Wednesday, July 18, 2007

I am In and I am Out. And That's OK.

It was about a year ago that I started getting my teeth into what this whole blogging venture might mean to me personally, and also what it might mean in broader, more overarching terms. I was positively giddy with the realization that though competitive and hierarchical models for evaluating how social networking occurs in the blogosphere, when it came to the smaller communities in which I was participating, the theories could not adequately account for how these networks cohered and were successful. I was, at that time, an excellent blogizen. I diligently reciprocated all comments, added everyone who had even breathed in my direction to my blogroll, and while I still faithfully read the entries of “big” bloggers (back to “being big” shortly) I became much more invested in my own niche. It was much more rewarding. My writing improved as I became part of a lively conversation, and I gained a lot of personal satisfaction from the relationships that were emerging.

As I continued along in this fashion, my comments section and reader stats steadily increased. I knew this because I was quite, quite obsessive about checking them. Stats were checked daily (hourly. ok. every 5 minutes) any linky love or referrals swiftly followed up on, I went about visiting blogs and leaving comments all over the place. To boot, my pregnancy at the time was not doing my traffic any harm, and as the due date approached, I got lots of hits as people checked in to find out the scoop (want to raise your readership? Get preggers or married. Or divorced.)

I was in the thick of it, and loving it. I had been blogging for about six months and I felt suddenly extremely tuned in to how the community worked, its norms of participation. I smelled fascinating research hypotheses, and steaming hot feminist arguments about the reinvention of motherhood. And I still do.

But…

Now an old and sage 18-month blogger, I still enjoy blogging a great deal (and could not be more delighted with the collective success of BlogRhet) but I have begun to experience some of that ambivalence about it all which is so familiar to many.

At what stage does “community participation” become obsessive? At what stage does commenting on other people’s blogs become less about reciprocity and good manners, and more about maintaining the readership, keeping that comments thread nice and healthy and full? When you find yourself slumping into a black mood because you posted one hour ago and “still no one has stopped to show me love,” then what does this reflect about the "relationships" you are cultivating? If you remedy the situation by carpetbombing a few blogs you’ve neglected lately, is that quite right?

Let me tell you a secret. After my baby was born last November, my blog became a pretty dead space. Understandably. I was not really motivated to write. I was simply motivated to function in some kind of human way. Sleep was also a priority.

Fast forward a few months, and I was ready to leap back in. And (it seemed to me at the time) in terms of my blog I really paid for my hiatus. It was like starting from scratch. I would post what were (to me) HI-LARious posts, and get only 1 or 2 responses. My STATS were pathetic, in my mind, and all those people who had been part of my community before were off enjoying other blogs. And how could I blame them? I had dropped off the face of the earth. When it comes to blogging, out of sight, out of mind can be very true. I knew this. I had observed the community norms, for chrissakes!

So I got busy. I was suddenly everywhere –at my old haunts, but also lots of newer bloggers I had not read yet. And it was a heady time. How I had missed Mama Tulip and Mom 101, those girls can write. And the more I commented, the more I saw a spike in my own comments, and while my stats did not exactly soar, they became much healthier. Then came the day when this post got linked from Zero Boss and Babble, and finally, I thought, I have arrived. Stats continued to escalate, until there was a week where I was hitting about 500-700 a day. (it was a lot for me, ok???)

The writing! The writing is speaking for itself! All my work is paying off!

Yes. My “work.” (Is it work, this thing we call “reciprocity”?)

Anyway, I did not think to check and see exactly which post was drawing the traffic. But surely it was my witty political commentary on the breastfeeding that ZB and Babble had so rightly picked up for its sheer genius.

Think again, Joy…. Try this post.

Yeah. Apparently I was the only blogger on the planet to actually think to put those funny math pictures on a blog so that people could email a link instead of forward all those jpegs about among their contacts.

That post, to this day, draws me as much traffic as pretty much everything else combined.

So, uh, the writing was not speaking for itself. [hangs head in shame...]

Don’t get me wrong. I am not putting myself down as a bad writer. I think I have some pretty good moments there, and only wish I could have the stamina to write more creatively more often, but I just don’t.

But the whole situation caused me to look hard at myself and ask “what exactly are you in this for? Because if it’s fame or status, then you are so totally SOL, woman!”

I questioned how my participation in the community—my devotion to reciprocation—was actually fuelled by less than “community-minded” goals, and more about traffic traffic traffic. Yes, it was about maintaining ties with writers I enjoy and respect, but the more feverish part of it was driven in part by a fear that if I don’t, they will forget about me. This was combined with a heavy sense of guilt and obligation.

And suddenly it wasn’t so enjoyable any more.

So I stopped. Not completely. (Obviously). But I stopped worrying about reciprocity quite so much. I came to a realization that the weight of obligation was entirely about me, and that even if I didn’t visit someone whose blog I adore on a regular basis, this didn’t mean they’d written me off. And if they had written me off, then tough shit for them, you know? Life was too short.

As Tere notes, this topic of “inclusion” and the appropriate rules of conduct in blogging communities has produced some in depth and even (politely) heated conversations at BlogRhet. It is obviously something that many of us feel very strongly about. Concerns over how blogging “cliques” might emerge, where only certain parties can be included. What this reveals to me is how emotionally invested we are in this whole process. So many of us started blogging as a means to write for an audience, then we discovered that with audience comes community. And despite my story, I will maintain that it is this community dynamic that is to me the most meaningful aspect of blogging. Nonetheless, there are some interesting and potentially sticky issue to raise:

Reciprocal commenting is a primary means through which certain blogging communities—small clusters of blogs—interconnect and gain strength.

Are these communities grow in size, are they also potentially jeopardized? Is there a critical point here in which a healthy and densely interconnected smaller community cannot sustain itself? I am thinking here not just in terms of people’s experiential relation to blogging (a sense that a community that was once quite tangible has disintegrated or shifted) but also, empirically, about how clusters and nodes in social networks might emerge or break down as they grown in size (I will be boring people with this at BlogHer, and no doubt in a few posts beforehand).

As I argued before, when we look at this through the lense of social networking theory, these individuals become dense nodes around which many of us cluster and coalesce. For example, I might not have a direct relationship with whom I perceive as a Big Blogger, but I observe other bloggers like me in the comments thread, and so I go and visit and make friends).

I do believe, that as certain bloggers “mature,” develop a following, embark on entrepreneurial ventures, their status in the community will automatically shift. They will become outsiders to some degree, dense nodes or connecting points, and though they might undertake very significant work to strengthen the community, they will not be able to participate in the same way that those of us who occupy the “long tail” of the blogosphere can.

This, I believe, is an issue of scale more than anything else, though the perceptions about status and inclusion are very real, and possibly contribute to this hierarchical dynamic. Of course they do. For as we go about looking for community (validation? traffic?) we forge relationships with those who can return the favor, and move away from those who do not. We seek peers, other people "like us" who can endorse this whole blogging thing and say "hey! I'm here! I"m listening!" And this is very meaningful.

The question of how the "like us" aspect of this dynamic works remains, but I'm going to end here. But the issue Tere raises about inclusion, and especially how race, sexuality and class figure into these equations is worthy of a post of its own, and I'll be returning to it pre- the panel at BlogHer (The Politics of Inclusion and Exclusion in Online Communities) where this question, among others, will be of central importance.

40 comments:

bubandpie said...

The way you've described the role of the "Big Bloggers" rings true for me. That gateway function is not something an individual assumes (with or without attendant responsibilities) - it is something that occurs, with or without the blogger's direct encouragement, because of readers. WE create gateway-bloggers by clicking through blogrolls and following up comments.

slouching mom said...

Joy -- This is an empirical question, no? If what you say is correct, than you should find a high correlation within blogger "groups" among amount of comments per post. If the same people are clustered in a network, and they're all commenting on one another's blogs, then mustn't that follow?

Miscellaneous-Mum said...

Some crucial questions there, a few of which I am currently dealing with (gee, I always say that don't I? Ms predictability here)

"what exactly are you in this for?" Like slouching Mom says, this is one of the empirical questions.

I suppose this kind of track leads to the questions of how obligated we are/need to be to our readers, especially if one find themselves becoming more 'successful' (an ambigious term, but here, specifically, I mean traffic and monetisation). Readers as friends on the one hand; readers as (I hate saying it) potential leverage.

Yuk. I hate breaking it down to those sorts of distinctions, but isn't that the nature of the discussion, I guess.

Then you have the situation I guess I found myself at a month or two ago, the readers/commenters I started alongside, my amigos, have vanished somewhat into the ether and I don't know what to think....

Marilyn (aka callistawolf) said...

Very interesting! I think I may have to drop in on your session at BlogHer because this is a pretty big topic in the world of the blogging and one I've thought about a lot.

Essentially, I think I'm in it for the writing. I would LIKE to have the giant following but I'm so poor at commenting... But I'm here, aren't I? That's got to mean something. :)

Mary G said...

Dern it Joy, you give me brain fatigue. And a bad case of the thinkies.
I'm still obsessing about reciprocal commenting, though, and this post takes the topic along the road quite a way, and in a Cadillac of a discussion.
We need a discussion on gateways --non Barabasi gateways. I think? Why do readers come and go? I am beginning to suspect that question has a very complicated answer, Misc Mum. Stages of blogging enthusiasm and fatigue, ditto. And the two are connected, I believe. You say
"I have begun to experience some of that ambivalence about it all which is so familiar to many."

You've got some cool company on the BlogHer panel. Please, please get the gist of it online for poor sit at homes.

mothergoosemouse said...

Looking forward to your panel at BlogHer. And for the record, I did not get pregnant for the purpose of increasing my readership. Not entirely, anyway. ;)

Motherhood Uncensored said...

I think that reciprocity is definitely expected. The more seasoned bloggers have an uncanny following -- like Amalah -- where she does not need to comment on their blogs to maintain her level of comments (particularly at her personal blog).

I think for most of us, the reciprocity certainly makes a difference. I have been commenting less, not only due to time, but also because I decided that I would leave a comment when I felt led to, not because it was an obligation. I try to go say hello to folks who visit for the first time, or someone who is a new blogger, but it doesn't always happen.

I definitely only see huge comment spikes when I write about something controversial -- then people come back and banter back and forth. But when I write a nice little post about motherhood -- not so much.

I see a wave of new bloggers come my way, they say hello and comment, and when they don't get the reciprocity, many leave. I get that -- and I think that's why there's such amazing small communities or circles of bloggers who don't have huge readerships but have relationships with each other where they comment religiously, feel accepted and read, and it's satisfying for them.

I think as you begin to blog longer (or maybe this is just me) that the comments aren't as important as the quality of them. When someone takes the time to read and comment, it sometimes means more than the passing "lol haha" that you might get.

I love to see comments -- don't get me wrong. But I do think that it's definitely more about the writing for me -- more so even when I started.

thailandchani said...

The best thing.. of all.. for me anyway.. is when people comment on my posts and talk to each other. I really do like that because then it feels like a bonafide discussion.

I don't think stats are necessarily a good barometer. The other day, I wrote a post about Terapon Adhahn, a man who was arrested for child abduction, (geez, now this blog will get the hits, too) and you can't imagine what happened to my stats.

Doubled. In one day. Google searches.

The idea of people coming around to get involved in a topic is definitely what I'm in this for... and why I continue doing it.

I go on commenting binges. There are days when I will comment on dozens of blogs.. and other days, I comment on the blogs of those who come to mine.

Honestly, the large bloggers don't interest me much because there is a certain "attitude" present that doesn't appeal to me. When someone says, "I don't have time to interact with so many readers", my immediate thought is "well, you have one less to worry about."

That's just honestly how I feel about it.

I've been at it for a year in September.. and in general, I'm rather content. I have a fairly steady stream of commenters, a comfortable amount for me to reply and talk with them, get to know them through their own blogs.. and all is good.

Granted, there are days when I struggle to come up with a topic. I blog daily.. so it can be a challenge sometimes.


Peace,

~Chani

karrie said...

Re: I think that's why there's such amazing small communities or circles of bloggers who don't have huge readerships but have relationships with each other where they comment religiously, feel accepted and read, and it's satisfying for them.

I strongly identify with this part of Kristen's comment. My traffic has increased far beyond the original smaller community, and while it is nice to feel heard on a larger scale, I'm not sure I enjoy the impersonal nature of it. Since I do have a child, school and a whole host of other responsibilities, it is difficult for me to keep up with dozen or so blogs in my Reader that I really want to follow. However, I do feel some responsibility towards visiting the nice people who leave thoughtful, intelligent comments. Especially if I sense, or they mention, that they're new to blogging.

I remember all too well feeling dissed and ignored when I first started posting, and I hate that my not following up with everyone who stops by, might contribute to another person feeling bad about themselves. There are so many wonderful writers and so many quirky,fun, passionate voices out there. I wish I could read everyone!

I'm just dipping my toes into the commercial aspects--something I have long been bothered by and conflicted about--but decided to create a different blog, with a different focus, for that venture.

I like my weird little corner of the web the way it is--hopefully still small enough to be inclusive and a good space for discussions.

Julie Pippert said...

I don't feel like I get much (enough) academic-level deep talk in my corporeal life.

A. Nobody I know corporeally day-to-day is on the Internet; in fact, a few friends still don't "get" email.

B. The hustle and bustle of mom life doesn't leave much space for deep talks; when my mom friends and I do get together there is always a sort of "coworker" style shop-talk.

That's where my blog comes in.

In a place where I am surrounded by readers of Dobson and the Secret, puzzled brows when I mention anything too literary, and uncomfortable silence if I bring up politics...I need an outlet.

So the community is key for me.

I am most attracted to people who come on my blog and talk to me, and to blogs that have commenters who are happy and willing to engage in feedback, conversation, and discussion. I have a bit of a preference for bloggers who come into their comments and add to the discussion (which doesn't mean replying to every comment).

It amazes me that in three years, I haven't found one person who wants to form a book club. Plenty of scrapbooking, but nothing literary. (Hang on, wiping away tears of self-pity.)

That's a void my blog filled for me this week. I was burning to discuss a book and its theme, and got a nice load of comments and feedback.

I'd say pretty much everything I do is motivated to that end: converse and exchange on topics that are valuable and interesting to me, above and beyond mommy stuff because I get that all the time.

I will comment to blogs if I have something to say, even if they never reply to me. Even if they never come to my blog.

But I put my main attention towards people who I know care I am there, not just as a reader in general but as me, Julie.

As such, the comments on my blog matter most, which is good since my daily visit stats are not impressive, LOL.

I don't even understand them, really. There are lots of numbers in two categories. I'd say hitting 100 is a high.

I'm told that's pitiful LOL.

I don't know why that needs to be called pitiful, actually.

I'm just amazed that in two years I went from an audience of nobody to an audience of a 100.

But, of course, I'm human, and every now and again I get my head turned. Somebody gets a paying gig, and I think, "Oh man, I probably need to do something more or better, I probably ought to get paid for all this time I spend."

And everywhere you go the goal of blogging seems to be to Get LOADS OF TRAFFIC! Lots of advertising, posts, messages, etc. all scream that they will teach me how to get more traffic. I've read a few articles, all of which extole the "virtue" of increasing traffic, and then offer a variety of suggestions baout how to do it. I don't ever see anything that different from stuff I already do, so I guess I have a case of "blog infertility" LOL.

Anyway, so my head gets turned. Oh yeah, I'm supposed to be driving traffic.

But I get my head back straight and recall what I'm in this for, and what I get out of it, what I enjoy most.

I do feel loyal towards certain bloggers, and I will invariably make sure to read and post something to them. This isn't obligation so much as a sort of caring.

I tend to post late at night or super early in the morning---that's when I have time. The side benefit to that is I can't worry overmuch about when comments start arriving since I hop up and rush off to the next thing.

I hope this somehow adds to the conversation.

I'm not sure I answered your questions, but hey, more data. :)

Christine said...

Ok, I admit it--the super long and uber-thinky comments here intimidate me.

i will slink away now and check my site meter. . .

(ps great post)

Lindyloo said...

uuuuh... what Christine said.


I started blogging to keep my far away family involved in my life. A few months into blogging when strangers started visiting my blog I would check my stats daily and this urge to comment and try to increase my visitors almost took hold. I had to really step back and remind myself WHY I began to blog. It's for my family and although I love the people I've 'met' and the lovely comments at the end of the day that's just gravy. Does that make sense?

ozma said...

This makes me feel better as I once had a semi-popular blog (like you, I had a smash hit post and then some super hot shot bloggers put me on their blogrolls) and then I abandoned it for paranoid reasons of my own (when I was pregnant, apparently at my most desirable). I usually don't regret it but think about it once in a while just like I think about men I failed to sleep with. It's good to know the whole thing would have gone downhill anyway.

Heh, just kidding.

I blog for community. You know why? Because I'm LONELY. I'm just so sad and lonely.

But I can honestly say I never check my stats. Because the stats don't show love, do they? It's love I want.

gingajoy said...

THE MOTHER OF ALL COMMENTS ON COMMENTS--PROCEED AT OWN RISK:

SM—yes, you’re absolutely right that this is an empirical question. This is definitely something that needs mapping/measuring in some way or form. The challenge is that although it is reasonably simple to map social networks established through links, it is less easy to bring comments into the equation. So this would take some close observation and tracking over time. Not sure if I am up to that task, but it’s definitely an interesting idea.

Misc Mum—I think we’ve all been there. Questioning our place in this whole thing. Wondering why so-and-so has suddenly gone AWOL. I think it’s one side-effects of becoming emotionally invested, methinks. It’s hard not to take this type of thing personally, but as I have tried to explain, at least partially, is that it might be a necessary symptom of how blogging communities actually function and grow—those tight-knit communities change, disperse and evolve over time. Of course, the history of this whole blogging venture is very short, but I think we’re beginning to write some of it already. Tere touched on this very astutely—that a blogger’s position changes and shifts over time, and it’s not just about “moving on” or leaving a community—it’s about how the community itself evolves.

Chani—I think you’ve articulated how a lot of us feel about this, that the personal rewards come from interaction with the community. I know this is the case for me. Nonetheless, blogging occupies an interesting in-between place—as a form of community-building/networking and as a form of publication. While for some bloggers the community dimension of blogging is of primary importance, for many others it is a platform to write and to publish, and the comments and community interaction might be a pleasant bonus. Others, like Lindyloo below, are blogging for other purposes—to reach out to family and friends who are scattered across the globe. Ozma blogs simply to connect with people, period. Our motivations all differ according to our contexts, but as we come together we often try to navigate the norms of that context, and sometimes we encounter differences in expectations.

What all this impresses on me is that we have to be careful about discussing “community norms” (myself, especially) because there are a myriad of contexts for blogging—even “mommyblogging”—that represent differing relationships between blogs, bloggers, and communities. I think we often find that tensions emerge when the differing norms of those various communities of practice do not quite gel or even clash.

Wow. That was a bit of an epiphany for me, so apologies if that comment seems half-baked right now!

Karrie—your dilemma is very similar to mine. As the community grows or shifts, it becomes impossible to keep up, and keep that community healthy and defined, you know? I also think back to my early days as a blogger, and those sometimes failed attempts to make contact, and wonder if someone is now perceiving me in the same way. I can sometimes get quite stressed about it, and this was part of why I decided to stop trying to second-guess commenter/reader expectations. For instance, although you and I do not always comment on each other’s posts, I know that you and I are connected, and I feel reasonably sure you feel the same way!

Julie. 100 is *not* pitiful, and you are right to ask “why do we call that pitful?” I have gone through the same thing. I am pretty sure my blog is about at the same place (although I don’t know. I no longer check stats). When I am more actively blogging and participating in the community, for me conversations like this one are much more rewarding than knowing that I have 10 times more readers who do not interact. Case in point, I write for MamaPop, just a few times a week. It’s a bit of fun, and I like to write observations about Pop Culture. That site gets thousands of readers a day, many of whom read my posts. But I have no clue who they are or what they are getting out of it. I get relatively few comments, and it’s a bit like waving frantically in the dark. I actually find that writing less enjoyable than my personal blog writing that brings in a handful of readers. Mind you, if I was getting any kind of revenue from the MP writing, based on stats, then I might feel very differently. This might be a good question for those money-making gals;-)

This has been an excellent discussion so far--and I feel all glowy and stuff.

mamatulip said...

Really, really great stuff, Joy. And thank you so much for the compliment; coming from you, that's high praise indeed.

I have what I call blogging "spurts". There are times when I crack off post after post of what I feel is great stuff, and somehow I am able to make it to the blogs that I want to read, and am able to comment on them, and life is good. Then there are times when I have a touch of writers block and can't find the time to write my own posts, let alone comment on other people's blogs.

When it's the latter I just kind of push back from the keyboard and regroup. I used to put an enormous amount of pressure on myself to blog EVERY SINGLE DAY and to comment on EVERYONE'S BLOGS all the time, every post. I can't do that. And I really don't think that is what blogging is all about, and it's not why I started blogging in the first place. Many times I have to kind of sit down and have a quick chat with myself: "Well now, MamaT, why did you start doing this? Remember?"

And you know what? This is a completely true statement -- I haven't checked my stats in a long, long time. It's something I just don't do anymore, and it feels good to not do it.

Tere said...

Excellent post, Joy. Have to admit, I saw a lot of myself in what you wrote. I've had days where - for whatever reason, but usually because I've written something that makes me feel naked - I am obsessive about my stats. I'm also obsessive when I write what I consider a "great" post, especially as far as writing quality goes, and the comments section is DEAD.

But with commenting in general - while I'm a big believer in reciprocity (if you comment for the first time, I will definitely visit you), I don't comment unless I feel I have something to say (whether I'm trying to be funny or heartfelt). I don't comment just to indicate I was there, nor do I wish readers do the same with me. There have been readers who've emailed me to share their thoughts, and they've stated they don't comment because they feel they have nothing to say but enjoy reading - I really enjoy that. That's an important part of blogging and community to me.

At the same time, I think it's very nice when a blogger responds to EACH comment (I myself have done that), but don't find it necessary. In other words, if I comment regularly at your blog, I don't care if you don't always address me. I find that sometimes, I have no direct response to a particular comment, and I don't want to be rude and ignore, but I also don't want to say something lame just to say something.

Thinking about your post, my feeling is that if I ever achieve "fame", if I'm ever part of an "in" crowd (whatever the hell that may be!), I want it to be because of my writing, and whatever humanity my readers understand I have. That's it. I'd LOVE thousands of daily hits, I'd LOVE to make money as a blogger or for my blogs to lead to paying writing gigs, but only if it's because my words can make my readers cry or laugh or just have some kind of emotional experience.

I understand really well your feeling about that (I think, anyway!). I've had a couple of posts that've been heavily linked to and has caused traffic spikes, but what I want is to be a good (no, great) writer and for people to come by for that (oh, and thinking I'm a great person and all would be bonus).

Yeah, ultimately, you put it best: I'm in and I'm out and both are o.k.

gingajoy said...

Tere--yep. I'd love all those things too, and especially if it was simply because of the writing, but fact is there is work to to do to get those readers, and reciprocity is a huge factor in this. it's about community, but as misc-mum has said, it's also on some levels about leverage (or what HBM would call social capital).

Mama T. I don't check my stats either. Nope. no sirree. Instead I just go with my gut sense of "who is out there."

(and some of you people are *freaky* ;-)) (in my mind) (just like me)

Mom101 said...

Wow Joy, you said so much of what I've been thinking, only articulately.

One point that I'm not sure has been touched on:

I think the longer you blog and the more blogfriends become realfriends, politeness dissipates and reciprocity diminishes a bit. I know you can always email me an important post and ask for an opinion, even if I neglected to get there myself that day.

Why do we have to be speaking opposite each other, dammit? Is it bad form to sneak out of my own panel?

Her Bad Mother said...

I love you, for realz, yo.

Seriously. It *is* such a difficult and head-twisting set of issues that swirl around the nexus of writing for self, writing for audience and writing for community. I almost never check my stats - and then usually only to see where traffic is coming from. And I certainly don't write posts for the purpose of drawing traffic - nor do I comment for that reason - but I *DO* do both of those things for the purpose of being heard, to engage in conversation, to be *read*. There's a difference there, but I'm not sure how to characterize it.

This is where the difficulty lays: those of us who consider this a forum for *writing* are in it, in some part, for an audience. But we also want the grad seminar experience, the free and open exchange of ideas. What happens when the balance tilts more in one direction than the other? Can one help the tilt? *Should* one avoid the tilt?

I get the sense, in some comments to these discussions, that 'Big Bloggers' have actively pursued some sell-out path, that they sought out and inked the deal with the big studios or record label and now are just pimp-pimp-pimpin'. That they're somehow inauthentic in a way that smaller, 'indie' bloggers are not. Which I disagree with. (And, if you haven't seen it already, you might check out the debate at MetroDad's post on ads on blogs. Dutch raises some good points about this.)

Sometimes, as you say, Joy, a blogger just 'hits it' with a post or with links or something, almost by accident (except not quite, because aren't we always striving to write well, to move our audiences?) This is important - you cared/care about stats and traffic, in the manner of a writer caring about audience, but did you plan this? Did you seek this out? No. You discovered that your voice resonated somewhere, somehow, and people came, and it felt good. There's nothing wrong with that. Chani says that big bloggers have an attitude - but what is that attitude, exactly? Most popular and semi-popular bloggers that I know are beyond grateful that they've had any success at *writing*. (I worry that the accusation of attitude is directed at me, to be honest, because I'm the only one making statements about this stuff.)

I'm not big, but I have a decent amount of traffic, and comments, and I love that, but it's also taken me by surprise. (Not that I haven't sought out audience, but again, are popularity as a blogger and 'audience' the same thing?) And (as we've discussed privately) there've been some costs that I feel keenly - most notably, my inability to stay as connected to as broad a swath of bloggers as I used to. I *do* the best I can to stay connected to my community, but a) that community may not have the same exact boundaries and make-up as somebody else's (which is to say, to someone whose blog I haven't visited, I may seem aloof, but to someone whose blog I follow with any frequency - or, ahem, someone I stalk via text or e-mail - I probably seem quite lovely. Which I actually am.) And b) as Kristen says in support of your thesis, Joy, it's just not possible to stay connected to an infinitely expanding community. Saying 'I don't have time' to respond to every comment is not snottiness - it's fact. It's simply not possible. Really.

(And as Liz says, there's also the interesting side-effect whereby you visit the blogs of your closest friends more intermittently, because you have moved to text and e-mail and telephone and expect to be notified personally of the big news - right, Julie? ;))

Anyhoo. Am more muddled than ever. What was that you said about tits?

thailandchani said...

HBM, the comment was not directed at you specifically. It was directed at those whom I sense have an attitude of superiority, like they don't have to deal with the "little people" any more. I'm not going to cite specific sites because I'm not looking to start a war.

I'm just trying to give an authentic picture of what it's like to be on the other side of that.

If I try to communicate with a blogger, beyond "nice post" or a throwaway statement like that.. kind of like saying "hi" in the hallway, and I get, in essence, "I don't have the time to be bothered with you", it's hurtful.. and insulting. So, yes, I back away.

Just for the record, I haven't tried to communicate with you in that manner ~ so it's not personal at all. :) My interactions with you have been very pleasant ~ and I found you to be a very nice person.


Peace,

~Chani

Julie Pippert said...

HBM I just spit in my french vanilla latte so thanks a lot dude! I work really hard to stir that fake powder stuff into boiling water!

Tits! I am so junior high.

First, if the "syndicated" and "indie" blogger thing was from me to Tere...that wasn't meant as any kind of judgment...that was just me defining the categories.

Ones I think it is important to consider.

People who are paid, syndicated bloggers for profit sites work off of assignments, within parameters, for specific purposes of driving traffic, etc. <---Statement of fact, not judgment

This affects not only what they write about but also how they write about it.

It's in the genre of journalism.

Indie bloggers might earn profits, but work within their own personal guidelines and parameters, for their own purposes. <--- Statement of fact, not judgment.

Earning money or saying we need to keep in mind the goal isn't intended to imply a negative judgment a la sell out.

But! It's disingenuous to pretend that blogging as a business is the same thing as say joe blow chronicaling his adventures in fatherhood.

If a blogger reviews a product that they (a) received for free and (b) are being paid to endorse, it doesn't mean they are inauthentic, but it is coming from a different place than say the time I plugged a product I really liked (but had no contact with the company).

I don't dismiss it, but it is a point to ponder.

KWIM?

I have Google ads on my site. They've earned me enough to oh maybe get something off the dollar value menu at McDs for the family. ;) But I fully and freely confess they are there in the hopes of earning something. I know it's controversial with some...some have said it's a turn off, ruins the purity of intent.

But I don't write to top search terms, don't plan my posts around hit traffic, don't even add those tech tags any more.

It's a matter of priorities.

If I were to add in a judgment, then what I'm saying, and what I think others *might* be saying is that we can all tell when it is genuine and when it is too interested, KWIM?

Some bloggers do have pay per view articles, do post daily about things that earn for them, are heavily ad-ed on their sites, etc.

So we might not be talking about the same blogs.

I'm not surprised by your success, Catherine. You are a great writer, come up with a good balance of topics all of which are interesting and appealing to a broad spectrum, and more than that, you are a community builder.

Again, I'm afraid that sounds too deconstructionist and thus judgmental, but it's actually a compliment, just a specific one.

My concern with paid blogging is the elitist hierarchy it constructs, especially because so many of those same voices are repeated throughout similar genre-d sites. As if these voices can and should speak for us all.

With all the movement to try to restrict Internet and blogging freedom right now, I'm afraid of marginalization.

This comes from history. Once upon a time, ParentsPlace was a free place: free to go to, free exchange, free everything. iVillage bought it and slowly but surely...the freedom was curtailed. The goal wasn't community and gathering, but profitability. Things went from deep and meaningful to quick sharp soundbites. Instead of the posters feeding the site, the site starting spoon feeding the posters.

See what I mean?

This is me being redundant out of my exclusionary blogosphere post be eh, at least I'm consistent, right? LOL

So yes, I don't blame them---I'd take money if I had the chance---but I have watched some bloggers go from one individual voice to a real marketing style of writing, because their goal in that post is to sell readers on something, to earn.

I am, as a business person, a big fan of viral marketing.

Conversely and hypocritically, I was LIVID when this dude called me, pretending to be some poor college student a friend of mine suggested, acting like he wanted some business mentoring, and then snowing me with a sales pitch when I gave home some of my valuable time.

Don't pretend to be my bud in order to sell me shit. I will put bad juju on you.

Perhaps it is the honesty factor.

Be upfront about your goals. I prefer it when people do that. I do.

HBM, your first para in comment? AWESOME. That's it, exactly.

Julie Pippert said...

P.S. I just awarded this site and its contributors the Blogging Community Involvement Award...details at ym place. :)

Julie Pippert said...

P.S. Catherine, uhh to be clear, because I offered the compliment, I don't want it to seem like I'm saying "well ya big sell out I like ya anywho!"

Uhh not the intention.

I don't actually read or fave anybody who I think poorly of, LOL.

And I don't equate big with any attitude; I think that's individual. I also don't equate big with any sort of popularity contest in the way of meaning "get something you don't really deserve-high school" sort of way.

Am I digging myself in deeper? Somebody help me.

It's not an us versus them, it's not! I mean nothing mean, honest!

Roses! Kittens! Gift-wrapped packages! Hallmark cards! Going to my happy place now...

thailandchani said...

I don't think anyone can equate big with attitude in all situations. Nothing is ever that black or white. At the same time, some of the big bloggers have attitude. As Julie said, it's individual.

And I have the right to vote with my feet. Or my mouse, as the case may be.

My intent in bringing that up wasn't to create any sort of defensiveness on anyone's part... just to add it into the discussion mix. :)

Mad Hatter said...

One of the things that I find weird is that if I write about blogging, my stats soar. If I write about other gunk, they balance out. I am perplexed by the degree that we bloggers love to navel-gaze this medium. I guess it's because it is the one thing that we all have in common. I must admit, though, that I have been consciously retreating from meta-blogging for some time now in favour of other, more personal issues.

I realize this has nothing to do with your most excellent post (and if you want your stats to soar, try embedding a picture of Britney's chooch in a blog post. Oh my).

Her Bad Mother said...

Julie, totally get where you're coming from. You too, Chani. I'm a bit sensitive, because I *have* been accused of selling out (to be more specific, I was called a sell-out and a 'tool of the patriarchy' for praising Gloria Steinem after I did a phone interview with her.)

My point is simply that the lines are very, very difficult to draw. I, too, dislike Pay-Per-Post and flash ads and in-text pop-up ads - but I really try to be careful about judging that stuff. It's a point of privilege to be able to say, 'oh, my writing is my own, it's folk art, I refuse to sell it.' Because the time and technology and literacy and will to write that are required don't come free. For many people, those ads or reviews or whatevers enable them to pay for childcare, or tech support, or banner design. Or, simply to stay at home with their kids. I can't judge that.

Historically, *all* art, philosophy and literature has required patronage of some sort - from an aristocracy or from corporations or from governments. (Unless, that is, you were Diogenes Laertius, and you made a philosophical point out of sleeping in your own feces.) Whether poetry or needlepoint - only the leisured class has ever been free to pursue art as hobby. Everyone else shills.

I'm terrifically fortunate to be able to glean some income from blogging, so that I can stay home part-time, and so that I can pursue my dream of writing. I'm picky about advertising (would rather cut off my arm than do PayPerPost), but I *must* recognize that I'm lucky to be able to be picky and still help pay the bills.

I've lost the thread of the original conversation, I think. Someone, please, throw me another line about tits so that I can crack wise and then slip away unnoticed while you all giggle.

Julie Pippert said...

Catherine, here...look trail of breadcrumbs. . . . . .

;)

Listen, seriously? I keep looking for opportunities and just got thrown one. I'm not going to cut up judgmental.

I am behind people earning their keep. I aim to be one.

Here's a distinction I am pondering:

What You Do On Your Own Site (for example, indie)

and

What You Do On Someone Else's Site (for example, syndicated)

With the latter, there is suddenly a gatekeeper between me and the content.

The gatekeeper chooses who I read, the tone, the contest, etc.

The content often becomes instructional: here's how you ought to live, what you ought to buy, how you ought to go about and do things, how and what you ought to think, etc.

Again, there isn't a judgment here.

Here's the judgment: I prefer to be my own gatekeeper.

If we become a model that the profit is solely by working through someone else at their site versus being able to profit independently, then I get a little worried.

It's true, you guessed right: I don't tend to read magazines, especially ones for women. I don't care to be told how to keep up and do it the way all of Them do it.

Her Bad Mother said...

I agree totally, Julie, about the benefit of remaining one's own gatekeeper - ownership of the means of production and all that. But, but - is this just a matter of the material or something more. I don't read Parent magazine, but I do read Brain, Child and WonderTime. Where the content is controlled just as much as it is on ClubMom or in Parent Magazine, but according to different terms. (Similarly, I don't read Glamour Mag, but I do read the New Yorker. Both are owned by Conde Nast.) Are the writers for the sites or mags that I disdain lesser writers for being published in those places? Or is the content (this is subjective of course) lesser?

I just don't think that a blogger who professionalizes by writing on the side for an established site is any more a sell-out than a writer who sets aside his personal journal sometimes to write for the New Yorker. Or maybe they're equally sell-outs, and it's just that I don't have a problem with that. Or only a selective problem with that.

(Or are we not talking about paying gigs on the side? Blogs that are entirely syndicated are, to my knowledge, pretty rare, especially in the momosphere.)

Where was I again?

thailandchani said...

"Sell-out" is a rather cruel and crude term.. and I'm not sure it could possibly apply to something like blogging, unless someone is scamming or spamming.

HBM, you really owe no explanations to anyone for your choices. It sounds to me like you are very mindful about what you take in... That is what this is supposed to be about (no matter what anyone said about your interviewing Gloria Steinem. Crikey! Sometimes I think women alienate other women more than any man could ever hope to do) is choice and responsibility.

I'm not meaning to sound so stinkingly libertarian about the whole thing but the bottom line is that I am smart enough to recognize when I'm being "marketed to" and when someone is trying to sell me something, whether it's a product or an idea, for their own self-interest.

I see it. I walk. It's that simple really.

But I don't begrudge anyone the right to do it. If you are able to stay home with your kids as a result of it, how can that be anything but a plus?

For a variety of reasons, I have chosen to not do it.. because I am a purist when it comes to my right to use my voice. I have a prejudice about commerce. Can't even be around it without becoming psychically ill. That's just me. My stuff. I don't want constraints on what I can talk about.. or to whom. And, truthfully, my blog is so small that I wouldn't make anything anyway.


Peace,

~Chani

Her Bad Mother said...

Thank you for that, Chani. Peace back to you. xo

Julie Pippert said...

Catherine,

Ahhh sigh this is where I hit the written medium limitation. This would be much easier as a conversation. Guess I will have to move to Toronto (you see, I'm such a slut...I will move anywhere). ;)

We aren't, or rather, I'm not talking about paid side gigs.

If a blogger has a paid gig, I say YOU GO GIRL! and give them high fives.

And seriously---there is no position of "sell out" in my posts or opinion.

Honest.

I don't think right now I can explain any better the rest of it, the why.

But I want you to understand that

(a) this isn't about you specifically in any way (and bad juju to rude trolls),

(b) I support earning from blogging,

(c) I usually avoid eZines, but for personal reasons (typically b/c of content, typically b/c most aimed at women and moms instruct rather than inform, or use fear factor) (and that's fine, a lot of people want and like that, not me, so I'm not there, but that's doesn't mean a bad or wrong thing with me or the eZine)

(d) I don't think one's blog and one's job have much to do with one another (at least not how you were saying)

(e) I read intelligently, with a question mark in mind, and an idea of context and agenda---which gives context to what has been written. Please know that 'context' doesn't imply a negative value judgment.

I assume people keep my context in mind when they read me, too.

In all sincerity I'm sure everyone here is mindful enough to not worry.

And I'm sorry my comments came across judgmental and accusatory. I tried not to do that; I'll try harder next time. Honesty and opinions don't need to be like that.

Moondance said...

When HBM said:
"Whether poetry or needlepoint - only the leisured class has ever been free to pursue art as hobby. Everyone else shills," it rather changed the way I was looking at the issue.

I do still think of the progression from folksy blogger to paid writer as sometimes taking on the characteristics of someone whose social interactions have the purpose of inviting you to a Tupperware party, not just the pleasure of your company. But really, it all has to do with honesty. If someone fools me into thinking this is a blog for fun or self discovery, and than it turns out you only want me to read to increase your stats so you can turn that around into some kind of commercial enterprise, I don't like it because I feel used and lied to. But if I happen upon a blog supported by ads, it may affect the aesthetics of the page, but not my appreciation of the writing.

Going back to HBM’s observation, once you remove the bad feeling of being taken advantage of, if I come upon a blogger who does this for a living, I must expect that she is writing with an eye to whatever limitations or extra obligations that puts on her. But it does not have to affect the quality or the integrity of the work. For example, think of what you do for a living (or what you would do, if you had to work to pay the rent). A large part of my job is writing, and the attention, pride and care I put into that writing is not diminished by the fact that I get a paycheck at the end of the week for producing those documents. In fact, I obsess over the quality significantly more than those who read them. Of course, I sought this career specifically BECAUSE it involved so much writing and it’s what I enjoy.

The art, the skill, and the process of writing is not diminished by being paid for. Is the poem written by the amateur to his wife more beautiful, more honest, than a poem written by a paid writer and sung as a song for profit? If it is, it’s not BECAUSE it was written with no profit motive.

So, does anyone else feel this distaste for certain types of blogs or blogger decisions relates to feeling “tricked” rather than the inherent value of paid writing?

Mom101 said...

Chani, Just another (admittedly non-academic--man, you women and your big words!) point of view on reciprocal commenting:

As someone who's not necessarily a "big blogger" but on occasion gets upwards of 75 comments, it is physically impossible for me to comment back at every person's blog. I tried to do it in the earlier days and it damn near killed me.

But that's not to say that my commenters are anonymous nothings who I'd smack on the back of the head with my book bag as they passed me in the hall after English class. I know every name. I know most of their blogs. If I see a new name, I absolutely recognize it. The lack of reciprocity on my part has nothing to do with attitude and everything to do with time.

I can understand why that might be offputting if you're here to make friends above all. But I'd hate to think that any of my readers took it as a slight. Or that they'd stop reading something (not necessarily me) that they enjoyed just because the writer didn't comment back.

I've been reading David Sedaris for years and has the guy given me one iota of love in return? Nope. But I'm still hoping...

thailandchani said...

Mom101, thanks for your perspective. :)

I'm not in the blogging thing strictly for making friends, but I am in it for the exchange of ideas.

Maybe that's why mine is rather small and I don't do much to "promote" it, outside of being on some webrings and a few blogrolls. (Neither of which have particularly increased my traffic, btw)

The whole idea of "blog" is rather foreign to me, as I consider mine to be a forum. It's an exchange of ideas in the most wonderful sense.. and the commenters at my site are honest and open, stating their opinions whether they disagree with me or not. There is learning and growing going on in all corners of this. I value them very much and I think they know that.

It sounds like a simple difference in focus maybe?

While I understand what you are saying intellectually, it just doesn't resonate for me. No judgments inherent in my statement.. but I just like accessibility, I guess.

:)


Peace,

~Chani

gingajoy said...

Moondance--you ask *the* questions about authenticity and trust that seem to be at the heart of all this. Worthy of a post of its own, certainly. It is an issue we have on our list, and I think you frame it so very well here.

An invitation to any of our worthy commenters: we would love to post anything you write on the issues raised here, if you are so inclined.

Snoskred said...

I'm not sure why everyone seems to be assuming that those who write paid ads puts limits or expectations on a blogger. My inclination is to say to anyone who thinks that - you could go and sign up for a couple of these things so you can see exactly what is involved - signing up for payperpost for example, does not obligate you to participate or make paid posts or put anything on your blog. You can see exactly what is involved in the process - and then judge it accordingly.

I know many bloggers are giving them a bit of a bad name because they switch from decent bloggers to blogging about products only - but it doesn't mean that has to be the case on *your* blog if you join it. My opinion is as long as you balance the paid things with decent content that your readers enjoy, nobody's going to mind too much.

Yes, some of the advertisers on sponsored review sites do only want positive reviews - and you as a blogger can choose not to do those reviews where you're not allowed to say what you really think, and there are advertisers who will accept either positive or negative reviews - so you're free to express your real view.

Yes, there is money to be made from blogging. Text Link Ads is probably the easiest and most pain free option - it is simply text ads you put in your sidebar. They are not pay per click, you are paid a set rate per link - which text link ads will agree on with you before they sell any of your links. They don't constrain you in any way as a blogger that I'm aware of. I still swear, etc. ;) well not as much, but that is because I'm trying to be a better girl and nothing to do with ads.

I guess this comment is a little off the topic here - I just wanted to say that in my experience I have not found that they put limits or expectations or constraints on you.

Snoskred
http://www.snoskred.org/

Jennifer said...

Hattie at Mother Pie did a rather significant research study on this very topic, vis a vis female bloggers specifically. It was quite thorough and quite interesting. The link is here. I think you'd enjoy reading it.

Tere said...

To address some of what Moondance wrote -- I agree about the honesty factor. That's what it boils down to me.

I don't care about a blogger having ads or getting paid to blog on corporate sites (I got my current "real life" job because the owners knew I was a blogger and am the company's official blogger) or anything profit-related.

But there ARE bloggers you do as Moondance said and who are in reality looking for stats and looking to turn their blogs into commercial ventures. All that Moondance wrote about that (to not repeat it) - I agree with. I've seen it and I've felt it; and yeah, it sucks and I just never go back.

Izzy said...

I always feel so dumb in the presence of such fabulously intellectual discussions and thus, maybe I don't have much to add other than my own personal observations but there have been some amazing points raised in this post and in the subsequent comments and I thank you all for feeling free to discuss these topics.

In many ways, in the general community, it's almost like discussing money in terms of feeling like it's an inappropriate group of things to be bringing up but I find this kind of meta-talk fascinating.

I don't know where I fall in terms of blogger status but I do know that, sadly, people I consider friends don't come around as often as they used to. But then again, my commenting has dropped off some as well, simply from sheer exhaustion as my list of reads grows longer and longer.

As for comments, I appreciate every single one I get even if I don't always have the ability to personally reply, comment back or visit that blogger regularly. I hope that's not regarded as me being too big for my britches or something because anyone who knows me knows I'm not. I f anything my britches are too big for me...lol.

But yes, as the community grows, it seems harder and harder to connect with people on a personal level and I do find that regrettable because while writing is fun for me, I cherish the sense of being part of a community much more.

Geez...I really carried on here.

I hope I at least said something useful and not just a bunch of meta diarrhea of the keyboard!

Tere said...

Izzy, so glad you added your thoughts!

I think many of us have faced or are facing that dilemma of "my reading list is growing so long, it's affecting my ability to comment and participate". I myself am trying to come up with some sort of schedule so that I can read everyone, participate, and still have a life (or at least, not abandon my child to Teletubbies and Barney playing on a loop).

I can all but guarantee a nice, big post on this topic from any one of us will eventually come up here...