Tags
Blogging, Comments, Conversations, Feedback, Marketing, Publishing
I ask myself this question because I’m suspicious of the idea that blogging is all about having “conversations.” This is an idea that a lot bloggers like to push forward. They like to view themselves as “conversation” enablers. But this idea is just marketing speak. It’s a simple and clever strategy to keep people talking about them and their blogs.
Good blogging though is about being a great publisher of content, not being a wonderful conversationalist. People that read blogs and people who publish blogs, are not looking for chit chat. They’re people who have something to say and people looking for someone who has something to say. If you’re blogging to know what people think about a particular topic, then I suggest platforms other than blogging, like chat clients.
Most of the time, when people are pushing and encouraging conversations, what they really mean and want is feedback, but there’s a big difference between wanting feedback and wanting conversations. Conversations are spontaneous and not well thought of rants. They are unstructured streams of thought between a group of people. Feedback, on the other hand, is evidence that you’re provoking a reaction, good or bad.
This is not me advocating for or against commenting. That’s a whole different issue. There are many pros an cons that have been discussed, but comments are not the only way to know if your causing a reaction. I’m just not sure if I can agree completely that blogging is about having and enabling conversations. If I want to see what people think of a particular topic, I prefer to use other methods other than blogging. There are better and more effective ways for having conversations. There are things like chat clients, forums, and even services like Twitter are better for having conversations.
And there’s always a hypocritical conundrum with the conversationalists. They say that’s it’s ok to moderate. But that’s not a conversation. A least not a natural conversation. That’s controlling perception and quality control. That’s being a publisher.
I view blogging as a tool for the amatuer publisher. Wanting feedback, criticism, and validation are totally different things. It’s not the same with having conversations. Publishing, like blogging, is about having something to say, not wanting to “talk.” A good blog post is a monologue that sometimes people enjoy and sometimes they don’t.
So don’t get obsessed or trapped with the idea of provoking conversations. Unless you’re Robert Scoble, your blog should be about having something to say. Don’t focus on what people may think, focus on what you think. Focus on being a good publisher.
I think this is a smashing idea!
You’re absolutely right! Bloggers see themselves as conversation starters but, in my opinion, posts that are intended to be conversation starters either 1) fall flat on their face (because talking is not why people read your blog) or 2) are very poorly written because the blogger trys to leave things open ended enough to inspire conversation.
Personally, I always try to write my posts as though I’m writing a commentary piece in a newspaper. I make my point, I try to polorize, and I sign off. Do I care if people agree with me? No. Do I care if they comment? Not really. I blog to get stuff out of my head and to, hopefully, give people a slightly different view on things.
I do not want to chat.
Different blogs, different ways of blogging. There’s a place for conversation starters and there’s a place for monologues. For example, my biggest blogging success, in terms of hits and comments (which is, of course, far from my favorite in terms of quality), was written as a one-way rant for a small niche blog. It garnered a couple of comments. Some time later I joined a group blog and it was reposted there. It provoked a reader storm, with hundreds of comments and thousands of hits. A conversation sprung up, just like that. By virtue of being posted on a different blog, the same text provoked a radically different response.
I don’t believe in telling bloggers how to blog or defining strict criteria for true or real bloggers. Aside from the usual notes about honesty, critical use of sources, and common courtesy, I don’t think it’s in anyone’s place to tell anyone much about what kind of medium blogging is. Of course, you are free to say what kind of blog you like, and you’re free to say a blog sucks — but really, I don’t think blogging is more about a monologue than a conversation. Maybe your blog is, but blogging isn’t. Short-form, long form, I read a variety of blogs and there is an even larger variety I don’t read, but nevertheless can respect as having their valid take on what constitutes blogging.
That said, it’s always good to have some idea of what you’re doing, what you’re trying to accomplish, whom you’re trying to connect with, that sort of thing. As a matter of personal convinction, that’s just fine.
Unrelated aside: have you noticed that the only people who tend to comment on blogging, on blogs or in other media, are either 1) bloggers or 2) grumpy old men?
Pingback: Food For Thought Links « Tape Noise Diary
Pingback: Directions, Pauses, and Focus « Tape Noise Diary