way. That’s fancy talk for “pain points.”
Being genuine means talking to your audience and not at your audience. It’s having a dialogue with them.
Going the “traditional” route with your language is the equivalent of marketing language greenwashing … and it applies to your informational content, too.
Perhaps nothing epitomizes this more than the falling stock of influencer marketing. Study after study shows that younger users are far less likely to purchase something because an influencer is associated with it.
Influencer marketing, as we mostly know it, is a facade pretending it’s not a facade. Do you think Patrick Mahomes really eats Chicken McNuggets or has a strong preference to use State Farm for his insurance needs?
All influencer marketing is just a digital marketing version of a celebrity in a TV commercial.
Do you think whatever TikTok influencer really prefers Capital One or even knows that it’s not a geographical reference?
While the idea of “influencers” seemed like a viable idea at the onset it’s fundamentally not sustainable because it’s fundamentally fraudulent. (For the record, “community” marketing is something else entirely. While it might rely on “influencers” within a community, it is far more genuine.)
It seems that folks have caught on to the idea that maybe this influencer being paid to say or do whatever is not actually an accurate reflection of reality (much like social media influencers themselves, to be honest).
A 2023 Drum article quotes one study as saying upwards of 80% of users say a brand’s use of influencers does not impact them one way or the other.
For the record, there are other studies that indicate that influencer marketing is a viable option. I agree, but I think it needs to be qualified. Just paying an influencer to say good things about your brand is not authentic.
There are authentic ways to work with communities and influential folks within them. That tends to happen more with micro or nano influencers.
This is why we’re seeing a trend towards working with micro or nano influencers who might provide a more authentic experience for audiences – a trend noticed by Hubbspot’s 2024 social media marketing report (among others).
Again, it’s rocket science. Everyone knows the influencer is only saying the things they are saying because they’re being paid to. It’s relatively meaningless in a vast majority of cases.
It shows how much savvier the current web user is relative to the past, and it’s supported by where folks are heading and what they are trusting … themselves (DTA, am I right?).
A seemingly endless number of studies show users looking toward user-generated content. CNBC was quoted as saying, “61% of Gen Z prefer user-generated content.”
Which brings me to my next point.
Informational Content Is Just As Bad & Reddit On The SERP Proves It
Up until this point, I’ve been focused on the nature of commercial content and the demand for conversational content.
The same concept applies to informational content, just for a slightly different reason.
Informational content on the web might not be as opaque as commercial content, but it is entirely sterile and stoic.
By sterile and stoic I mean content that doesn’t actually speak to the user. It takes a topic, breaks the topic down into various subtopics, and simply presents the information, and does so without ever discussing the context of the readers themselves.
No one has more data on emerging content consumption trends than Google and its ability to analyze user behavior in a variety of ways. And what has Google done for informational and commercial queries alike? Plastered the search engine results page with user-generated content.
The proliferation of Reddit on the SERP should tell you everything you need to know about the state of informational content and beyond.
All you need to do is head to the Google SERP and take a look at all of the Reddit results strewn all over the place, from different SERP features to the organic results themselves.
And while SEO pros may be upset about the abundance of Reddit (and rightfully so in my opinion), we have no one to blame but ourselves.
Do you really think Google wants to rank Reddit here, there, and everywhere? I personally don’t. I think Google would much rather have a diverse set of experience-based content to rank.
Regardless of your feelings about Reddit on the SERP, users’ inclination to prefer content created by other users tells you one thing: People are looking to move past all the facades and want something transparent that speaks to them—not at them.
Think about content like dress codes in the office. In the 1950s (at least in the US), it would be unheard of to show up to the office with anything but a suit and tie or a dress.
Just like professional dress codes have become less formal, so has content become “less formal” too.
And it’s a relatively recent development on both fronts. In fact, I would actually argue that office dress codes are a good representation of “where we are at” in terms of how and what we consume in terms of content via-a-vis formality.
While more traditional marketing language might have been acceptable and effective just a few years ago – it’s not any longer (at least not to the extent). We are less formal as a people, which means speaking to each other is also less formal. That has to spill over to web content at some point, and it has.
The AI Of It All
The rise of AI-written content accentuates all of this. When everything starts to sound the same having an actual voice comes more into focus. As AI conversion evolves, users are going to want to know that what they are consuming is “real.”
Much like a paid influencer, AI-written content doesn’t offer an authentic experience. And if we can see one theme in what users are looking for, it is an authentic experience.
I know someone is reading and thinking, “But AI is conversational!”
I would not confuse the fact that AI can reply back to you in an informal way as being an actual conversation or dialogue with another actual lifeform.
I have many relatives who will chew my ear off for hours on end as I nod away – that is not (much to their surprise) a conversation. Inputting prompts in reply back to an LLM and then having that LLM respond is not a conversation. (I feel like it’s insane that I have to say that.)
A real dialogue has to be based on empathy and the coming together of two distinct entities. This is what I mean by conversational. The dialogue has to be based on understanding the user’s pain points and meeting them.
AI not only doesn’t do that – but it dilutes that very concept. AI is content creation inherently devoid of understanding the “other.”
AI-generated content is the exact opposite of empathetic content. It is no wonder that it will drive a greater demand for something that is more connective (i.e., conversational content).
The rise of AI-generated content will inevitably lead to a greater demand for more conversational content simply because it is human nature to yearn for connection and existentially disdain void.
When you couple together the growing impatience with stale and stoic content aligned with the facade of much of the web’s commercial content with the rise of AI, it’s the perfect storm for a shirt in user demand.
A More Conversational Internet Is More Autonomous Internet
What’s this got to do with brand marketing? We’re getting there. One more step.
Users looking for more authentic web experiences point to people not wanting to be sold to. Skepticism and distrust are triggered by being urged to make a purchase.
Rather than being induced to click by some clever headline or urged to make a purchase by some influencer, people want to make their own decisions.
They’re looking for real advice. They’re looking for real information to have real needs met. And then they’re looking to be left alone to use that information to their liking.
It’s not an accident that Google added an “E” to E-E-A-T for “experience.” It wants quality raters to evaluate a page from an experience perspective because it has determined this is what users are looking for.
When your entire modus operandi is to seek out authentic information and experiences, the last thing you’re looking for is to be coerced. The last thing you want is to feel pushed into something.
The quest for authenticity in experience-based information is entirely about being able to make a well-informed, autonomous decision.
Urging users to click and convert with all sorts of marketing language and over-emphasis is antithetical to this mindset. Using language that feels slightly manipulative is antithetical to this mindset.
Trying to create spin and putting up a marketing facade (such as with classic influencer marketing) is antithetical to this mindset.
You can’t have Michael Jordan jumping over Spike Lee in a commercial to sell shoes anymore. It’s not real, and it’s not authentic. It’s fantastical. It’s fake.
You also can’t “drive” conversions by telling users you’ve developed a “new,” “revolutionary,” or “ultimate” solution for them. It’s not real, and it’s not authentic. It’s fantastical. It’s fake.
You have to create an environment where the user feels empowered and uncoerced.
How do you then go about targeting growth and revenue, all while allowing the user to feel autonomous and unsolicited?
Brand marketing.
Brand Is Your Best Friend In An Autonomous Web Scenario
I know there is going to be a tremendous amount of resistance to what I am about to say.
In fact, most companies will balk at my conception of things. For SaaS, it’s probably borderline heretical (I think startup SaaS brands often lag behind consumer trends more than anyone).
If user autonomy is the fundamental brick on the house the ecosystem is built on, then being top of mind is the cement that holds your marketing efficacy together.
What’s the opposite of pushing for clicks and conversions? Allowing the user to come to you at their own time and at their own speed.
Being top of mind is more important than it ever was because it aligns with the underlying psychological profile driving web experiences.
There is a direct equation between the consumer demand for autonomy in the buying journey and brand marketing. Creating the right associations and developing the right positioning with genuine differentiation is of the utmost importance if you want to align with how users think – and, more importantly, feel about the web.
If I had to put in a more “performance-focused” mindset, direct traffic is the future of the web. Get them to come to you on their own terms.
It works for both parties. You’re less susceptible to relying on whatever platform’s funky algorithm (whether it be social or search, it all kind of feels like a mess right now). At the same time, your users don’t feel like you’re overselling, pushing clicks, and otherwise nudging them to convert.
They’re coming to you because they found out about you, liked what they saw or heard, and decided to pursue the possibility of buying from you at their own pace.
Moreover, the brand allows you to connect. Again, in an AI world, the drive for connection will only increase. Brand is the intersection of your identity and your audience’s.
It is an associative connection, and it allows your audience to understand that there is a “you” behind the product or service you are offering.
This is the power of branding in the modern web.
What Kind Of Brand Marketing?
What kind of branding creates autonomy? Education-focused brand marketing.
Brand marketing can mean a lot of things to a lot of different people. Often, on the digital stage, it means pushing the value of your product across the web.
I am not saying that this doesn’t have value or that it shouldn’t be done, etc. I am saying this is product marketing disguised as brand marketing.
90% of your brand marketing should hardly (if at all) push your product (beyond maybe a mention or something subtle of that ilk).
Brand marketing is about fostering an identity (either of a product, service, or the company as a whole) and using that identity to create messaging that positions the said product, service, or company in a certain way, thereby establishing a connection with your target audience.
The associations you build and the sentiment towards your brand that you establish should, hopefully, result in your audience seeing you as a relevant solution. But this is associative, and that’s important to remember.
The kind of branding I am talking about is focused on adding value to your audience’s life. Note that I didn’t say offering value via your product or service to their lives. First comes the value, and then comes the value from your product.
You can’t push the product in what might be called “branding” without first establishing a brand that showcases concern for the user and their life context independent of any “ask” (such as making a purchase).
You wouldn’t ask your neighbor for a cup of sugar before saying, “Hi, good morning. How are you?”
You shouldn’t ask your consumers to open their wallets and fork over money before establishing a real connection.
Yet, this is pretty much the internet as we know it.
A Note On Performance Marketing
I am not advocating you should not use performance-based marketing tactics to increase your reach and sales and whatnot. Performance-based marketing can be a powerful force for growth and revenue expansion.
What I am advocating for is performance sitting within a broader branding context. There has to be a balance between the two (and I don’t think it is an even balance).
With that cliffhanger, perhaps I’ll explore the balance between brand and performance at another time.
More resources:
Featured Image: batjaket/Shutterstock