There’s an endless debate in marketing – B2B marketing especially – about whether you should gate content or not. Let’s review some of the arguments for and against.
In Favor of Gating
Gating content, on the surface, makes logical sense. You as the marketer are providing a trade – information for information. It’s a barter.
With the many changes and restrictions to what data marketers have access to, gating is one of the few ways you can get first-party information from your audience; no laws on the books restrict the amount of information someone volunteers to you.
The argument against gating is one of reach – ungated content is shared more easily, its value is apparent, and advocates against gating suggest that the reputational benefits of ungated content far outweigh the lead acquisition data.
Those advocates against gating also point to the fact that just because someone fills out a form to download something, it does not indicate purchase intent; by ungating content, the leads you get from standard contact forms show actual purchase intent.
Opinion: It’s Not Binary
I don’t think either position is absolute. The question we’re asking is what the value of our content marketing is, and the benchmark I refer to is Jay Baer’s from his book Youtility: is your content good enough that someone would pay for it?
Gating content is essentially a transaction. It’s an alternate sale, a trade of information in which you are selling content value and the audience member is selling their information.
So value is part of the equation. So is intent. Content that inherently serves us first is different than content that serves someone else first. An extensively-researched paper that delivers substantial value to the audience is something that, in Jay’s Youtility model, would indeed be worth paying for.
Here’s how I tend to think about whether to gate or not:
Content that serves me first but is valuable, I won’t gate. This is stuff like case studies, where there’s clearly an obvious self-serving angle to it. That stuff I want to have available to anyone who wants it.
Content that serves others first but is less valuable – like this blog post – I also won’t gate. Frankly, it’s too much effort on my part. That’s not to say my blog isn’t valuable, but it’s one of those things where the return isn’t worth the effort.
Content that serves me first and isn’t valuable I just don’t publish. I’ve got a long pile of half-baked content in my various notebooks that will never see the light of day until it graduates to one of the other categories.
Finally, content that services others first and is more valuable – like the aforementioned intensive research paper that I would feel comfortable asking someone to pay for – is something I’ll gate.
Every brand, every person has to figure out their own criteria for whether to gate content or not – or even whether to charge money for it. I charge money, for example, for my books. The takeaway is to have some kind of process, some kind of decision-making mechanism so that you’re consistent in what you choose to gate or not gate.
Here’s an easy bench test: for the content in question, could you reasonably get someone to pay for it? If so, it’s worth gating.
Would you struggle to get someone to give you even a dollar for it, like a case study? I wouldn’t pay a cent for someone else’s promotional case study. No money? No gate.
There isn’t a right or wrong answer; every audience is different. What you’ll need to do is determine what works best for your audience and your own interests. Find that delicate balance that allows you to accomplish both objectives reasonably well.
You might also enjoy:
- How I Think About NFTs
- How to Measure the Marketing Impact of Public Speaking
- You Ask, I Answer: Google Tag Manager and Google Analytics Integration?
- Almost Timely News, 17 October 2021: Content Creation Hacks, Vanity Metrics, NFTs
- The Basic Truth of Mental Health
Want to read more like this from Christopher Penn? Get updates here:
Get your copy of AI For Marketers