February 14, 2006

while we’re on the subject of blog inequality…

zzzbambam11.jpg
New York maga­zine has just published a very long article about blogs and the whole ine­qua­lity thing: “Blogs to Riches– The Haves and Have-Nots of the Blog­ging Boom.”

But if you talk to many of today

19 Responses to “while we’re on the subject of blog inequality…”

  1. Isn’t this just life, how many cor­ner shops are there com­pa­red to big super­mar­kets, one or two per­son soft­ware com­pa­nies com­pa­red to Mic­ro­Soft or Oracle.

  2. Ric says:

    Yes — some­ti­mes it only has to work for the author to be worthwhile

  3. MarkN says:

    Feels like an inno­va­tion pro­blem to me. How inte­res­ting can the 972589th mar­ke­ting blog be?
    Then there is first mover advan­tage and all that. Hugh’s strength is time in the game and rela­tive con­sis­tency.
    And, you just gotta know there are a lot of resent­ful B, C, D level jour­na­list blog­gers who are pis­sed they have no vig in the blo­gosphere.
    Iro­nic that they whine about in a news­pa­per column. Also iro­nic that blog­gers would care about what is said in the newspaper.

  4. Jack Yan says:

    It hap­pe­ned to web sites, and it

  5. hugh macleod says:

    Agreed, Jack. I only wish blogs and PCs had all been inven­ted 20 years earlier.

  6. Blog­ging Power Law Dynamics

    Great article on blogs and power law dyna­mics that sho­wed up on my desk this mor­ning, from New York maga­zine. “When [Clay] Shirky com­pi­led his analy­sis of links, he saw that the sma­ller blog­gers’ fears were per­fectly correct: There is

  7. Larry Smith says:

    Would like to join.

  8. What’s unfair…
    1. When Tele­fo­nica lies to me — every time I COMPLAIN about their crap ser­vice — a near daily occu­rrence
    2. When tech com­pa­nies esta­blish walled gar­dens inside which favou­red hacks — like those at NYT/WSJ get brie­fed in advance of the rest of us who have an inte­rest in what those com­pa­nies do
    3. When Lan­dro­ver sends out a seriously crap car and igno­res peo­ple who COMPLAIN about it des­pite the safety impli­ca­tions
    4. When pac­ka­ged appli­ca­tion pro­vi­ders raise their main­te­nance costs at a time when my need for sup­port is in dec­line — but when their sales models are collapsing…read Oracle/PeopleSoft/SAP
    5. When the Lon­don Times mis­re­pre­sents a blog­ger as racist and then fails to issue an une­qui­vo­cal retrac­tion.
    If those things are of inte­rest to you, talk about them on blogs, with pas­sion and autho­rity. Who knows, someone like Sco­ble might agree with you, make a fuss and attract atten­tion on your behalf. Or not.
    And let’s just be very very cloear here. You try get­ting an une­qui­vo­cal retrac­tion out of mainsr­team media? It just doesn’t hap­pen. I should know, I have been part of that world for many years. It’s repug­nant. It’s arro­gant. It’s sha­me­ful.
    At least there is a ‘list’ howe­ver unfair it may seem where YOU can have your say — mostly at least.
    Here’s one Hugh — it’s vir­tually impos­si­ble to suc­cess­fully copy a plan. I have no way of kno­wing what goes on in another person’s mind and never will. It’s my sec­ret desire to be a genuine min­drea­der yet so many of us try and do that every day.
    It’s really that sim­ple. It’s one of the rea­sons your ideas sur­prise me from time ot time — even if I do think some of them are bar­king. But then I won’t pro­fess to ‘get it’ first time around on most things.
    And Jack’s right on. I made a total balls up of my first attempts at this medium. Because I ASSUMED cer­tain rules I knew applied in one world would apply in another. Doh. I learned.

  9. Verne Gripes says:

    Nobody blog­ging on the lower lists should really be sur­pri­sed or com­plain that life in blog­ging turns out to be just like life outside of blog­ging.
    The article does talk about the “power-law dis­tri­bu­tion” which is real, but all it means is that as a race we behave like sheep because we’re cowards most of the time.

  10. Write something inte­res­ting and peo­ple will read it. Sim­ple to say, hard to do.
    Has ever­yone given up on coCom­ment yet?

  11. Ric says:

    @Patrick — no — as a mat­ter of fact I’m having lots of fun with CoCom­ment.
    @Hugh — I don’t know whether it’s something Lau­rent has done, or something that always wor­ked, but when you open a post from a full link (i.e. the “per­ma­link”) the com­ment form is in-line, and CoCom­ment can pick it up (like this one …).

  12. Egill says:

    To me, and I’m wri­ting only about what’s inte­res­ting to me (music and design), get­ting a few peo­ple every day rea­ding my blogs is great. I live in a nation of 300.000 and here 80 uni­que hits a day is con­si­de­red a lot. If I had an audience of a few hun­dred thou­sand I’d quit blog­ging and start a cult.

  13. Rob - BAPI says:

    This is a really inte­res­ting article, in same ways it is easy to say some blogs will be more popu­lar than others but surely there are ways we could improve the visi­bilty of the sma­ller blogs? BAPI has been set up to look at exacly this sort of issue and we’d be plea­sed to get your views on this.

  14. Cairo Otaibi says:

    Blogs are crea­ted like men. Some are more equal than others, thus the ine­qua­lity. Yes, does size mat­ter?
    I am already drow­ning in all sorts of inte­res­ting stuff out there, and what may inte­rest me, may only inte­rest a hand­ful of peo­ple. I do not read the A-list blogs anyhow, wha­te­ver the A-list is. I fil­ter a lot and I may miss a lot of good stuff. The good mining tools are still mis­sing.
    Some peo­ple ins­pire or enter­tain me, others do not.
    Blog­ging is just a publishing tool avai­la­ble to every half wit with a PC and Inter­net access. I am still expe­ri­men­ting what good this is going to be for me, but the jury is till out.
    Ine­qua­lity is sort of a good thing.

  15. http://agentbedhead.com/index.php/archive/blog-inequality/

    Blog Ine­qua­lity: Is it a myth, cyber­le­gend, or just something to keep blog­gers from fee­ling ina­de­quate about whether we really mat­ter to anyone but our­sel­ves?

  16. Any blog­ger who obses­ses with link pop, autho­rity ratings, traf­fic, blog site stats, A and F lists, clin­king (clique/cul-de-sac linking)…is a moron.
    Hard­core Blog­gers don’t give a fig about num­ber of com­ments pos­ted at their blog, nor how many RSS subsc­ri­bers they’ve got, or lost after pos­ting a con­tro­ver­sial article.
    Hard­core Blog­gers blog because, like all great artists, they *must*.
    They are in no popu­la­rity con­test.
    Hard­core Blog­gers per­sist, and watch the fla­key blog­gers fall like flies.

  17. Egill says:

    Amen to that!

  18. Changing Way says:

    Stan­dard Silliness

    I know I’m late to the party, but I feel moved to say a few words about Andrew Keen’s Weekly Standard/CBS article. Keen cri­ti­ci­zes Web 2.0 as a neo-Marxist move­ment that glo­ri­fies blog­gers as the pro­le­ta­riat and vili­fies tra­di­tio­nal media as the bourge…

  19. Mar­ke­ting Beyond the Gatekeepers

    Lately the blo­goshere has been buz­zing about the New York Maga­zine article entit­led Blogs to Riches — The Haves and Have-Nots of the Blog­ging Boom. Hugh Mac­leod tal­ked about it so did Guy Kawa­saki and Darren Rowse and Gaw­ker and…