The most understated reason common to unread notes
A series on the basics of note side hustles, learning marketing🔰
This time, it's about the titles of note articles that don't sell.
A common issue with note articles that don't sell: you can't tell what the article is about just from the title.
I think that hits the nail on the head.
And it's incredibly important as a matter of "design."
Titles of note articles that don't sell often have:
・Feelings written down
・A sense of the problem
・Empathy
But,you can't see how you will change after buying itright?
In other words,
“Will I feel relieved after reading this?”
“Will my understanding deepen?”
“What will I be able to do next?”
You can't imagine any of these.
On the other hand, titles that do sell,
regardless of whether the content is shallow or deep,
give a vague sense of the state after reading.
・Your perspective is organized
・You don't have to take detours
・You can avoid mistakes
・Your options decrease/increase
They place this "post-reading image"
vaguely at the title stage.
And, the less a note sells,
the more "I want you to understand"
and "I want you to notice"
come first,
and the reader's change is put on the back burner.
That's why
it connects to the complaint that notes don't sell,
and the feeling that you don't know what will happen if you buy based on the title is all on the same line.
Notes with weak design
try to fix things in the body text.
But in reality,
80% is decided at the title stage
.
If it's not clear who it's for, what they should do, and what will happen, you don't feel like buying it.
Yeah, that. I really think that's it.
And it's an incredibly simple story.
Ultimately, the buyer
“Who,” “what they do,” and “how I will change”
won't open their wallet unless these three points connect in an instant.
Notes that don't sell usually stop at:
・Thoughts
・Problem posing
・Empathy
But the reader is unconsciously looking for:
“So, what should I do?”
“How will my situation change if I read this?”
In the title,
who it's for is vague
→ Actions are invisible
→ Results are also invisible
In this state,
no matter how good the content is,
it gets put in the “not now” folder
.Conversely,・Who (beginner/experienced/someone lost)
・What to do (change thinking/review design/avoid)
・What happens (no detours/no getting lost/fewer mistakes)
If this is conveyed even vaguely in the title,
a “let's try reading it” is born.
Generally, if I don't understand it at a glance, I don't think about clicking. I think the title is everything. Because the title is a microcosm of the article.
Yeah, really that.
It sounds like an extreme argument, but I think it's almost the truth based on experience.
A reader before clicking
is already in a state ofnot wanting to think.
They are skimming, tired, and there are too many options.
Therefore,
“You'll understand if you read it” doesn't hold up.
In the title,
・Is this about me?
・Is it related to my current confusion?
・Does it seem worth reading?
If this doesn't pass in an instant,
the body text is the same as not existing.
And as you said,
the title is a microcosm of the article.
What you are doing in the content,
what kind of perspective it is,
where you are taking them,
everything is compressed.
The less a note sells,
the more they think “the title is just for atmosphere”
and “I'll win with the content,”
but in reality, it's the exact opposite.
If you want to win with the content,
you need to translate it in the title even more,
saying “this content is necessary for you,” otherwise it won't reach them.
When I look at articles by people who say they don't sell, it's usually blurry who they are assuming. There's a strong sense of “I succeeded, so you will surely succeed too.” It feels like pushing your favorite food onto someone else.
But you don't know what kind of allergies the other person has, and they have their own likes and dislikes. Only by introducing it with a stance of “here you go, if you'd like” while taking those into account, will the other person become interested.
Yeah, that analogy is incredibly accurate.
I think that's exactly it.
Articles by people who say they don't sell
put “talking about themselves” ahead of “who they are writing for”.
・I succeeded by doing this
・I felt better after eating this
・My life changed when I did this
It ends there, and
there is no check of the other person's constitution at all.
That's why it becomes
“you'll surely be fine too,”
but that's like
・recommending spicy food to someone with a weak stomach
・giving milk to someone who is lactose intolerant,
and the reader unconsciously braces themselves.
What the reader is really looking at is
“Does this person understand my situation?”
“Are they assuming cases where it might be impossible for me?”
That's it.
Therefore,
“Here you go, if you'd like”
“You don't have to force it if it doesn't suit you”
Writing with this stance
looks like weak sales, but
conversely, it builds trust
.It's not the “pushing of favorite foods” you mentioned,but “a feeling that the ingredient list is properly displayed.”
With allergy information, target age, and warnings attached.
Only when that is done
can they reach out with peace of mind, thinking
“Oh, this might be for me.”
In the end, even if you try to sell articles with self-taught marketing that is self-centered, it won't go well.
Yeah, I really think it comes down to that.
Self-taught marketing that is self-centered,
the person thinks they are “thinking about it properly,”
but in reality,
・their own success experience is the standard
・their own preferences are the correct answer
・it's based on the assumption that their own words will be understood
is often the case.
But the buyer
lives in a completely different context, different physical condition, and different timing.
If you try to sell by saying
“I succeeded with this”
while ignoring that,
it becomes a gamble where you pray that it hits while being off-target.
The more successful an article is,
the less it feels like marketing, but
it is designed from the reader's perspective.
The target is clear,
and those who don't fit are filtered out from the beginning.
So in the end,
the more you stick to your own way, the less it sells,
and the moment you properly imagine the other person,
it becomes “reaching them” rather than “selling.”
In summary...
Notes that don't sell often don't make it clear what the article is about from the title alone.
Even if there is emotion or empathy, it doesn't get clicked because the reader can't see 'how they will change if they read it.'
What readers want to know is
who is doing what and what the outcome will be.
Titles that sell present this post-reading image from the very beginning.
On the other hand, the less a note sells, the more it focuses on 'I want you to understand' or 'I succeeded,'
without considering the reader's circumstances or the possibility that it might not be a good fit.
Ultimately, self-centered, amateur marketing doesn't reach anyone.
Only with a title designed from the reader's perspectivewill an article be read.
[Conclusion]
When you worry that your note isn't selling, it's often because 'selling' has become the goal.
Originally, selling a note is just a bonus.
It's like an unmanned vegetable stand; you leave out what you've harvested,
and it's a sustainable system where people who need it just happen to stop by and buy it.
If you persistently ask passersby, 'How about this?', it's never going to sell.
That's because they don't need it.
You don't feel like buying something you don't need, and in the first place, you can't even tell what the product is by looking at the package.
If you don't know what kind of vegetable it is or who grew it, you're even less likely to want to buy it.
People who worry that their note isn't selling need to think about:
What am I selling?
Who do I want to buy it?
Am I communicating with that in mind on a daily basis?
I felt that it is necessary to rethink those points once more.
The person who wrote this article👇