How many email newsletters, blog alerts, RSS feeds and other content feeds have you subscribed? How much do you read each day? A? Two? No?
It is likely that you do not read the five blog posts that CMI publishes each week. Our analyzes show that most of our subscribers do not. We are not angry, we have it.
Maybe you were very busy one day. Maybe the subject or title does not match your information needs when the email arrived. Maybe you have never seen the article at all. It's easy to miss even good articles when so much comes from you.
This is the reason why the CMI editorial team experimented with the reissue a few years ago. Michele Linn wrote an article explaining the re-release strategy in 2017 that still lives and still generates traffic, although less than it was before.
Faithful to the initial experience, I base myself on his work to add some nuances learned since then and add new examples to the discussion.
Why are we republishing blog posts
We republish articles to remind our audience of good advice that is still valid and relevant. We get more mileage with less effort than writing a post from scratch. It's a win-win situation for our team and our audience.
Republish articles when content is still valid and relevant, says @KMoutsos. Click to tweet
Refreshes the content catalog. The content of CMI dates back to 2008. Some elements that still generate search traffic need to be updated to remain useful. Republishing also allows us to update the content and make it available to readers who are new to the CMI audience or who missed it the first time.
Maintains or improves rank / results of research . Sometimes an old post is classified to search and therefore generates a lot of traffic. Before we experience a decline in clickthrough rates, high bounce rates, and other issues that jeopardize our ranking position for a key phrase, we are creating a new version – updating the text as needed and using the date of the day in the URL. When it makes sense, we redirect the old publication to the news (more on this in a moment).
Fills the editorial calendar before rush hours. In April, most of CMI's editorial team was occupied by the ContentTECH Summit. Meanwhile, we have maintained the publication schedule of the blog by republishing several articles. We do the same thing in September when we attend Content Marketing World.
Again, republishing older articles (even with the addition of updates) is faster than writing (and editing) messages from scratch. Three articles from our April republished content quickly reached the "Current Hits" widget, which features the most popular articles published in the last three months.
Highlights something new. When the chief content officer became an exclusively digital experience in April, we wanted to give our members of the blog audience – who may not be CCO subscribers – the Opportunity to discover the contents of the magazine.
We took this article on robot-assisted writing in the April issue …
and republished it on the CMI blog …
and creates a CTA inviting readers to explore the new CCO.
RELATED CONTENT HANDPICKED: Reuse of content: behind the scenes with CMI
Why we republish instead of updating the original URL
CMI's blog URLs include the year and month of publication. Ouch. Even if we add the brightest new tips, concrete examples and "10x" content, the SERP URL always indicates the date of original publication.
If your URL contains the publication date, you may want to republish it to update, says @KMoutsos. Click to tweet
Do you want to click to read the article with a date of 2019 or a date of 2016? (If you said both, stay with me, I'll get there – and answer the questions it asks about duplicate content and message redirection.)
It makes perfect sense to give articles a new URL reflecting today's date.
How We Select Items to Republish
CMI's reprinting process remains similar to the one he used when he started two years ago.
We identify the publications that generate the most conversions to our mailing lists. We check the performance of traffic and social sharing (I usually look at a full year). Content audits are useful for finding candidates for a new publication.
Recently, I have expanded the performance review period from last year to the last few years. Looking at what messages have been popular in 2015 and 2016, some new gems have been discovered. (To do this, I've set the date range in the appropriate Google Analytics reports to focus on 2015 or 2016.)
Michele suggests keeping a checklist of messages to republish in your editorial calendar. The system involves tracking the following information:
Name: Title of the original position.
Author: Permission of the author to republish the message (and determine if he wishes to update it).
Publication Date: We usually wait at least a year between the original position and the republished position.
Notes: Detail the extent of the necessary modifications.
Now, to some questions that I know you have.
Should you republish publications without updating them?
We did it, but only if the information and advice is still accurate and relevant. We check (and update) links, titles, and other details to make sure that the republished text is currently accurate. A note from the editor is added at the top to explain that it is a republished message whose content is identical.
How do you decide when to reorient?
Refocusing or not is a mixture of art and science. Here is a summary of the MIC process shared by Michele:
Redirects the original URL to the new URL when the original publication generates little traffic through the search (science) or when the information is no longer relevant or accurate (art).
Redirect the old URL if the original publication generates little traffic or is inaccurate, says @Kmoutsos. Click to tweet
Keep the original URL and publish an updated publication with a new URL when the original publication generates significant organic search traffic and the information is reasonably current. Add a note from the editor at the top of the original URL to direct users to a newer version of the message if they wish.
Keep the old URL if the original publication generates a lot of organic traffic and the information is current, says @Kmoutsos. Click to tweet
Here is our decisional grid followed by some scenarios:
Scenario: The original publication generates little search traffic
Transfer the old post to the new one and follow the following checklist:
Create a new title: N °
301 redirection of the original message: Yes.
What to do with the original message: Redirect this URL to the new message.
What to do with the new position: Add a note from the editor to indicate that this post has been republished. (An example is in the picture below.)
Include "popular demand" in the cover image: Yes.
We have republished this Ann Gynn document even though it did not attract much search traffic and was not as good as expected when it aired in 2017. The advice was still valid and timely for the CMI audience.
In 2018, we launched it the first day after Content Content World 2018 and redirected the original message. The new version, which included a note from the publisher and "By Popular Demand" in the picture, outperformed the original. (Note: we have slightly deviated from our documented process by updating the title.)
Scenario: The original publication generates a lot of search traffic
With publications that attract a lot of search traffic, we are moving slightly to avoid negative effects. We usually create a new publication with minimal updates (or none).
Here is the check list for this type of job:
Create a new title: Yes.
301 reorientation of the position of origin: No.
What to do with the original message: Add a note from the publisher to indicate that this message has been republished and include a link to the (new) message updated.
Include "popular demand" in the new cover image: Yes.
In our original article on republication, Michele shared this article, tips, tools and editorial calendar templates, as an example for original publications with significant search traffic.
We have republished an updated version of Jodi's work in 2016. In 2017, we republished another updated version, incorporating "Back by Popular Demand" into the cover image , a new title and a note from the editor pointing out that previous versions were used. the previous years.
Scenario: New publication with redirection of the original publication, but obsolete, which still generates search traffic
We treat our guidelines only as a way to guide our thinking. Sometimes we are moving away from the documented path when we think it helps our readers.
For example, we found a 2012 article classifying the term "content calendar" and attracting many visitors but not reflecting our current standards of depth, practical advice, and so on.
I wrote a new content calendar article and redirected the original and old-fashioned message. We could have left the old post live, hoping that the new would exceed it. But we thought that it did not serve readers to keep it.
While we find older publications that attract search traffic but no longer meet the needs of our audience, we continue to replace it.
RELATED HANDPICKED CONTENT: How to use the 4 most useful reports in Google Analytics
Scenario: New Message on the Theme of the Popular Original Message
Although this scenario is not republished, I include it because it is an option to consider when evaluating articles to republish. I put it in the category of ideas to steal you. This reminds us to rely on the content ideas that our audience liked in the past.
Build on content ideas that your audience likes, says @Kmoutsos. Click to tweet
When we write new messages using the central design of an older message, we do not label it as an updated version (ie, Back by Popular demand). But we wink at the original piece in the new text.
Here is the checklist for this type of job:
Create a new title: Yes (but stay with the same build).
301 reorientation of the position of origin: No.
What to do with the original message: Add a note from the editor at the top or add text in the message to point to the latest version or add a content-related area Selected to point to the new article.
What to do with the new message: Include in the text (and not a note from the editor) that it is an update of the text. a theme and point to the previous version (s).
Include "Return to Popular Demand" in the cover image: No.
In 2018, we published this article by Stephanie Stahl, filled with excellent narrative examples.
His popularity led me to write a new post with more examples. I used the title format of Stephanie because it worked:
What about duplicate content?
We sometimes maintain an old message live even when we republish an updated version. This raises the inevitable question: do not worry about penalties for duplicate content?
Our SEO consultant believes that ContentMarketingInstitute.com is such a large site that the amount of content actually duplicated is small enough that it does not matter. In addition, according to some SEO experts, concerns about duplicate content are largely misplaced.
What do you think?
I would love to hear from you. Did you notice when we republish the content? How do you manage republishing and updating blog articles?
RELATED HANDPICKED CONTENT: Adopt a conservation mindset to get the most out of your superior content
Do you want to make sure you see useful and informative articles that you may have missed the first time, as well as new messages containing the latest information? Subscribe to CMI's free weekday newsletter.
Cover image of Joseph Kalinowski / Content Marketing Institute