December 30, 2007

how big is your audience? [revisited]

zzzmkghilkj07.jpg
As the mar­ket for blog and Web 2.0 media keeps on matu­ring, I thought this gaping­void post from August, 2006 was worth a revi­sit:

I get asked a lot about how many peo­ple read my blog.
I have no idea. Because the ans­wer, of course, depends on what metric you use. What stat coun­ter you use. Anything bet­ween x-thousand and x-thousand-times-ten visi­tors per day, depen­ding on which robot you wish to believe.
I tend to believe the lower figu­res more than the higher ones, but hey, that’s just me.
But “How many peo­ple read your blog per day” is not the same thing as “How big is your audience.“
Let me explain.
The num­ber of blogs I read on a daily basis num­bers about a dozen. The num­ber of blogs I read every cou­ple of days num­bers about ten times that figure.
But the num­ber of blogs I read regu­larly, just not that often, is way, way, way higher than that. Many thou­sands of them.
Dave Wein­ber­ger is a good exam­ple. I like his blog, I like him, I value what he has to say, howe­ver for one rea­son or another I don’t read his blog that often. Maybe a cou­ple of times a month. Maybe only once a month. It’s nothing per­so­nal, it’s like he said in a very enter­tai­ning post last year:
No, I’m not kee­ping up with your blog.
I would like to. I really would. I like it and I like you.
But we’re now well past the point where any of us can keep up with all the blogs worth rea­ding from the peo­ple worth kee­ping up with. Even with an aggre­ga­tor.
I just can’t do it any more.

So, although I don’t read his blog that often, he is on my radar, and I con­si­der him some­body who con­ti­nues to inform and influence my world­view. As a result, I con­si­der myself very much part of his audience.
Another way to think about this is akin to a favo­rite rock band. You may not lis­ten to their recor­dings every day, but pull out their music every so often, when your life needs a dose of their par­ti­cu­lar brand of ins­pi­ra­tion. They might not be a daily fix, but they’re nonethe­less a regu­lar and impor­tant part of your life.
So follo­wing this logic, I’m gues­sing there are a lot of peo­ple who read me in the same man­ner that I read Wein­ber­ger. I may not be part of their daily fix, but they are part of my audience nonethe­less.
If you accept this logic, then sud­denly my audience starts loo­king much lar­ger. And so do the audien­ces of many other blog­gers.
It’s just a pity this metric isn’t one that adver­ti­sers find par­ti­cu­larly use­ful, or else a lot more blog­gers would be making money.
[Note To Self: I would be really inte­res­ted to hear Stowe Boyd’s take on this.]

My take on this, one year later? I’ll have to con­cur with JP Ran­gas­wami, who remin­ded me on Twit­ter that, “if ‘traf­fic’ is what you want, then more car­toons may mean more traf­fic. If you want con­nec­tions and rela­tionships, that’s har­der.” I also con­cur with our mutual friend, Doc Searls, who doesn’t like desc­ri­bing the peo­ple who read his blog as his “rea­ders” or “audience”. They’re not “eye­balls”, for heaven’s sake. They’re just peo­ple he knows. Life is short enough without impo­sing cor­po­rate metrics onto your friends etc etc. Sure, for convenience’s sake we’ll all use the words “audience”, “rea­ders”, “traf­fic” etc. But they’re not words that do a par­ti­cu­larly good job of get­ting to the meat of things.
[Update:] I desc­ribe blogs in the com­ments below: “A sim­ple device to stay on people’s radar screens in a hope­fully mea­ning­ful way.” It works for me etc.

"Hugh's Daily Cartoon" Newsletter. A new cartoon sent out every weekday morning to your inbox [RSS version here.]. A wee chuckle to start your day off right etc.

19 Responses to “how big is your audience? [revisited]”

  1. Jeff says:

    You’ve writ­ten some great posts in the past about how to write bet­ter, and how to get peo­ple to read your blog. This posts gives a more com­plete defi­ni­tion of what a blog audience really is. You can still make a big dif­fe­rence, even if peo­ple don’t read your posts every­day. If you write something great, and peo­ple know about, they’ll keep coming back to it every now and again, when they need to.

  2. hugh macleod says:

    Agreed, Jeff, that’s all a blog needs to be– A sim­ple device to stay on people’s radar screens in a hope­fully mea­ning­ful way. Anything more, and you’re using the media in a way it’s simply not desig­ned for.

  3. thom singer says:

    I recently had a blog­ger blow me off to write a guest blog post because I did not have enough traf­fic for him. I was a little hurt, but then I rea­lize that I do not write for traf­fic or “eye­balls”. I write for that ONE peson who reads the post and emails me and says “wow, I nee­ded to hear that mes­sage today”. I don’t get those emails every­day, but often enough that I stay ins­pi­red.
    I think you are right about one’s audience being much lar­ger than the num­ber of twit­ter follo­wers or the daily blog stats. In the Web world you just don’t know who will stum­ble upon you and need to hear your words at that moment. In some ways it is almost spi­ri­tual that your words (or car­toons in your case) are out there wai­ting to be found by the per­son who seeks that mes­sage.
    thom

  4. Summer says:

    When I was blog­ging (I quit per­so­nal blog­ging to deal with some per­so­nal stuff then focus on my busi­ness) I used to think of the rea­ders as my “com­mu­nity”. Sort of like the peo­ple I see at church and say hi to once a week, and catch up with maybe once a month if we get lucky.
    Perhaps that’s the apt­ness in the above car­toon. Rarely do peo­ple com­ment every day. Rarely do they com­ment every time they stop by. By they do and they check in, and if we’re lucky they say hi. But I like to think we blog for more rea­son then for peo­ple to say hi. I mean, we know they’re there, our stat meters tell us that. But we know they’ll catch up when they get a minute or they see us.
    And I’m fin­ding that now, I think it doesn’t mat­ter whether it’s a per­so­nal blog or a busi­ness — you need a com­mu­nity and peo­ple who are enga­ging, even if it’s a cou­ple times a year, even if you’ll never meet them in per­son. Maybe being a “good” blog­ger is a good pri­mer for how to create other rela­tionships in other arenas.

  5. hugh macleod says:

    “Maybe being a “good” blog­ger is a good pri­mer for how to create other rela­tionships in other are­nas.“
    what a simply lovely thought. Thanks for that :)

  6. I’m the same way with regards to rea­ding other people’s blogs. I basi­cally read them every so often (not daily). I think the pri­mary rea­son for this is due to sig­nal vs noise or the pareto prin­ci­ple (80/20). Eighty per­cent of their con­tent is decent, good even, but it’s the twenty per­cent that they write that really hits home with me.
    I’m no dif­fe­rent with my blog though. I can blog about this and that for days and then one day I really seem to con­nect with peo­ple when I write about something that truly con­nects with me. I think a lot of the time that’s the pri­mary pro­blem. Peo­ple feel like they have to blog daily. I mean if you’re trying to enter­tain peo­ple, ya blog daily. If you want to truly con­nect with peo­ple though and create rela­tionships, it’s more about what you write that mat­ters (which is why I agree with Thom that con­nec­ting with just ONE per­son makes it all worthwhile).
    One of the rea­sons why I’ve never really been that satis­fied with my blog though is because my con­tent is all over the place. I do this pur­po­sely though because I like pos­ting small pie­ces of my thoughts when I’m trying to figure out things but I’m sure I pro­bably con­fuse peo­ple more than anything as it goes over their head. It’s one rea­son why I’d like to figure out how to break my con­tent down into sepa­rate streams so that peo­ple can subsc­ribe to what inte­rests them (and thus they decide what is a sig­nal and what is noise). The­re­fore, someone might like my daily explo­ra­tion in trying to put the small jig­saw puzzle pie­ces of life together, whe­reas someone else may only be inte­res­ted in the final rea­li­za­tion at the end of that exploration.

  7. Douglas Karr says:

    Some irony is that I actually star­ted blog­ging just to keep up with infor­ming all of my friends of the things that I’ve dis­co­ve­red. Now I just have a lot more friends!

  8. Jacqueline says:

    I com­ple­tely agree — as a wri­ter, I do keep a blog in order to stay on people’s radar (and to catch the eye of poten­tial clients/editors), but I also do it to build rela­tionships and to par­ti­ci­pate in the con­ver­sa­tion in more mea­ning­ful way then by simply comm­men­ting on other blogs.
    And if my words hap­pen to ins­pire or bring a smile to someone’s face, all the bet­ter.
    *I too try to keep up with hun­dreds, if not thou­sands of blogs, but I don’t read them all on a regu­lar basis. It is like having favo­rite bands or musi­cians, or favo­rite authors — you pull out the genre, album, or book you are in the mood for at the moment.

  9. “It’s just a pity this metric isn’t one that adver­ti­sers find par­ti­cu­larly use­ful, or else a lot more blog­gers would be making money.“
    Hmm; I think adver­ti­sers do use that metric: monthly uniques.

  10. Bah, hum­bug. Some of these peo­ple oh-so-modestly proc­lai­ming their disin­te­rest are naked social clim­bers who cal­cu­late very well what — and who — mat­ters to them. There’s not going to say “I think of you as my chum, as in bait (for adver­ti­sers). You only mat­ter to me to the extent that I can use you or sell you in some fashion. I’m trying to fake sin­ce­rity as well as I can”.
    Yeah, there’s a dif­fe­rence bet­ween cul­ti­va­ting a large num­ber of low-margin sales and a sma­ller num­ber of high-margin sales. That’s not exactly a reve­la­tion. But den­ying that aspect of blog­ging is about as true as semeone run­ning for office den­ying an inte­rest in poli­ti­cal power.

  11. Jacqueline says:

    @Hugh and @all : Thanks for your valua­ble thoughts in and on this post. I just ‘twit­te­red’ about them because I find them ins­pi­ring and I do hope others will read them too…

  12. thom singer says:

    Seth Fin­kels­tein makes a valid point, and I am guilty as sin in my above com­ment. I do care about traf­fic and I do get exci­ted when my traf­fic spi­kes. I should not have made it seem like I don’t care.
    But I am not obses­sed with it. There is a dif­fe­rence.
    I still stand by the fact that an audience is lar­ger than just your stat numbers…and that exten­ded reach and impac­ting others is what mat­ters. But size does mat­ter and a big audience is flattering.

  13. hugh macleod says:

    Au con­traire, Seth. For it is true that, in fact, you, Seth, DO only mat­ter to me to the extent that I can use you or sell you in some fashion. I am INDEED trying to send fake sin­ce­rity in your direc­tion as well as I can.
    Some­body got a pro­blem with that?

  14. John says:

    Hugh,
    So, when you say you’re sen­ding fake sin­ce­rity, does that mean you’re insin­cere or is that fake insin­ce­rity? No, wait…is it…shit, I can’t keep up. You’re too damn deep for me.

  15. jswa says:

    I’m curious, I remem­ber seeing ads before on gaping­void, but no lon­ger. May I assume there is no sig­ni­fi­cant money to be made run­ning ads or using PPC, or is there another rea­son?
    thanks

  16. T says:

    This gives me some new pers­pec­tive on how to eva­luate the size of my audience. Good stuff. Thanks!

  17. KY says:

    a very insight­ful view and a slightly dif­fe­rent pers­pec­tive. I guess the explo­sion in the num­ber of per­so­nal blog has really chan­ged the con­nec­tions bet­ween bloggers

  18. marco cervantes says:

    hhaha funny i have my own blog to u know in mypace funny huh ?:)