Does Great Content Require Great Interactivity?

There is a new digital magazine out there called The Marketer Quarterly. It’s free. It’s only digital. It’s got amazing editorial. And, it’s not interactive. Which led me to the question: Does great content require great interactivity to be a success in the world of digital?

The Marketer Quarterly is designed to guide marketers through the connected world with an in-depth focus on all aspects of marketing. In it there are interviews, feature stories, practical columns, and graphs and data snippets, but there is no interactive content. Does this matter?

I actually opened the magazine and first searched for interactive elements. I wanted to see what videos I could watch, or what images would move. I didn’t see anything outside of some hyperlinks. So I started on the first article and was immediately drawn in by the compelling graphic on the ESP timeline. And then a strange thing happened – I started reading content and getting engrossed in the editorial, which was perfectly complemented by compelling visuals.

This was odd to me.

With most digital content these days I find myself skimming headlines, clicking on videos and photo galleries, and then moving on. The fact that The Marketer Quarterly was able to compel me to read the content was exciting to me. It gave me hope that great content does still matter. And, all of the buzz happening right now about Facebook’s Paper app seems to agree with my conclusions. Content is winning out over interactivity. The caveat seems to be that the content must be accompanied by fantastic visuals in order for it to make the biggest impact.

What could this mean for publishers everywhere? Can operational expenses be reduced, or shifts in staff move more toward journalists and editorial teams again? It looks like the tides are shifting again. Kudos to The Marketer Quarterly team for taking a step in the right direction.

Image via Shutterstock.