Archives for posts with tag: Blog

As we move towards a world that is, literally, the Internet of things, it’s interesting to see how this lifelogging thing is going to develop. For a good introduction to this phenomenon of using wearable devices to track your entire life for some kind of perverse posterity, see here.

The weblog quickly graduated – and shortened – to the blog, where people could write about what they see going on in the world, much like this blog you’re reading, and build up a following and a web 2.0/2-way interaction with people. It’s now become an important part of an organisation’s or individual’s social media strategy.

At the moment, it’s hard to see how lifelogging will develop into something more commercially relevant – and into a more concise and marketable word. Apart from flogging I suppose, but that’s a couple of bridges too far in the wrong direction methinks.

Perhaps it’s destined to go the way of other wearable tech that runs into privacy issue because of the collateral recording of other people without their permission. On the other hand it could presage some hideous dystopian world 50 years from now where we’re all tracked 24/7. Could go a number of ways :-).

 

Two hundred is a good number. In cricket, a century is considered a very good score by a batsman. A double century is a lot rarer, a lot more prized. ‘Not out’ means the batsman is still ‘at the crease’ and has the potential to score more ‘runs’.

Two hundred of anything is impressive I think. 200 fans or followers is more than the sacred 150, thought of as the maximum size for a ‘tribe’.  200 customers means you’re a serious player. 200 wins, well, you get the picture.

This, dear reader, is my 200th post. I hope you’ve enjoyed reading them. I’ve certainly enjoyed writing them.

Here’s to 200 more – as long as they’re useful!

Where do you stand, dear reader, on blog post length? I won’t tell you how many online column inches have ben devoted to this. The consensus is that it doesn’t matter, it depends. One thing they all seem to agree on, however, is that longer posts get linked to more often.

The conclusion they draw is that longer posts are therefore better. I take issue with this and offer a different explanation. The reason is tl;dr syndrome. Too long; didn’t read. People are busy, too busy to read long posts, so they just scan them.

This is how it goes: “Boy this is a long post. It’s good though, at least what I’ve read of it sounds good, but I can’t read any more, so I’d better share it anyway.”

So you get this kind of social media message: “Very interesting, important article on blah blah blah, worth a read.” Does this create a kind of social media maelstrom of mediocrity?

Better to create a blog post that people have time to get through properly, no?

 

For me, dear reader, the natural cadence of this blog is a post every Monday, Wednesday and Friday. It’s what I’ve stuck to since the first post.

My posts are fairly short and take a minute or two to read at most. Three times during the working week feels like the right balance between intrusion into your productive time and making enough of a regular connection. Consistency is one of the my key tenets, and I don’t know about you but I find wading through a monster of a post once a week a bit of an ordeal. Plus, you get the weekend off for good behaviour.

Three posts a week is something that I feel I can continue to commit to as my part of the bargain. I don’t feel I can stretch to the daily dose of epic content that Mr Seth Godin has been bestowing upon us for more than a handful of years. I’m not a full-time writer, nowhere near as brilliant, and I don’t have the resources.

It doesn’t really matter what I think though. It’s your view that counts, since you’re consuming the output. Otherwise I might just as well paint a masterpiece and lock it in my basement.

I’d be delighted to hear how you feel about the frequency of posts, privately or via the blog. And the content of them for that matter.

Thanks for reading :-).