One distinction that I find that I make in my head is that content is top-down, not bottom-up. Or at least if content is created by students it’s something that is canonized before it becomes “content”. So I don’t see it as a matter of it being print as I don’t see student work as course content. Maybe that’s a fault on my understanding.
Though I do appreciate that content is sort of a tombstone. It marks the things gone by. But that makes me wonder about class wikis, though that might be related to the canonization piece I mentioned.
I see content as less of a print concept but much more a corporate one and one that comes up more as we treat students as consumers. I think about how YouTube labels the people who create videos as “Content Creators” in which art, or reflection, or fooling around serves as a gauge or vehicle for the purposes of the platform, rather than serving the piece itself, or the community that is engaging with it.