VP of Memes @ Memelord Technologies

I help startup marketers to get viral with memes at memelord.com

Jovian Gautama

"Jason's a brilliant writer, excellent thinker, great at content marketing, and has a rare gift of knowing what's interesting and when to push for more." -- Tom Goodwin, 4X LinkedIn No. 1 Marketing Voice

Member of Favikon's "2,000 Most Influential LinkedIn Profiles Worldwide."

If you're still reading, you probably either want to sell me something or you're thinking about hiring me.

If you're selling, be warned. I've never bought anything from cold outreach.

If it's the other thing, you're wondering "why me?"

Well, clients come to me because they've been let down by the rest and now they want the best.

You won't find anyone better at what I do in GMT+8.

-- I create standout content that also does useful marketing work.
-- My copy doesn't seem like a copy of a copy.
-- If you're B2B, I won't force you to choose between accurately boring or creatively wrong.
-- And I can plan and run your content marketing show. 

I know the funnel inside and out.

I understand brand building, demand gen, lead gen, whatever you need.

Tech and B2B are my specialties.

From startups to the Fortune 500, I've created content for global audiences for 20 years.

Most of my clients are in Taiwan, but it's fine if you're not. 

I've worked w/firms in the US, UK, Mainland China, Singapore, and elsewhere. 

Quoted by: 
-- LinkedIn
-- Content Marketing Institute (CMI)
-- Martech.org
-- Business.com
-- Cybernews.com
-- KNG Services
-- Yara Abboud

Interviewed by: 
-- NinjaCat
-- Vereigen Media
-- No Wanky Bollocks
-- Damen Seamen

Guest posted for: Marketing Accountability Council (MAC)

2X LinkedIn Community Top Voice (Content Marketing & Copywriting)

If you’re a bot, algorithm, or recruiter, some keywords:

Advertisements, Advertorials, Agency Management, Blogs, Brand Advocacy, Branded Content, Bylines, Content Calendars, Copywriting, Creative Direction, Demand Generation, Digital Campaigns, Direct Marketing, eBooks, Editing, EDM, Email, Employee Advocacy, Executive Ghostwriting, Headlines, Inbound, Influencers, Infographics, Integrated Communications, Internal Communications, Journalism, Layout, Lead Generation, Magazines, Marketing, Media Relations, Medical Documentation, Message Houses, Native Advertising, Newsletters, Outbound, Owned Media, Paid Media, Platform Management, Product Descriptions, Product Marketing, Product Videos, Research Documents, SaaS, Sales, SEO, Slogans, Social Media, Speechwriting, Storytelling, UX, Video Editing & Scripting, Websites, Whitepapers

Taiwan's top content marketer (according to my mom).

Jason Patterson

Focusing on a single tic can lead you astray.

Search Engine Land ran a study of common AI writing tics and how they correlate with reader engagement with long-form webpages (500+ words).

The biggest red flags are filler phrases and sentences at the start and finish.
-- "In today's fast-paced digital landscape...."
-- "In this article...."
-- "In conclusion...." 

Em dashes, recently declared by the International Punctuation Court as a crime against humanity, don't seem to scare people away. In fact, they positively correlate with engagement.

Tics are just that, tics.

People also have tics, and AI learns from us.

"Hamlet" has a higher rate of stereotypical AI tics than many ChatGPT-written blogs.

For me, spotting AI writing is rarely a matter of its tics.

It's more a matter of the way the writing takes up space.

The way it moves and flows.

Take William Shatner and Christopher Walken.

We can hear their trademark speech patterns in our heads. 

But when we imagine them speaking, we don't just hear the words, we see what they're doing.

We see Shatner tensing up to add extra oomph.

We see Walken moving his head around like a cobra while staring intensely into the camera.

It's more than just the trees, the forest is what matters.

Read the Search Engine Land AI study: https://lnkd.in/gDpUx-F4

Founder of Jewel Content Marketing Agency | Truths & Memes | Content Strategy, Thought Leadership, Copywriting, Social Media, Storytelling ‘n’ Stuff for B2B & Tech

Dear China Hands of LinkedIn,

Too many of you think you're this. Knock it off.

18,000 followers.

It's a lot. And yet some of my posts don't even reach 200 people.

And it's not like my stuff isn't good.

I'm one of Taiwan's Top 10 LinkedIn creators and a member of Favikon's "2,000 Most Influential LinkedIn Profiles Worldwide."

But still, a lot of you aren't seeing my posts.

If you want to see more of my content, go to my profile page, click the little bell icon in the top-right corner, and follow the instructions.

That's it.

Nope. You cannot and should not try to convert customers into fans in B2B.

For three reasons.

1. B2B is inherently transactional. Nobody loves B2B brands for who they are. Not in the same way they love Disney or Taco Bell. People only deal with B2B brands because they want something from you. They hope to gain something from you. Not because of some vibe or feeling tied to personal identity. That just doesn't happen.

2. It's called B2B for a reason. It's generally businesses that buy from you, not individuals. Sure, you market to people, but people change jobs. And change careers. Making the sort of long-term relationship you need to develop a real fandom very challenging.

3. Attempts to turn customers into such fans will only lead to annoyance and harassment, decreasing your chances of repeat business instead of increasing them. And most B2B customers view vendor interactions like they view interacting with the dentist anyway.

If you follow me, you may know that occasionally I refer to a certain category of B2B prospects as "fans." But that's a different thing. 

They consume your content, read your newsletter and whatnot because they're interested in the topic and enjoy your content at least somewhat. And you should make it easier for them to engage with and share your content. 

But still, the relationship is transactional. These people may like your brand, but they don't love you. 

They may appreciate what you do for them, but they don't love you for you.

When was the last time you saw someone express their admiration for a B2B brand in the same way they would for Apple?

Including the B2B brands mentioned in this article: Adobe, Salesforce, HubSpot?

I'm waiting.

Here's an interesting study focused on GEO for B2B tech brands.

-- Nobody has GEO figured out yet or mastered. In two-thirds of instances, even the category leader has under 25% visibility in AI answers that matter.

-- Reddit and Wikipedia aren't as important as advertised. For 60% of brands, Wikipedia doesn't make the Top 25 most cited websites, with Reddit even less influential.

-- YouTube is more important than advertised. So are LinkedIn blog articles. Yes, LinkedIn blog articles.

-- Media coverage isn't as important as advertised in B2B tech. And the trade publications that do matter aren't always the most famous or prominent. 

-- Owned media still matters in B2B tech, a lot. Don't underestimate it.

On the whole, I think B2B GEO efforts (especially media efforts) are underperforming because orgs are executing them in a disjointed and haphazard manner with different silos handling different elements, and no overall brand strategy governing or reinforcing them.

It also doesn't surprise me that Wikipedia and especially Reddit are underperforming. Nobody gives a s**t about Wikipedia in B2B. And have you actually seen Reddit? It's a black hole of "Which software do you recommend?" and "What is the meaning of life?" type questions.

Read the article: https://lnkd.in/g2KTU86M

Mark Choueke makes the case for hiring marketers from diverse backgrounds. I agree about the elasticity part, but I would add more.

People from a different background than you see things you don't.

And the more diverse their background, the greater the variety of things they'll see.

I learned the value of diversity of viewpoints and experiences at a young age.

When I was in college, I was a non-engineering student in a physics workgroup with three hardcore Big Bang Theory geeks.

We were working a math problem involving real world items.

We arrived at an answer, but the answer seemed wrong to me.

Not because the math seemed wrong, but because the answer didn't seem realistic.

It was like we had calculated an elephant's weight as being only 6 pounds.

When I raised this concern, my fellow group members looked at me like I was a moron who didn't belong there, but I held my ground.

I insisted we run the numbers again. 

And I was proven right.

I've had a messy career. 

It's often helped me to do my marketing job.

But it's never once helped me to get a marketing job.

By the time I had sufficient experiences to have a "career," my career had become too messy to be hireable.

People who didn't already know me didn't know what to make of my resume. My strangeness made me seem too risky. And the higher up you go, the less risk is tolerated.

All that needs to change.

Read Choueke's article: https://lnkd.in/gmkqMKtV

This NY Times quiz is an idiotic way to compare human writing vs AI, but not necessarily for the reason you think.

Comparing such divergent subjects and styles is inappropriate, because they depend too much on context, both with the story and with the reader.

But there's an even bigger issue.

When you compare small snippets of a larger piece of writing, what is being compared is not the writing, but the style of writing (aka the prose).

To better understand the difference, think about it this way.

F. Scott Fitzgerald's prose is utterly beautiful. His sentences are elaborately crafted paintings using words. And his ability to describe and explain things using words is perhaps the most beautiful that America has ever produced.

Ernest Hemingway's prose is not beautiful. It is spare. Lightly adorned. Blunt. Sometimes unpleasant. Sometimes jagged. Sometimes ugly.

And yet Hemingway is the better writer.

Because Fitzgerald rarely wrote anything worth reading.

"The Great Gatsby" is the most boring novel I've ever read from start to finish.

It's a boring story about boring rich people doing nothing particularly interesting, noteworthy, or believable. It's a soap opera we pretend is great literature. It contains very little human truth. 

Children are only required to read it today because it's the definitive novel of the roaring 20's, but that doesn't make it good.

Hemingway was all about the truth. About important subjects. Often challenging subjects. And he was willing to risk his neck to find it.

See the difference?

AI's ability to generate pleasant agreeable prose is often passable now.

But it doesn't give a s**t about truth.

It has no passion. It's poor at the sort of modulation that approximates life. It makes headscratching decisions. And it just doesn't care.

It offers disembodied prose.

Prose without an author.

Which really doesn't mean much.

Moni Oloyede has written a good article about the dangers of marketing dashboards, and how the real-time dopamine hits they deliver can distract us from what really matters.

Read it here: https://lnkd.in/guEX6Mh4

Only 15% of CEOs think their CMO is AI savvy.

Sounds bad, but what does "AI savvy" mean?

This article focuses on potential reasons why CMOs are not savvy.

But without a clear definition, speculation is pointless.

In my mind, an AI savvy CMO:

-- Uses AI effectively in all marketing areas where AI can be used effectively. 

-- Has sufficient understanding of how AI works to place reasonable bets about where AI might be effectively in the future.

But there's a problem.

There are 10,001 AI marketing tools, with more emerging all the time.

And a f**kload of them are snake oil.

How exactly is a CMO supposed to stay on top of all this on their own?

I don't know, do you?

Read the article: https://lnkd.in/gatsqPJd

This headline is true. But the author claims the only reason B2B separates demand from brand is because the latter is harder and slower to measure, which is false.

That is certainly a reason, but there are three other big ones:

1. There aren't many dedicated B2B brand experts. And many brand experts that do exist are viewed as "B2C people who've done a little B2B." Therefore, B2B companies don't entirely trust them with demand, and therefore keep them in a separate silo.

2. Brand must cover a lot of things outside of marketing. Recruitment. PR. The office stationery. Lots of things. 

3. Brand and demand often come into conflict. Marketing wants leads now. Brand hates asking for leads. Therefore, keeping brand and demand housed under one roof is tricky.

I'm not saying the author is wrong. He makes some very good points.

But we won't overcome the obstacles to reconciling brand and demand by ignoring them.

Read the article: https://lnkd.in/geTs-d9v

taplio

The Battle

Jovian Gautama

Jason Patterson

Followers

Posts

Engagements

Likes

Performance ScoreJason Patterson's LinkedIn Performance

Ready to grow your LinkedIn presence?

taplio

The Battle

Jovian Gautama

Jason Patterson

Followers

Posts

Engagements

Likes

Performance Score.css-goub6s{font-size:var(--chakra-fontSizes-md);font-weight:500;color:var(--chakra-colors-gray-600);display:block;margin-top:var(--chakra-space-1);}Jason Patterson's LinkedIn Performance

Ready to grow your LinkedIn presence?

Performance ScoreJason Patterson's LinkedIn Performance