>> ATDT DEMODULATED.COM 2400 BAUD 8N1 OK <<

However you’re blogging, it’s wrong

Writing | Tuesday, April 10th, 2007 | 10 years, 4 months ago

Last year, when I’d only been blogging for a few months, a friend of mine IMed me saying that he was interested in starting his own blog. I was only too happy to bombard him with handy tips and tricks I’d learned about formatting pages, organizing archives, search engine optimisation, and other tidbits, to which he replied with the textual equivalent of a one-finger salute. I told him it was his site to do with as he pleased, and he reasserted his agreement with this. Shortly thereafter, he added this text to the bottom of his site:

If you have any suggestions for my blog, please mail them to SHUT THE FUCK UP c/o GO TO HELL. I’ve had too many people tell me what I “should do.”

Little did I know at the time that this would be the best advice on blogging I’d ever receive, and the guy hadn’t even written his first entry!

I’ve been reminded of this prophetic advice a few times in the past week while reading and vehemently disagreeing with various lists defining blogs and best practices.

The first such list, entitled 10 Things Your Blogger Won’t Tell You, comes to us care of SmartMoney.com which was a hint of idiosyncrasy right off the bat. The list is comprised of outlandish generalisations, any one of which would surely turn away prospective readers after one visit. I’d like to rebut some of the more glaring beFUDdlements:

1. Hardly anybody reads me.

And? All the bloggers I read address their audiences and even answer some questions, but largely they write about themselves as they see fit. Personally, I keep an eye on my Google Analytics statistics, but I see this as a separate matter of server administration. I relish comments, but continue writing when I don’t receive any. I more often will ask myself a question than ask my readers one. Bloggers won’t tell you that no one is reading because it is a given, and is irrelevant. If you’re blogging for anyone but yourself you have already failed.

3. Did I mention I’m not a real reporter?

The text accompanying this point pigeonholes blogging as a poor man’s substitute for accredited (thus, infallible) news media. Give me a break. The gut reaction of the general populace to world-changing events IS news. Reporting from the trenches by the people themselves, not a homogenized commercial-break-friendly TV spot, is the wave of the future. Which is more poignant – the 30 second newsreel stating 100,000 people were killed in a tsunami, or the 3000 word essay written by an orphaned teen in a small affected village?

4. I might infect your computer with a virus.

Cheeses n’ rice, kindly fellate the nearest tuber or squash. I suppose what the author was trying to convey here was the fact that there are many advertisement websites hosted on blog platforms like Blogger which offer no value to readers and exist only to trick people into clicking a pay-per-click site. The only thing this has to do with blogging is the publishing platform. I don’t think I’ve seen a virus on a web page in a decade.

The rest of this list really isn’t worth glorifying with criticism. It’s reflective of the typical tiny plea coming from traditional mainstream media outlets too stubborn to change with the world they’re supposed to be the authority on.

The other list I’d like to comment on is by a hugely respected name in publishing and technical communication, Tim O’Reilly. His list is a Draft Blogger’s Code of Conduct. I suspect such a code is in response not to the needs of bloggers, but to those who criticise them. This is a wooden fire escape, in my opinion, since “blog” is a squiggly-defined term to begin with. Here are some of the points I take exception with:

2. We won’t say anything online that we wouldn’t say in person.

Why? Isn’t that kind of the point? (not to do so, but to be free to do so) I’m pretty sure the above statement is true of my blog, but I defend the freedom to do otherwise.

4. When we believe someone is unfairly attacking another, we take action.

If that action is to thrust with our pens then I agree. Otherwise, who is “we”? What is the consolidation between bloggers? I don’t think I’m in the minority of bloggers for having a self-centred blog. If a blogger I read is insulted, and this, in turn, insults me, then I will attack with my +2 verbiage of scathing. Otherwise, good luck buddy.

5. We do not allow anonymous comments.

Two words on this proposal – FUCK THAT. The real power of blogs is that they are portal to the human being who offers the content. A door is a better portal than a window. By default WordPress requires an email address from commenters, but I disabled this. The internet is all about freedom, and I want to assist people in choosing their degree of anonymity. Net neutrality encompasses more than bandwidth allotment.

Blogs are not mass-produced widgets that come in a plastic vending machine egg. Blogs are different things to different people. That’s the real power. You can make a blog designed for daily ranting, product placement, customer support, organizational planning, document storage, radio show playlists, a public calendar, communicating with employees, or whatever else you can dream up. Why limit this? Why impose guidelines? Why craft one size of reins when you don’t even know which animal will be pulling?

Thanks to James for teaching me this.

–edit–

I just read this post on Matt Cutts’ blog and thought it was a great follow-up on my comments. It’s short and sweet, plus it has a picture of his cute kitty, so check it out. His is one of my favourite blogs so be sure to bookmark it!

>> ATH0 -- NO CARRIER <<



12 Comments

  1. What? No credit for giving you adequate fodder for a day?

    Comment by Bianca — April 10, 2007 @ 1:39 pm

  2. BIG thanks to Bianca for sending me Tim O’Reilly’s draft. Read Bianca’s blog at http://whining.weaselhut.net

    Comment by brian — April 10, 2007 @ 1:56 pm

  3. Brian,

    I enjoyed your comment. I agree that blogs are a “portal to the human being who offers the content,” and that’s why they vary so much, have individual style, and defy guidelines. Blogs should reflect the individual qualities of the writer.

    I also think there are some tried-and-true principles for the form that increase reading pleasure. As a reader of your site, I want information. But I don’t want it in one long paragraph, so you chunk it up with subheadings. I want to read more of what you’ve written on a topic, so you supply related entries. I want to see who you are, so you offer an About page.

    Sure you can disregard the reader’s desires, but one main reason for blogging is the interaction with others, getting feedback, participating in a networked conversation, engaging in information sharing. Some may not have this in mind, sure, but I’d say most of us like to read and be read. Hence my attempt to offer some guidelines for usability when it comes to blogs.

    I really enjoyed your viewpoint on my post and this topic in general, because yours is a significant point, and you add more depth and interest to the discussion. Thanks!

    Tom

    Comment by Tom Johnson — April 11, 2007 @ 9:13 pm

  4. I never really thought of it as disregarding the readers’ desires. That’s a pretty blunt way to put it and I think you’re correct. I think articles like the ones I link in my post have put me on the defensive as they tend to address the blogger more than the readers.

    Your more practical list of best practises and particularly this comment you’ve left me have reminded me not to forget the little people. Thanks for writing, Tom!

    For reference, here is a link to Tom’s list of usability tips for bloggers. I wish I’d read this before writing about this topic.

    http://www.idratherbewriting.com/2007/04/09/twenty-usability-tips-for-your-blog-%e2%80%94-condensed-from-dozens-of-bloggers-experiences/

    Comment by brian — April 12, 2007 @ 8:10 am

  5. Bahaha. I was ahead of my time.

    In a time period of about 6 hours I was /TOLD/ how to run my site by several people. I realize people are passionate about it, but some people got down right bossy. No Brian wasn’t one of the bossy ones and the response wasnt directed at him but I’m sure my reaction may have seemed that way.

    Comment by James — April 17, 2007 @ 11:41 am

  6. I seem to recall advising what you “should” do more than what you “could” do. But whatever.

    That being said, you “SHOULD” be updating more often! You’re on my list of blog links and your absenteeism is making me look like a jackass, jackass.

    Comment by brian — April 17, 2007 @ 12:56 pm

  7. how DID you get such a high ranking in google search results anyway?

    Comment by mick — April 18, 2007 @ 5:45 pm

  8. Did I? Depends on the keywords you query I suppose. Google works in mysterious ways!

    Comment by brian — April 18, 2007 @ 6:32 pm

  9. yeah i can’t remember what i searched for, but it was way up there :)

    Comment by mick — April 19, 2007 @ 4:02 pm

  10. I’m actually kind of surprised that I make it on Google whatsoever. I write this blog for myself, really, and I enjoy writing “witty”, non-descriptive titles that are not at all search engine-optimised. I even had a low PageRank of 3/10 last I checked. It’s really interesting to see that some of my articles are deemed relevant.

    I do, however, use a WordPress plugin that automatically generates a Google SiteMap which is an XML file containing links to every page on this blog, to be submitted to Google every so often. I suppose that helps make Google aware of my articles, though I doubt it effects relevance.

    Comment by brian — April 19, 2007 @ 4:21 pm

  11. Your site is perfect!

    Comment by Anne — May 12, 2007 @ 10:14 am

  12. Perfectly what?

    Comment by brian — May 12, 2007 @ 1:19 pm

RSS feed for comments on this post.

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.

Powered by WordPress | Theme by Roy Tanck | Customized by Brian Damage

-->