don't be the noise

if you want to be heard

If you spend long enough writing online (five or more minutes), you’ll come across an argument that never dies:

It’s better to produce quality content than it is to produce massive quantities of content.

People complain that it’s noisier than it’s ever been. And they’re right. But if you stop and think about it, the more noise there is, the easier it is to create a strong signal that the right people hear.

Humor me as share an analogy about frogs, bats, and crickets.

We live on a bit of land. We have a small pond and some river frontage. Nighttime is almost obnoxiously noisey. The frogs croak in unison. The bats squeal and bicker. The crickets just make stupid, endless noise.

The frogs, though, have an advantage over me. They are surrounded by noise and yet they only hear the signals they’re meant to hear. Turns out, some frogs don’t hear the rest of the noise. They may not even hear other frogs that are just out of the right range.

You and me, we’re digital frogs. I think we have a strong sense for noise and an ability to find the signal.

The signal in our case is the quality content the “experts” want us all to create. There is, of course, a catch to creating quality content.

To a frog, the wrong signal doesn’t even register. The right tone, pitch, and annoyingly throaty croak is all it hears. We’re the same. We filter spam without thinking. We scroll past obviously gross hot takes. And we find our signals.

To one frog, there may be nothing but noise in the air tonight. To another, all he can hear is the call of his mate.

The best way to cut through the noise is to create a strong signal for the people who you want to hear you. Don’t be the noise. Be the signal.

That means creating “quality content” that the right people find and find value in. The endless noise of “quality vs quantity” misses the nuance:

If you send the right signal, the right people will receive it. The wrong people will only hear noise. But you don’t have to care about those wrong folks. Let them have the frogs.

Peter

(387 / 500)

PS: This note was inspired by LinkedIn stuff right here.