If you aim, as you should, to publish high-quality content for the web, content which people will share, and link to: then make sure it is original.

Don’t base it on the oft-repeated copy-and-paste statistics and homilies that are all too prevalent on the web right now.

The statistics that count are those that come from original research. And that kind of research doesn’t need to cost a fortune, it can come, say, from a simple well-crafted randomized survey. It can come from speaking, knowledgeably, with a handful of well-chosen people..

Example: for years, most content creators (I’m embarrassed to admit, including myself) have accepted the oft-published “fact” that visitors to your website have about the attention span of a goldfish: said to be eight seconds or so.

The problem, according to market analytics and research firm CXL, is that this assumption is not based on any scientific evidence. But it has been repeated so often that it has taken on the air of truth.

How did this happen? It’s a terrific example of how recycled “facts” easily become twisted and distorted on their journey through the web.

The origin for this one most often cited is a 2015 Microsoft Canada study, CXL says. (For this, and more fascinating myth-busting, see their blog post:

Lies, Damned Lies, and (Some) Marketing Statistics | CXL).

While Microsoft Canada did complete a study of attention span in 2015, according to CXL, the eight-seconds assertion, and the comparison to, heaven help us, goldfish, is not from that study. The eight-seconds stat is in there but is attributed to another source, which in turn dead-ends with no evidence.

(As an amusing sidelight, goldfish in fact do not in fact have short memories and are often subjects of memory retention studies).

Nonetheless, the eight-second assumption has spawned a writing and design ethos, at least in the US. In this style, short-form microcontent, brief utilitarian headlines, single-sentence paragraphs, and minimalism in design, are a given.

In fact, it turns out that there are scientists of human information acquisition which state that attention span is highly contextual. It depends on what the subject is, who is the audience, where the content is encountered, and its emotional value.

The eight-second web page is, in other words, sometimes right for the job and sometimes not.

How do we account for the high visibility and traffic of very long form blog posts, for example? How do handle the need for comprehensive content, as on a products and services page?

On the other hand, scannable text and a minimalist design make sense much of the time in the context of today’s web, full of distractions. Volumes of content do lead to “pogo-sticking” around for many searchers. It just depends.

Our point is: original research and data is best, while secondary data can be useful if treated carefully and with skepticism. During 2020, haven’t we learned that nothing is more important than the need for fact-checking?

In our agency, we try hard to always do the hard work of original research and analytics (quantitative). And the even harder work of speaking, and deriving insights, with actual human beings (qualitative).

(For a deeper dive, read our post “Blogging Like Your Users Depend On it.”)

So if you are in the market for quality content, do ask your content creator, or content agency these questions: where do you get your information? And how do you derive your insights?

Tip: “I Googled it” just isn’t good enough.