<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8" standalone="yes"?><rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"><channel><title>Marketing Blogs</title><link>https://marketingblogs.org/</link><description>Recent content on Marketing Blogs</description><generator>Hugo</generator><language>en-us</language><lastBuildDate>Sat, 23 May 2026 00:00:00 +0000</lastBuildDate><atom:link href="https://marketingblogs.org/index.xml" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/><item><title>About</title><link>https://marketingblogs.org/about/</link><pubDate>Sat, 23 May 2026 00:00:00 +0000</pubDate><guid>https://marketingblogs.org/about/</guid><description>&lt;p>Marketing Blogs is a quiet corner of the internet where one operator writes about the parts of growth marketing that don&amp;rsquo;t fit on slide decks: the SEO that actually compounds, the email that people actually read, the attribution conversations that nobody wants to have, and the brand work that earns its budget.&lt;/p>
&lt;p>No newsletter. No course. No coaching offer. Just notes from work, published when there&amp;rsquo;s something honest to say.&lt;/p></description></item><item><title>SEO That Compounds: Why Most Teams Plateau at 18 Months</title><link>https://marketingblogs.org/posts/seo-that-compounds/</link><pubDate>Sun, 12 Apr 2026 09:30:00 +0000</pubDate><guid>https://marketingblogs.org/posts/seo-that-compounds/</guid><description>&lt;p>Every B2B content team I have worked with hits the same wall somewhere between month 14 and month 22. Traffic rises steadily, then flattens. The instinct is to publish more, hire faster, or chase shinier formats. None of those usually move the line.&lt;/p>
&lt;p>The teams that break through tend to share three habits. None of them are about volume.&lt;/p>
&lt;h2 id="they-treat-topics-as-portfolios-not-articles">They treat topics as portfolios, not articles&lt;/h2>
&lt;p>Most plans look like a list of post titles. The teams that compound look at a topic the way a fund manager looks at a sector. A &amp;ldquo;topic&amp;rdquo; might be ten or twenty individual URLs that all share intent and link laterally to one another. Each new piece raises the ceiling for the others. A single article in isolation almost never does.&lt;/p></description></item><item><title>Content Strategy Without the 60-Slide Deck</title><link>https://marketingblogs.org/posts/content-strategy-without-the-deck/</link><pubDate>Sat, 28 Mar 2026 14:00:00 +0000</pubDate><guid>https://marketingblogs.org/posts/content-strategy-without-the-deck/</guid><description>&lt;p>The most expensive document in most marketing orgs is the content strategy deck. It takes six weeks to produce, two more weeks to socialize, and roughly nobody opens it again after the rollout meeting. By month four it is wrong about half its assumptions and quietly archived.&lt;/p>
&lt;p>Here is what I have learned to do instead.&lt;/p>
&lt;h2 id="one-page-four-sections">One page, four sections&lt;/h2>
&lt;p>The replacement is a single page. It has four sections and a date at the top. It gets revisited monthly.&lt;/p></description></item><item><title>Email That Doesn't Bore People</title><link>https://marketingblogs.org/posts/email-that-doesnt-bore-people/</link><pubDate>Thu, 05 Mar 2026 08:15:00 +0000</pubDate><guid>https://marketingblogs.org/posts/email-that-doesnt-bore-people/</guid><description>&lt;p>Open rate has been a junk metric since Apple Mail Privacy Protection started prefetching images in 2021. Five years in, plenty of teams still report on it as if it means something. It doesn&amp;rsquo;t, and the leadership team can tell.&lt;/p>
&lt;p>What follows is what I have seen actually move email-driven revenue at companies between $5M and $150M ARR.&lt;/p>
&lt;h2 id="stop-sending-the-newsletter">Stop sending the newsletter&lt;/h2>
&lt;p>The weekly company newsletter is the single biggest source of list fatigue in B2B email. It is rarely the thing customers signed up for, and it is almost never optimized for the customer&amp;rsquo;s calendar.&lt;/p></description></item><item><title>The Attribution Conversation Nobody Wants to Have</title><link>https://marketingblogs.org/posts/the-attribution-conversation/</link><pubDate>Wed, 18 Feb 2026 11:45:00 +0000</pubDate><guid>https://marketingblogs.org/posts/the-attribution-conversation/</guid><description>&lt;p>Two things are true at the same time, and most marketing teams refuse to hold them together.&lt;/p>
&lt;ol>
&lt;li>The CFO needs an answer about which channels are working.&lt;/li>
&lt;li>The multi-touch attribution dashboard is mostly theater.&lt;/li>
&lt;/ol>
&lt;p>The team&amp;rsquo;s job is to live with both facts without giving up.&lt;/p>
&lt;h2 id="what-the-dashboard-actually-shows">What the dashboard actually shows&lt;/h2>
&lt;p>Most multi-touch attribution tools assign fractional credit to touchpoints across the journey using one of a handful of models: linear, time-decay, position-based, &amp;ldquo;data-driven.&amp;rdquo; All of these are reasonable as heuristics and none of them are causal.&lt;/p></description></item><item><title>Brand Is Distribution, Not a Mood Board</title><link>https://marketingblogs.org/posts/brand-as-distribution/</link><pubDate>Thu, 22 Jan 2026 16:20:00 +0000</pubDate><guid>https://marketingblogs.org/posts/brand-as-distribution/</guid><description>&lt;p>The cleanest framing I have heard for brand spend came from a CMO at a mid-stage B2B company, not a creative agency. She said: &amp;ldquo;Brand is a future discount on CAC.&amp;rdquo;&lt;/p>
&lt;p>That sentence is worth holding. It reframes the conversation away from logos and color palettes and toward something a CFO can argue with on its merits.&lt;/p>
&lt;h2 id="what-brand-actually-does">What brand actually does&lt;/h2>
&lt;p>In the strict marketing-science sense, brand investment moves three measurable things:&lt;/p></description></item><item><title>The MQL Is a Useful Fiction. Treat It Like One.</title><link>https://marketingblogs.org/posts/the-mql-fiction/</link><pubDate>Sun, 04 Jan 2026 10:00:00 +0000</pubDate><guid>https://marketingblogs.org/posts/the-mql-fiction/</guid><description>&lt;p>The Marketing Qualified Lead was invented around 2002 by SiriusDecisions to settle a recurring argument: which of the names marketing handed over should sales actually call. It was a process artifact, never a real thing about a real customer. Twenty-four years later it still does that job, and we have collectively forgotten its origin.&lt;/p>
&lt;p>The cost of forgetting is that we report on it as if it measures intent. It does not.&lt;/p></description></item></channel></rss>