More on the influence of blogging
Who’s got time to blog? It’s been 2 weeks since my last post (forgive me for I have sinned…). But I’ve been busy doing … errr … work. Two major deliveries coinciding, plus recruitment and web site redesign has distracted me somewhat, and diverted me from the blog task (which I tend to fit in where I can anyway).
Importantly, I haven’t had the time to read other people’s stuff, which is how I form opinions, so nothing to rant about.
I’m coming to the impression that people who blog either don’t have regular (or full) jobs, or that blogging is their job. It’s no coincidence that most blogger give up after six months – they just don’t have the time. When Scoble et al tell us that you’ve got to blog often (= daily) it’s no wonder that most succumb to normality.
This then limits the influence that blogs can have. It’s the people who have “proper” jobs – consultants, analysts, regulators, academics, etc - that carry most influence. From Influencer50 research, we see that few blogs have influence, and those that do come from other sources. Influencers blog, more than bloggers influence.
Importantly, I haven’t had the time to read other people’s stuff, which is how I form opinions, so nothing to rant about.
I’m coming to the impression that people who blog either don’t have regular (or full) jobs, or that blogging is their job. It’s no coincidence that most blogger give up after six months – they just don’t have the time. When Scoble et al tell us that you’ve got to blog often (= daily) it’s no wonder that most succumb to normality.
This then limits the influence that blogs can have. It’s the people who have “proper” jobs – consultants, analysts, regulators, academics, etc - that carry most influence. From Influencer50 research, we see that few blogs have influence, and those that do come from other sources. Influencers blog, more than bloggers influence.
Labels: blogging, influencers
posted by Duncan Brown at 9:01 pm
2 Comments:
As an internet strategist, I'd like to suggest an alternate way of looking at things.
First, when someone tells you that you HAVE TO do something, I would question it immediately. No one HAS TO do anything. No, not even blogging.
The first place I would look is at your initial REASON and STRATEGY behind starting a blog. What is your currency? And, I don't mean money.
If you started your blog to bolster your thought leadership platform, then yes, as a quick and easy answer (without knowing anything else about the business), my professional recommendation would be for you to blog often. Is often daily? I don't know. Only you know that.
If you need to (based on your stated objectives) blog frequently and if blogging is important to you, you'd need to carve some time out for blogging and pre-writing posts - having no business/work to do and blogging for a living are not the only options to having a nicely populated blog.
Resisting the "need" to write an article - not a post - will also help to release some of the tension.
On the other hand, if you started your blog as an infrequent way to stay in touch with your audience (kind of how Coudal Partners does with their "infrequent mailings"), then you probably don't need to blog daily and I would recommend that you put your social media eggs in another basket.
I just spoke at the BlogHer Business conference for the past two days and was a co-presenter on the ROI of social media workshop. I found that everyone and their mother want to talk about the 'R' part of ROI but no one wants to discuss the 'I'. What are you willing to INVEST to get a RETURN?
We just had a client tell us they want to start using social media but they don't want to invest a lot of money or time. My response: "Well then go buy an ad in a trade pub and call it a day." The golden rule is, if you don't have time, you have to have money (or additional resources). And, if you have no money, well you had better have time (or energy). You can't be cash AND time-strapped and expect a grand result.
Everyone wants a high return for little effort. And, well, that just isn't realistic.
Social media may be fun and the applications may look 'cool' but the reality is, they are business tools and need to be approached less from the opportunistic standpoint and more from a strategic mindset.
Lastly, let's also not forget that the leader of the company doesn't have to be the only one who blogs for the company - a la Tom Peters.
And, there's more than one way to "blog". Text is not the only way. There's video and audio that aren't being used nearly as much as it will next year, and the year after.
So, I say all this to say... blogging (and social media in general) is what a business makes of it. It's not about keeping up with the Joneses or conforming to some bureaucratic norm. It is what it is. And, when done strategically, it's a beautiful thing.
Hi Lena,
I think your comments are really insightful - thanks for contributing.
Two observations spring to mind:
1. If bloggers are serious about "blogging for business" (eg as a marketing, social network tool) they should allot time/budget to the activity. I consider myself in this group, so point taken.
2. The medium still precludes some individuals from blogging with influence. Either because they don't have the time, or because they don't have the authority.
It still worries me that blogs consistently fail to show up as influential in our research into IT decision makers. Who are blogs for?
Post a Comment
<< Home