Hi, Lyndon.

Yes, but the thing is that in my opinion, link bait meant link worthy content back in the days, but not now. Now it can be semi-useful content that is tuned to Diggers. The main content of such is to get links, not to deliver value.

I get this from the examples of content people call link bait. Mostly, those are link-oriented (not even linkerati oriented) pieces of wasted screen space. While I agree that 'linkbait' can have a meaning of 'great content', it acquires it only in context of creating great content - the one I am talking about.

An example of link bait can be the Super Digg from one of the links above: the post was about something completely unrelated to the main website topic, while I am sure something could be conjured about it.

Then again, I guess the difference is what kind of value link bait and great content deliver. Link bait may be more aimed at entertainment, shallow thinking and without much thought-provoking.

Great content, in turn, can be about something fundamental, sparking a whole train of thought (on the semantics of 'linkbait'?) and providing a way for the reader so to improve their lives.

Maybe, instead of trying to work with 'link worthy content', I should have said 'great content', because creating something for the whole purpose of links is, um, not as inspiring as creating something to improve someone's life (or lives of the millions).

Then, I guess, it is a nuance that only some marketers may notice. I am sure, after utter abuse of link bait (both term and action), a small batch of marketers will "go back" to simply providing life-enhancing content.

Thank you for reading, commenting and subscribing :)