Previously these pages featured a post explaining the CCO role – or chief content officer. But while we were encouraged to see all kinds of businesses embracing content marketing and the CCO role, we questioned why a media owner would have one.
“If you have reporters, editors and publishers, why would you introduce a job title like CCO?” we asked.
Well, it turns out there are bad reasons to introduce the CCO moniker – to supplement the job titles we just listed, for example – and then there are good reasons.
One of the more progressive B2B media owners, UBM, has a CCO. In this interview with the Media Briefing (link no longer available) he explains why the role is relevant.
When you very clearly identify yourself as a provider of marketing services, through channels such as events and research as much as publications, then the role of content changes.
UBM and a few other major media owners recognise that.
We have spoken before about established publishers being able to offer content services. That’s slightly different to UBM’s marketing services approach but also takes the view that media companies are still the best at generating and distributing content.
And just as major companies evolved their IT departments to become IT services companies, serving – as a profit centre – not just themselves but countless other businesses too, so too publishers can offer content services to others, way beyond their current advertising gene pool.
And to do that, you could do worse than having a CCO leading the way.
* photo credit: Incase. via photopin cc
Follow us on Twitter – @ColContent