Kent Newsome on technology, music and life

8/04/2006


Blogger's Challenge: Who Do You Write For?

Who are we, as bloggers, really writing for? Have you ever asked yourself that question?

I've been thinking about that a lot lately.

The knee-jerk answer, of course, is that different people write for different reasons. Some write for their real world customers. Some write to attract eyeballs attached to fingers that might click on an ad. Some write as a way to market their online products. Some write for themselves. Etc. Etc.

But I am asking the question at a more fundamental level.

Who are the readers of our blogs? Not the intended audience. The actual audience.

Who do we really write for?

My answer: mostly for each other.

I'm just not convinced that blogs have much penetration into the general reading population. Stated another way, I suspect that the large, large majority of readers of any blog, save and except the TechCrunches and Techdirts of the world, are other bloggers and maybe the occasional relative or curious friend.

Even the mega-blogs, whose traffic the rest of us stare at in jealous disbelief, have subscriber numbers in the tens of thousands. TechCrunch has 92,854 subscribers. That's an incredible number until you consider the fact that there are 300 million people in the US and 6.5 billion worldwide. In context, even TechCrunch's penetration into the real world is less than insignificant. The New York Times and the Wall Street Journal have circulation numbers in excess of 2 million, and that doesn't count tons of people like me who read those papers online or who grab a colleague's copy after he or she is done with it.

The number of bloggers competing for attention makes it seem like the blogosphere is a huge, chaotic place. But it only seems that way because we have all ended up in a small room at the end of the hall. When people refuse to converse with me or go out of their way to link around me, it hurts a little. Until I remember that while they aren't listening to me, no one in the real world is listening to them either.

I have been told by a couple of buddies in old media that old media tech writers tend to write for each other as well, so my theory is not limited exclusively to bloggers.

But the more I think about it, I think most bloggers write primarily for each other.

Don't get me wrong- I enjoy writing. But sometimes it feels vaguely depressing to write something, put it up and wait anxiously for someone to reply via comment or link.

The problem, it seems to me, is that we often overstate the interactive nature of the blogosphere. Sure, blogs are somewhat interactive, but there is still an effort hurdle to be crossed to converse. You have to invest the time and effort to make a comment or write a responsive post. And with everyone talking at once, a lot of things get lost in the static.

And, of course, the rock stars who refuse to have cross-blog conversations with anyone other than other perceived rock stars make blogs seem even less interactive (and more silly) than they really are.

The whole system just seems really inefficient to me.

Which is why we need to ask ourselves why we write and who we are writing for.

So here's my challenge. Write a paragraph that explains why you write a blog and who you write for. Think about it for a moment first. And be honest. I'll compile a list (with links), and we'll see if there are any patterns. Maybe we'll learn something.

Here's mine (I trashed and completely rewrote the following paragraph four times):

I write as an outlet for the creative energy that I used to use writing songs, and to initiate conversation with people who share interests of mine that are not generally shared by my real world friends. I write because I like to build things and to see if I can become meaningful in an area other than the one in which I make my living. Fundamentally, I write for the people who will allow me to become part of their conversations, either because they like what I have to say or because they are willing to try to change my mind. And, to be honest, I write to show some of the people who believe they are tech stars that some middle aged ex-farmer from Texas can compete with them on their field, on their terms- and win.

Tags: , ,
Posted by Kent @ 8/04/2006 09:05:00 PM | Permalink

Submit to: Digg | Netscape | Reddit | Tailrank
Bookmark on: Del.icio.us | Furl | Ma.gnolia
Reactions: 10 Comments | Post a Comment | Inbound Links

10 Comment(s):

I write for those 10 or 13 people who come in and look at every post I write and the other former students, or attendees of one of my seminars, or someone else who stumbles through the internet searching desparately for real-world info on landscape design as a profession. Anything but another "garden" blog and how are my petunia's doing.

I've no illusions on "large" numbers but as long as there are those looking I will continue to pass along what I know-such is my passion for my most mis-understood profession.

1 day, 1 reader at a time.

btw your stuff is good, you care and it shows, keep it up.

By Blogger Rick Anderson, at 8/05/2006 12:32 AM  
**************************

The last time I wrote a reply to such a question was:

http://sandhill.typepad.com/sandhill_trek/2004/11/why_do_we_blog.html

[begin old answer]

Short Answer: "To be heard"

In my view, there are three regimes, roughly: One, few, many.

"One" == Diaries. Some people keep their diary on-line, and don't mind if others read it.

"Few" == Socializing, chatting. The intended audience is close friends, and events only of interest to that circle.

"Many" == Punditry. The goal is to reach as many people as possible with your ideas.

These categories aren't strict walls, but are general aims.

Some blog evangelists are (local) celebrites who find that a huge number of people are interested in the evangelist's diary and chat, so the evangelist gets the silly idea that diary and chat will revolutize society ("Emergent Blatherocracy"). The evangelist then has an annoying tendency to tell the unsuccessful pundits to be happy to write diary and chat.

The lovers of diary and chat think the wannabe pundits are ruining the neighborhood, commercializing the pure art.

It's all as varied as any other writing and art/commerce differences.
[end old answer]

To be more personal here, I wrote because:

1) I was suckered into the idea that blogs were a way to "route around" media power, and to be HEARD.

2) I had delusions of influence.

3) The random-payoff of attention makes it seem far more effective than it actually is.

4) It's painful to admit that you've wasted so much time and effort and pretty much nobody is listening.

Blog evangelism is very cruel, as it preys on people's frustrated hopes and dreams.

My blog is read by a few dozen fans, and, inversely, some "opposition researchers". I've come close to shutting it down at times, and will finally reach the breaking-point eventually.

By Blogger Seth Finkelstein, at 8/05/2006 1:10 PM  
**************************

It's a terrific question. My colleague and I started TheGoodBlogs to solve this precise problem. I think waiting for someone to pick up your post because they found you at Google is a long shot. The only way to solve 'the long tail' is to get the long tailers to promote each other through their blogs. It's beta so there's much to do, but you can bet our hearts are in the right place, with the blogger. Love to get your feedback.

By Anonymous The Idea Dude, at 8/16/2006 9:07 AM  
**************************

I write to get the ideas out of my head. I write on a blog so that my friends can read those ideas. I write on a public blog so people I don't know can read those ideas, and become one of those friends.

By Blogger JJeffryes, at 8/16/2006 2:42 PM  
**************************

I'd like to think I'm writing for the community in which i'm interested. I know that 99% of that community don't read my stuff but then I've only ever been interested in attracting the 1% who care enough to find out what people like mmyself have to say,

The reality is that a group of may 300 turn up regular every days, a fraction of them comment, a few send me emails asking questions and in recent times some of them have picked up the phone to ask questions or talk to me about something I've said.

That's progress, one link at a time.

By Blogger Dennis Howlett, at 8/17/2006 12:01 AM  
**************************

I have a political blog dedicated to local and regional issues and perspectives. I'm relentlessly partisan. I help raise funds for candidates and whip up volunteers for their campaigns. I shout out what I think and feel, and I do so to alert others to what some reg'lar folks are thinking and doing. I spin. I want to change the world by speaking to it.

My primary audience are reporters, political bloggers, politicians and their staff, and political junkies. I don't believe I'm writing to the wide world, but I am speaking to the people who are. I've got around 100-200 readers a day, but I've been quoted in the WaPo and the National Journal, and might be appearing on PBS' "NOW."

I believe blogs add to traditional media, not replace or circumvent the old order. I think they're effective, but not as much as some think...I also think their effectiveness will be short-lived as corporate blogs, astro-turfers, and professionals will overwhelm the amateurs...

By Anonymous Jay Stevens, at 8/17/2006 6:31 PM  
**************************

lots of us read, lots and lots, and we almost never comment.

By Anonymous lindiana0, at 8/17/2006 8:37 PM  
**************************

There are only so many people you can have interactive, meaningful communications with, right? And isn't that one of the key things about blogging - the interactivity? 10-13 sounds about right . . . but, because it is so easy to just pop in on a complete stranger and read about their life, and it is also so very easy to follow links and land on the blog of someone who shares somewhat similar interests - it is so tempting to seek out new blogs. So you let your existing 'blog relationships' go. . . . Sorry for the wordy comment, I just happened to be pondering the same subject today.

By Blogger Bobby, at 8/26/2006 6:28 PM  
**************************

I've stumbled into the discussion late from a post I read from Nick Carr.

I'm not sure that what I do is blog, but if you have a website that you keep for personal reasons, it tends to be called a blog nowadays. So, I'll try not to get mired down in semantics.

I write for myself.

1.) To record something that I find useful and may need in the future. So far, html has survived more platform changes than any other format. As a corollary, the things I find useful, others tend to find useful as well.

2.) To clarify why I believe in something, for myself. I've found that writing something and posting it for the world to ridicule either changes my mind or cements it firmly in place.

3.) As a research tool If you want to learn how to do something, try to teach it to others. The experts will instantly swoop down and correct your mistakes, plus it gives you a better understanding of the material by forcing you to explain the topic in the simplest terms possible.

Probably 60% of my daily traffic is from Google and it's all going to reference material I generated from #1. I write about once a month if I'm lucky, and I get around 300 uniques a day.

Honestly, what do you hope to accomplish from blogging? That this will be your only job? An additional revenue stream? Beautiful women throwing little pickles at you?

By Anonymous Phil McClure, at 9/24/2006 5:23 AM  
**************************

I write in the earnest hope that one day this will be my only job, providing a generous revenue stream, and that eventually beautiful women may indeed throw little pickles at me.

In the meantime I write because it's something I can do, alongside so many other things that are beyond my reach. It's a form of therapy.

By Blogger hj, at 10/05/2006 2:57 PM  
**************************

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link
DISCLAIMER
Newsome.Org, Kent's blog and the related pages and content are solely the thoughts and opinions of Kent Newsome in his personal capacity and are not associated with any other person or entity, including, without limitation, any partnership or other business entity Kent may now or hereafter be associated with.