The argument against TL,DR
A while back, I made a post about “Too Long, Didn’t Read“. I’m an advocate of shorter posts for blogs, 200-300 words. If you have more than that to say, make it a whitepaper, or submit to a publisher for a feature so you can link to it from your blog.
However, here is a snip from someone who feels differently and has some references to back it up.
What do you think? Short posts (200-300 words) for a blog, or long posts (1,500 words or more)?
Write ONLY In-Depth, 1500+ Word Blog Posts
I’m not a huge fan of the “X is dead” angle.
But there’s one thing I’m certain about when it comes to blogging: 500-word posts are dead.
This isn’t new.
In 2012 Moz found a clear correlation between content length and links for their blog posts:
And Neil Patel noticed that 1,500-word posts generated 68 percent more Facebook likes than shorter posts:
Why do longer posts do so well?
There are a few reasons:
Long content has a higher perceived value: When someone sees a long post they automatically think “wow, this must have taken a ton of work. I need to share this.” Post with 300 words don’t have the same effect.
You can create the definitive guide on a topic: I can tell you from experience that having the definitive guide to something on your blog is the fast track to hands-off link development. But it’s hard to cover an entire subject in 400 words.
More engagement and time on site: Reading 1,500-words of pure gold puts someone in a very appreciative mood. A mood that encourages them to share your stuff.
Longer posts may take more work, but the ROI of one long post is head and shoulders above a handful of short articles. Peep Laja (who grew his blog from zero to 50,000 visitors in one month), states that: “If I could offer you only one tip for the future, writing long, thorough blog posts would be it.”
Well said.