Why do your Shitposts Get More Engagement than Content that Took Ho...

Hi Friends!

I don't often do "response videos" but I ran across this super interesting read from Asher (@abh12345) on how "shitposts" seem to get more engagement than content that took you hours to make. I thought he brought up some really interesting points and gave some great examples. I'd highly recommend checking out that POST and reading through it.

To start out... let's define what I mean when I say "Shit Post". After reading through Asher's post and the comments left on it - there seemed to be a general consensus that it wasn't the amount of words in your post, or the length of your video - but how much time it took you to prepare.

For example - My random gym selfie and a professionally shot self portrait from @eveuncovered are both technically "a photo"...but one clearly took more time than the other!

Content that took you less than 30 minutes to make..PNG

Comparing My Latest Two Posts

To kick the video off - I do a screenshare comparison of my latest two posts. One of which was an interview with the lovely @llfarms about a hot topic in the eco-system right now - the @steemalliance. (Ps... today is the last day to register to vote!) The other post is a quick photo I took at the gym chatting about how I'm going to start lifting weights.

Screen Shot 2019-04-04 at 9.37.33 AM.png

If one piece of content was an interview that resulted in a post that took hours to assemble, while the other one was a quick photo and few short paragraphs - then why does it have over three times the amount of engagement?

Here's your Shitpost Cliff Notes...

Ironically... I end up chatting about short posts for almost 13 minutes... and so in the interest of keeping this "shitpost friendly", here are some cliff notes from the post. Check out the video for the full explanation though!

Content that took you less than 30 minutes to make. (1).PNG

Content that took you less than 30 minutes to make. (2).PNG

Content that took you less than 30 minutes to make. (3).PNG

Does this Mean Shitposts are Better Than Longer, More Detailed Content?

I think that's a personal decision on why you are making content and what you are hoping both you and your audience will get out of it.

One thing I try to do, is look at why a shorter post got more engagement - and then try to incorporate some of those elements into my longer content as well. Could I make my main points clearer and more accessible? How could I break down the message to make it even more relatable?

I always do my best to end my posts with some kind of question to the audience as well - no matter the length or quality of post. This can help spark conversation and gives people something interesting to talk about.

So here are my questions to all of you...

Would you add anything to this list? Do you prefer consuming quick posts, digging into longer posts, or having a mix? Which type of content are you more likely to engage with?

With Love,

Lea