Not really, that’s just a headline to suck you in (although my apologies to any group coincidentally experiencing a calamity today) and that’s exactly what happened last week when I published the exact same article on 7/23 and 7/24 albeit different headlines. The article on 7/23 featured a very descriptive headline with a constructive slant, One Simple Key To Getting The Most Out Of Your Artist Agent Retainer, while the article on 7/24 provided no description whatsoever and relied on more of a sensational approach, Are You Making This Critical Mistake? Care to take a guess at which one attracted more readers?
If you guessed sensational 7/24, pat yourself on the back; then again, if you guessed practical 7/23, you win too.
Both days generated fairly even metrics with the 23rd edging out in overall visits but the 24th performed a bit better with overall engagement and generating new readers. Neither day’s metrics strayed outside of established traffic norms.
All of this was intriguing as metrics over the past decade demonstrated that readers favor the salacious tease over descriptive prudence but ever since the Minnesota Orchestra labor dispute, I’ve noticed the trend slowly leveling off.
Nonetheless, neither approach produces superior results; if anything, it appears that a healthy mix is the best tactic. Having said that, it’s fair to point out that maintaining a well-adjusted tone and construct for the actual article is the way to go when it comes to producing a strong, regular readership.
So enjoy a balanced culture blogging breakfast but don’t feel guilty if you slip a little vodka into your orange juice every now and then.