ENGINEERING.com

Comment by BIN95.com on 'How engineers decide what to read. 6 content marketing insights from our number cruncher.'

BIN95.com — Thu, 12 Jul 2012 22:31:56 GMT

Interesting post. It confirmed some things and I learned somethings. And for that I thank you. :>)

Comment by Anonymous User on 'How engineers decide what to read. 6 content marketing insights from our number cruncher.'

Anonymous User — Tue, 17 Jul 2012 22:04:18 GMT

Content marketing by the numbers part 2. How important is the quality of your content?

Comment by Chris on 'How engineers decide what to read. 6 content marketing insights from our number cruncher.'

Chris — Wed, 18 Jul 2012 21:06:29 GMT

What would you consider to be a "technical image" ? Can you give some examples of what was effective?

Comment by John Hayes on 'How engineers decide what to read. 6 content marketing insights from our number cruncher.'

John Hayes — Thu, 19 Jul 2012 12:50:55 GMT

HI Chris,
Scroll to "related images" at the bottom of these 2 articles to see the thumbnails that attracted attention:
http://www.engineering.com/ElectronicsDesign/ElectronicsDesignArticles/ArticleID/4491/Blue-Genes-for-Sequoia.aspx

http://www.engineering.com/ElectronicsDesign/ElectronicsDesignArticles/ArticleID/4481/Safeguarding-digital-archives-Part-2--A-better-way.aspx

http://www.engineering.com/ElectronicsDesign/ElectronicsDesignArticles/ArticleID/4480/Sine-slice-whod-a-thunk.aspx

Comment by Coleman on 'How engineers decide what to read. 6 content marketing insights from our number cruncher.'

Coleman — Thu, 19 Jul 2012 17:34:23 GMT

Silly question...on # 3 above: Is there by chance a type-o here: :...or dull images actually were net harmful to the open / read rates."

Was that possibly "not" harmful? I am very interested in this article, and that would change the whole meaning of the sentence.

Comment by John Hayes on 'How engineers decide what to read. 6 content marketing insights from our number cruncher.'

John Hayes — Thu, 19 Jul 2012 18:50:32 GMT

Hi Coleman,
There was no typo. An article with a dark image, even if it's technical is less likely to get clicked than an article with a run-of-the-mill basic image. Here's an example of a great article with a poor image.

http://www.engineering.com/ElectronicsDesign/ElectronicsDesignArticles/ArticleID/4504/Q-ball-in-the-corner-pocket-Is-the-Nexus-Q-a-scratch.aspx

Note that the image is highly relevant. But it's very dark. The title is clever and the topic is newsworthy. This article did well in engagement, but poorly for open rates. Our algorithm attributed the poor open rate to the image.

Comment by Anonymous User on 'How engineers decide what to read. 6 content marketing insights from our number cruncher.'

Anonymous User — Thu, 26 Jul 2012 13:16:19 GMT

How long do engineers spend reading your marketing content? We did the math.