I've been putting off checking Google Reader simply because of the fact that I haven't been checking it. I didn't want to have to sift through post after post after post. But today I realized that the longer I wait, the more posts I'm going to have to endure, so I might as well get it over with.
After I narrowed down 208 new items to about 20 that I actually thoroughly read, I had a realization about blogging. I've always heard that the more you post, the better your blog simply because shorter, more frequent posts attract more readers. It makes sense, and I've always kept that in mind in regard to my blog. I try to post every day, but it's been over a week since my last entry, and I admit I felt a little inadequate and nervous about not being on top of things.
Well, I knew I wasn't going to read every single one of the 200+ items on my Reader, so I went to the blogs that I value most. Later, I realized that I was more likely to read posts by people who blog less frequently than Romenesko-type blogs.
I knew that whatever I read at yelvington.com or Teaching Online Journalism would be well thought-out, original, personal and relevant to me and my interests. Those are the things that I value in blogs. Yes, Romenesko and Twitter are good for short snippets of information and breaking news. I get much of my information and ammunition from sources like those. However, when it comes to the goals that I hope to accomplish with my blog and what I'm interested in reading on others' blogs, I strike a chord with blogs with less-frequent entries and analysis of some sort.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
2 comments:
There are negative traits to the nature of blogs if one is to assess content quality. For the publisher, the urge to provide the reader with 'fresh' content continuously, and the immediate gratification of seeing it online often encourages less thought-out posts, and lack of insights. This is not always the case but it's quite common. As for the comments, they're constrained to a tiny html box, encouraging rushed, noisy feedback (hm...). All in all, it's a balance between the desire to be on top of things and perceiving value for the time spent. Naturally, aggregation systems make these traits more bearable; in greader, I've saved valuable seconds by just becoming friends with the <spc>, <j>, <k> keys, and a little bit of caffeine. However, there are many questions that remain. Who is my target audience, and what are my expectations out of this interaction? What is it that I intend to provide?
May I recommend http://www.useit.com/alertbox/articles-not-blogs.html
Thanks, Xerxes Folupa. Lots of good feedback to digest there. My favorite line from the article: A thousand monkeys writing for 1,000 hours doesn't add up to Shakespeare.
I think there has to be a balance between the continuous content and analytic content. Continuous content isn't always a bad thing, although it does tend to leave many readers unsatisfied. That's where the well thought-out, insightful, article-ish blogs come in. It's the combination of both that delivers the ultimate information experience.
I have much to learn about blogging, and I'll definitely keep your last couple questions at the forefront when I'm writing posts in the future.
Post a Comment