Infographics That Add No Information
The Story
Tom includes infographics in every issue of Marketing Ideas, “even when they’re arguably unnecessary” (Source 1).
His reasoning: “If someone reposts one of my visuals on LinkedIn or X, it makes them look smart. A shared infographic feels like thought leadership. A shared newsletter link? Less so.” (Source 1).
Even when the infographic adds nothing: “Even when the infographic doesn’t add much new info, it amplifies reach. I’ve seen the data: Issues with visuals are shared more frequently, linked more often, and ultimately lead to more subscribers.” (Source 1).
In his own newsletter, Tom is more explicit: “I include infographics in my emails even when no visualization is actually needed. Why? Because they give people something to share that makes them look smart (versus just sharing a link to my article). Even when the infographic repeats my text verbatim with zero added value, people love sharing them!” (Source 2).
Subscribers attributed to this tactic: ~500 (Source 2).
Lesson for Creators
Sharing isn’t about your content, it’s about your reader’s identity. A link makes them look like a forwarder. An infographic makes them look like a curator. The infographic doesn’t have to be informationally novel — it has to be socially loadable. This is the principle behind every shareable artifact: the share is a small ego transaction for the sharer, and the smarter you make them look, the more they share. Tom’s version is the bluntest possible articulation: it’s fine if the infographic just restates the article verbatim. The container is the value.
Related
- The Customer Certificates That 3x Social Shares — same “make the sharer look good” pattern, B2B version
- Thompson’s Law - Viral Is Just Broadcast — the larger framework Tom operates within
- 300 Lightbulb Stress Balls — physical version of the same shareable-artifact logic
- The Snacks and Entrees Content System — Alex Garcia: another newsletter format choice that prioritizes shareability