The WordPress CMS debate continues

Guest post by Scott Liewehr
I don’t think of WordPress [1] as a web content management system [2] (WCMS). There, I said it. If you live and breathe content management like many who subscribe to this publication, you’ve likely just had one of two polar reactions:

1) You’re seething right now, only reading onward to find slip-ups to use to pick this article apart and “educate” me via the comments, or

2) you just shouted “Thank you!” aloud and are interested in finding more ways to support your own reasoning (which may be based more on intuition than logic). There aren’t many who are neutral on the subject. In fact, as Jeff Cram points out [3], the debate has gotten a bit religious lately.

“We don’t see things as they are, we see them as we are”

As the French author Anaïs Nin [4] once explained, we each view the world through our own lenses based on our own background and experiences. I don’t think of WordPress (WP) as a WCMS, but that’s just me. I’m happy to call it a blog publishing application, or even a web publishing system, but having worked in the content management industry for over ten years as a practitioner, consultant and analyst, I have a pretty clear understanding of what a WCMS is…at least in my own mind. Maybe I’m a purist. Maybe I’ve been playing the role of subject matter expert for too long and I’m no longer seeing clearly. Either way, for me, WP just doesn’t pass the WCMS sniff test.

Here are a few things that just don’t sit right with me:

• Any topic with so many evangelists touting “How to use ABC as an XYZ”, probably means that either 1) ABC is admittedly not an XYZ, but it can be used in a similar fashion if tweaked or used in a certain way, or 2) ABC is not quite as intuitive as we might have thought, and these how-to videos, articles and blogs are required to educate users. I tend to think number one is more likely.
• The all-too-easy argument that WP is a system which manages web content; therefore it must be a WCMS. Sorry, this doesn’t hold water for me. Using that logic alone, toilet paper and disposable napkins are both paper towels. We know this doesn’t make sense, so let’s not get literal. I’ll grant you that the WCM term could be better defined--more on that later.
• The notion that a WCMS is a process and that every organization that updates a website has one by default, even if it’s 'some guy named Sergei FTPing Dreamweaver files [5].' I certainly agree with my friend Robert Rose that much of what makes or breaks a website is non-technical, but to prey on the multiple definitions of the word system is to seriously over-simplify [read: avoid] the argument. [Note: Rose was not addressing this debate when he wrote those words, but I’ve seen them quoted in this context more than once.]
• The argument [6] that if someone uses WP as a WCMS, then that makes it one. If you’re being honest, it won’t take you more than ten seconds to come up with five examples of tchotchkes you use for unintended purposes. Laurence Hart came up with three clever ones [7]to start you off--too easy.

So, then what defines a WCMS?

I could list all of the features and functions that I believe serve as the guts of a WCM, as others have done [8], but I’m not so sure that matters. Why? Because if you agree with me then we likely have similar experiences with WCM and I don’t need to convince you. Unfortunately, there is no feature [set] I can list which will help you conclusively win this argument at the [virtual] water cooler…at least not within the fast-approaching word limit of this post.

On the other hand, if you disagree with my position, then you would either write me off as a WP novice and tell me there’s some new add-on I should download to account for the lacking feature (the geeky response), or worse, you might play the “user” card and tell me that it’s not about me or my viewpoint, but rather that of the end-user. Ooh, and that would be unfair.

“It’s the end-user, stupid.” 

I consider myself a staunch user advocate, and anyone who knows me knows I rarely turn to technology as the first answer (or problem). Actually, I usually turn away from it. So to those who channel James Carville in this debate: Right, I get it. But the simplicity required for a political campaign doesn’t necessarily suffice when it comes to answering the seemingly age-old question of the definition of WCM. I tone down the tech jargon when interacting with my business clients in the same way that I appreciate my doctor speaking to me in plain English, but that doesn’t mean that an academic argument about the boundaries of WCM amongst industry professionals isn’t worthwhile. I understand it’s a trivial point in the “real world”, but as a father of two toddlers, so is everything other than molding our youth into responsible young men and women. So, that’s a bit of a cop-out. I agree we can let the end-users call it whatever they want, but they stopped reading this post about eight paragraphs ago.

If not us, then who?

My stance on this subject is a gut response based on my experiences. I could attempt to retrofit a bunch of arguments together to try to convince you, or I could make a feeble attempt at yet another car analogy to make my point, as Ian Truscott called me out [9] for doing once before. But I’m not here to evangelize. Actually, I’m not black-and-white on the subject myself. And, as many have noted, I’m not even sure it matters. If the tool fits the need(s) [and those of the foreseeable future], then by all means use it. The interesting point which makes this debate so sticky [10] is that it has shone a flashlight on yet another reason why we need to clarify our industry’s terms, and for that matter, the profession itself. As Lisa Welchman points out, “most people barely understand what [we] do." [11]Maybe those refinements will result in the inclusion of WP as a WCMS, and if so, then I’m all for it. If not, WordPress is still a great tool. But, if we cannot define our own terms, then who’s going to do it for us?

Scott Liewehr is a Senior Consultant at The Gilbane Group [12] in the Web Content Management practice as well as a founder and Principal at onesta [13] where he leads the Strategy team. He is also considers himself fortunate to serve as the President of CM Pros [14], the association of record for content management professionals worldwide.