We are Odyssey content producers, and we have the power to make or break our image. We are part of a website that “discovers and shares a chorus of millennial voices, amplified organically through social media … revolutionizing content creation and discovery, enabling compelling, high-quality content to be created and discovered at speed and scale,” according to Odyssey Editorial Director Rosemary Kelly.
Odyssey is unlike any other media platform in that “industry peers have websites where people go to consume their content. In contrast, people consume [Odyssey] content in social channels when someone they know shares an article with them, not by going to our website as a destination,” Kelly elaborates.
According to Odyssey’s about page, the platform was founded by two Indiana University alumni who “felt that news and content were either too generic or highly politicized” and created Odyssey as a tool to prompt synthesis of diverse media content, especially from millennials. Perfect in theory, but completely ironic in practice.
Every college student with a beating pulse and a Facebook account knows what Odyssey is. And, unfortunately, every college student with a beating pulse and a Facebook account knows the Odyssey "stereotype."
Just for the sake of being clear, let's define that stereotype. A lot of content shared and reposted by staff writers and readers falls somewhere along the lines of “An Open Letter To My [pick one: Future Husband, Best Friend, Mother, Chipotle, you get the picture]” or anything to do with Greek life, or “Syllabus Week/Midterms/Finals As Told By [popular TV show people only know because it's on Netflix].” The vast majority of the content created for Odyssey that most people notice usually follows a pre-determined mold that different writers at different universities emulate without changing much content-wise or adding a personal touch.
On a site that reportedly was founded to foster a diverse point of view and creativity and passion, why is the majority of the visible content on Odyssey almost completely devoid of those things?
As a disclaimer, I would like to inform readers that I do not believe that every single article written for Odyssey is cookie-cutter. Not every “open letter” is the same as all the ones that came before it; not every listicle about college life has been done before; not every sorority article is the same. Additionally, there is a lot of political and otherwise involved commentary coming from Odyssey writers, including these two pieces: “How Feminism Crippled Hillary Clinton's Campaign,” and “Boko Haram Sends Female Suicide Bombers Into Refugee Camp."
Additionally, my intention is not to single out any Odyssey writers, nor insult our contributing body, or put Odyssey itself in a bad light. I simply believe that this is an important topic to address in order to better the writers and the publication.
Now, let’s describe Odyssey on social media.
All the articles that people see on their Facebook feeds, all the open letters and the “Blank as told by Blank” articles — the reason these articles get shared and go viral is because of their generic nature.
For the record, Odyssey insiders, including Kelly, don’t just see the large volume of generic articles. They are exposed to over 7,500 articles each week written by Odyssey contributors, so they receive a fuller picture than social media users stumbling upon Odyssey articles receive.
Nevertheless, relatable and generic articles have so much social traction because any college student can read them and feel a sense of connection to them. For example, Kyle Brown of Northern Arizona University wrote an article titled “Signs You’re From Small Town, USA.” As someone from a small Massachusetts town, I understand completely what he means when he says, “You'll have stores that are specific to your town” and “There will be a couple of events throughout a year that seemingly the entire town goes to.” Hypothetically, I would then share the article on Facebook because I liked it and because it resonated with me.
Everyone else from my small town will then see that I shared Brown’s article. They will share it with their friends, and so on. This article is so relatable that it is easy to generate a lot of shares with it — it’s much harder to do this with a political commentary or something else that’s inherently controversial in nature because everyone has different viewpoints. Coupled with the stigmas or reservations some people have about sharing politics or unpopular opinions on Facebook, this makes it much harder for an original op-ed piece to gain the same kind of traction as a happy-go-lucky small town article.
Brown’s article racked up 2K Facebook shares. That is not only a testament to Brown’s strong writing skills, but also how relatable the article is. His article does pay homage to his own hometown, which is more interesting than just talking the talk, but nevertheless, there is no room for controversy in this article. That’s why it gets shared — there’s no friction.
As a result of this, the kind of writer that will be drawn to Odyssey may fit a “generic” mold, at least on the exterior. Of course, every human undergoes their trials and tribulations and has some defining characteristic that makes them different from everyone else, but there is a “generic” front that some people put up for whatever reason. That’s a totally separate article, though.
Anyway, the writer body for Odyssey slowly starts to become homogenized. The types of people reaching out to Odyssey to work for them may, in some way, fit said “basic” stereotype, and if diverse people aren’t reaching out to Odyssey, there’s no way Odyssey can be as diverse as they aspire to be. They can’t force people to write for them.
As a result, this sharing-content/acquiring-new-writers thing turns into a vicious cycle and, in turn, makes it harder and harder for Odyssey to generate diverse content. It would be very hard to stop this downward spiral without a significant change in Odyssey policy, values or something else.
Old friend and fellow writer Anna Tanksley commented on my original article share. She agreed with what I was saying, and as far as making a change was concerned, she suggested that “stricter standards for writing may lead to a reduction of generic content, but would probably be a controversial move as well.”
She’s right on the money. Part of what drew me to write for Odyssey was the freedom I had to come up with a pitch that didn’t even necessarily have some contingency from week to week. The open-ended nature of Odyssey is why I love it. I am never pigeonholed to one topic. Taking away that freedom or somehow compromising it would not sit well with me, even though it would be in the best interest of the publication.
At Syracuse University, the Odyssey writing staff has a Facebook group where writers are required to post their topics for the week to eliminate repeats. It works from week to week and over short periods of time. However, I did notice that with the coming of the new semester and new writers, there were a few article ideas that had been written last semester that new writers wanted to take on. The Facebook group is, at best, a passable way to try and eliminate generic content.
The best way to really address the problem is to make sure we as writers understand the problem. We obviously have Facebook, because otherwise, we wouldn’t be sharing our articles, so we obviously know that generic articles are rampantly taking over Facebook. It definitely gets annoying to see girl A sharing “An Open Letter To My Best Friend,” then scroll down three posts to see girl B sharing “A Thank You Note To My Best Friend.” Instead of just sitting there, idly getting annoyed, and continuing to scroll, we need to do something about it.
We are Odyssey content producers, and we have the power to make or break our image.
We have the option to write another “Finals Week As Told By 'Friends.'” We have the ability to create the stereotype everyone seems to have about Odyssey. We also have the power to break it. We have the power to create new and original content. We have every ability to use writing to show the unique substance of our brains and our points of view and outlooks on life.
I’m not initiating a call to arms or a revolution, I’m just starting a conversation.
