The traditional view of the communicative foundations of testimony maintains that (a) successful testimonial exchanges typically preserve content (b) the content so preserved is rich and informative enough to serve as an appropriate object of testimonial belief and assertion, and (c) testimonial exchanges are relatively often successful, such that we gain a great deal of knowledge through accepting what others tell us. I argue that there is no notion of content that can support this traditional view. Minimalist approaches provide a notion of content that is easily preserved across an exchange, yet too shallow to serve as the object of testimony; maximalist approaches provide a notion of content that is sufficiently rich, but which is not typically preserved in communication; and moderate approaches do not provide a suitable compromise between these two extremes. I conclude that we should reject the idea that successful testimonial exchanges typically involve the preservation of (informative) testimonial contents.