I have given many blogging tips over the years. One of the areas I haven’t spoken about in awhile is experienced vs. inexperienced advice. Let me clarify: there is a difference talking about what you think you know vs. speaking from experience. Yesterday I came across an article that was contradictory. This is a screenshot of the article and my initial thoughts while reading it. The author meant well, probably a great guy, but the article makes no sense and could really lead someone down the wrong path. My goal is to shed light on these types of issues so they can be discussed and avoided in the future.
The problems…
The article advises bloggers to evolve or not get stuck in a rut when it comes to blogging. In theory, that makes sense. However, there are blogs covering all types of topics and each niche or genre has different needs and requirements. Trying to give blanket advice for all niches is a slippery slope. Was this advice given by an experienced blogger (with a successful site) who successfully tried the advice or by a blogger who thinks this is good advice?
Unfortunately, it was not clear the writer was talking definitively about non-personal blogs until the end of the article. With personal blogs, evaluating the competition is not a wise move since there is only one “you” and who does “you” better than “you”, right? Let’s delve into the article a bit.
Changing the style and/or tone of your writing
Have you ever had a favorite TV show that changed writers and the show went downhill? Have you dated someone who changed, and you had less in common (grew apart)? If a blogger changes their tone or style of writing, how can readers “connect” with the writer? When someone likes your writing there is something about it that appeals to him or her. Perhaps it is the accurate information, the side humor, the style of writing, the laid-back tone, etc. If you change that, will the reader embrace the loss in traits that attracted the reader to the blog in the first place?
Why does evolving require changing your tone or style?
Wouldn’t a better route be adding features, setting a higher standard, doing something unique? To evolve (and survive) there has to be a solid foundation. If a technology blogger wanted to take things to the next level, they would not necessarily do the same thing a parenting blogger would do. One interesting phenomenon is the inability to learn from someone else’s past mistakes. There are many examples of bloggers that changed their tone and style, losing their audience in the process.
Missed opportunities
Using Blog Herald as an example, they cover blogging news and tips. In the US, the new FTC guidelines went into effect December 1st. Where were Blog Herald’s articles covering this? One of the reasons why I waited to post this article until today was to see if they would post something on it. They did, a day later. Meanwhile for the past couple of days, bloggers have been going nuts trying to figure out what to do, especially video bloggers. Wouldn’t it have been nice if the Blog Herald (or other blogging blogs) had a series of articles on how to be in compliance, dealing with advertisers, etc? Bloggers would have a solid source of advice and information to prepare them for this change.
That’s an example of evolving. Take advantage of upcoming opportunities to inform your current readers while creating new ones. This way your blog can experience a growth spurt without making major changes that might rock the boat.
Evaluating the competition
In business, it is wise to be aware of what the competition is doing however, that does not mean if ADC company does something you have to one up them. Let’s look at an example of where evaluating the competition failed. The design community.
Scrivs wrote an article about how a site started a trend and everyone started copying it. Bloggers changed their style or tone, to copy Smashing’s successful list posting type entries. In the end, most articles published in the community are list articles but there is a more fundamental root issue.
If you read the comments you will see comments like, “You wrote what I’ve been thinking for a while…” and I can say from experience this is valid. I brought up the overuse of list entries quite some time ago. The problem here is that the A-List bloggers in this community said nothing and did nothing to “evolve” past overusing lists. Do you see the problem? By “evaluating”, the competition sites copied each other, no one said anything, and there has been no evolution in the community. It maxed out (or depending on whom you ask, flat lined). In this case evaluating the competition and doing what they were doing was a bad idea.
Remember all the Digg clones? Remember their response? Flattered, but they laughed. While the copy cats were copying what they currently knew about, Digg was working on something new. Is Digg as popular as it once was? No. Why? They irritated their audience changing things attempting to thwart the competition. What happens if you copy a site that is destined to a downward trend? What happens if you don’t notice the downward trend in time?
Be aware of the competition but do your own thing.
Contradictions
At some point, the author realized and acknowledged the contradictions in the article and left them there without finding out what the problem was. Their advice was:
- Have a unique voice.
- Be consistent.
- Evaluate the competition.
- Don’t worry about going off the path you set for yourself.
- Change your style and tone.
- Take risks and find out what works.
- Find the balance in these contradictions to be a successful blogger.
To me, when the author acknowledged the contradictions, there was a problem. Don’t publish the article. Trying to follow that advice is like trying to solve a riddle. Let me be clear, it is hard to advise people, especially blanket advice, but how is an article that ends saying, “figure it out” helpful? Especially if you look at successful commercial bloggers and notice, they’ve changed very little. Same style of writing, same tone, no new features on the blog and some are very repetitive topic wise with their articles. They might change their site design but that’s about it. Where is the proof that these major changes are needed?
What should you do?
I have talked with thousands of bloggers over the years about their blog. Many of them wanted to be “big”, wanted to be an authority in their niche, etc. When talking to them, most did not have an accurate perception on how their blog was received by strangers. Once that topic was tackled, they had no clear picture on what they wanted to achieve (other than being big) and how they were going to get there. Or a realistic idea of how long it would take and if it was truly possible. The one point that was clear: the advice I gave one blogger did not necessarily work with another blogger in the same niche.
People evolve to better themselves. They push their limits, try new things, take risks, etc. to explore what life has to offer. That is a personal journey. What a person does and what a company does are two different things. Companies (commercial entities) need stability. However, as the person (blogger) evolves, their change in personality or taste usually shows in their content. Sometimes that means a change in topic, domain name, writing style, etc. The change was not made to “evolve the blog”. The change was made because the writer changed and the person wanted the blog to reflect those changes. An example, a blogger writing about games has a new addition to their family: a baby girl. Their love for their new child spills over into the blog with baby updates. Perhaps the baby updates mean more than covering games, since the blogger doesn’t have the time anymore to play as in the past. The blogger has a decision to make. Some bloggers would continue to cover games, some would change to a parenting blog. Some would do nothing, keeping the blog a mix and dealing with the consequences of it. There isn’t a right answer without more facts.
When I give blogging tips (here are some of them) I give advice that will help the norm. Writing original content, having a solid design (and the aspects that make up a solid design), understanding your target audience, etc. are things everyone can benefit from. However, when you advise people to change their tone and style, take risks (without talking about what types, etc.), deviate from their path/plan…those are one-on-one consultation discussions.
Giving that type of advice without facts on what the blogger is doing and what their plans/goals are usually will not work well. Give advice based on experience.
Written by: Tyme White | Follow Tyme on Twitter | Be Friends on Facebook
I normally do not respond to bloggers who offer commentary on existing blog posts, as it is clearly easy to find imperfection with written words that already exist. However, that being said, your post makes some valid points.
First off, allow me to introduce myself. My name is Andrew G.R., the founder of Jobacle.com, a successful career advice blog and podcast. I’ve produced compelling content for FOX News, MTV Networks and dozens of blogs over the past 10 years. I don’t state this as a claim to fame, but rather to give the audience some background on the author – something that I should have done from the start. By using the methods I write about, I was able to create a brand name in the employment world from scratch, picking up thousands of readers and national media along the way. Fortunately, this success has led to dozens of creative opportunities and a ton of great contacts. But this does not make me an expert…
I subscribe to the theory that there are no new media experts, only folks who dish out advice based on their personal experiences. The Web landscape is changing as you read this, and anyone who claims to be a blogging expert, is anything but. I’ve never pretended to be a blogging expert. I’m just a guy who writes honestly with the hopes that the reader will engage. To me a single comment or blog response is a success. I wish more readers responded with your zeal and insight.
Had the ‘evolution’ post been peppered with more facts and examples of how the methods worked in practice, it would have made for a better read. You are spot on with that. I do think, however, you are confusing ‘evaluating’ other blogs with ‘copying’ other blogs. When you assess what others are doing, you are not supposed to mirror their actions – and I’m not sure why you are treating the two as the same animal.
As far as contradictions in my writing, I never shy away from them. I agree that it can lead to a less focused post. And it would undercut my position as an advice-dishing expert, but again, that’s something I do not pretend to be. I am all about honest dialogue, which means if I think it – I write it.
I’ll be sure to check in occasionally and see what you are talking about next. Your blog is intriguing! Thanks again for the post. It made me think, which in my world, means it was successful!
I left comments open (requiring moderation) in the event you wanted to respond. All other comments I personally responded to via email as comments generally aren’t open on my site. However, I felt it was only fair to allow you to respond, if you chose to, and allow my readers to see your response. Thank you for responding. I have let comments open if you’d like to respond to my response. Any other comments I will respond to personally.
Also I want to disclaim that I can come off sounding curt at times when that is not my intention. There is no anger or hostility in my words. So please try to step back, be objective and absorb what I am saying (whether you agree with it or not).
I am not confusing evaluating and copying. Interacting with so many bloggers and developers over the years I know that normally the first reaction when evaluating is to copy what one thinks might be (or is) successful than take a risk with the unknown. It is a logical process for many and I gave an example to prove that my assessment is accurate. If you would like others:
Social networks became popular so people wanted to add social network functions to their blogs even when it made no sense, they didn’t have the traffic to justify it and didn’t have the time to moderate it if they had the traffic to sustain it.
A designer creates a grid design (for example) on a popular site. Next thing you know the grid design is “the design” to use.
Why did snark blogs rise? Because one person started it and seeing the success, people copied it without realizing the implications of doing it.
Let’s not forget the numerous “blogging” blogs that popped up when one became popular…and the majority of them to die out.
I had a large successful gaming community. That “inspired” people to create gaming blogs and copy every thing I did.
And let’s not forget the people who evaluated 9rules, copied and failed.
I could go on endlessly. This trend is not only in blogging, it is everywhere. So it is fascinating to me that you said when people evaluate they aren’t “supposed” to mirror as if they don’t. People aren’t supposed to cheat on their spouses but they do, don’t they? Is that not remiss to consider what people are known to do when writing an article that gives people advice?
In traditional journalism, your article would have been pulled by an editor for a re-write because of the inconsistencies and the content of the article does not match what Blog Herald is about (according to the About page):
That’s great you are a guy blogging about personal experiences but your entry and your method of blogging is not in sync with what Blog Herald is supposed to be or even perceived to be. It was the job of the editor to pull that entry, spend some time and educate you (work with you) on the history of the site you’re blogging on and the sites within SplashPress.
For example, can you say 9rules -> Chawlk -> 9rules transition (one could even include Blog Herald)? We did the exact same thing. Scrivs was the leader of our team. So essentially, you wrote an article that gave advice that is proven not to work on a site that is run by a man who made the same mistake using similar tactics that your article recommends. Peppering the article with more facts would only prove what I am saying. Surely you see the problem with your article (now) since the odds are high your audience is well aware of what happened in the past since they watched it happen and criticized it while it was happening…on sites SplashPress owns?
Actually, the editor shouldn’t have to explain that to you as you should know. The problem is that you’re writing in an area that is not your strength. You said you made a name for yourself in the employment niche (which is great, congrats!), so why are you writing about how to blog? Your strength is employment articles – that is where your knowledge is. Instead of having multiple blogs about blogging why not have an employment opportunities blog (within SplashPress), especially with the bad economy? You mentioned missed opportunities in your entry, isn’t that a big one? Instead, you are writing in an area that is not your strength, competing with people who have years of experience in the field.
Which is one of the many problems SplashPress will have to deal with to turn things around, in the event there is a serious effort to do that (time will tell just how serious). The commercial sites that are successes have authorities writing on them. You made your mark in the employment field, so surely you know the importance of getting qualified people to do the tasks at hand, yes? I’m not suggesting you be fired (just want to make that clear) but it IS an inefficient use of time to try to train you on things you should already know and a MORE efficient use of time placing you where you seem to have a passion and definitely a strength.
In any event, my article was demonstrating that your article was not on point (especially with the principles and goals according to the Blog Herald About page) and I have proven that (whether you agree with it or not is your choice). If you would like to discuss this further, feel free to comment or you can email me at tymewhite@gmail.com. I’d even be willing to hope on Skype and talk about it if you’d like.
**I’m not letting any other comments through but I will respond to you via email.**
And my apologies, I was rude in not introducing myself. My name is Tyme White. I have a Master’s degree in Business Management. My thesis was about building online communities and was chosen as the best thesis in my class. The principles I discussed were used to shape classes that are being taught today about online interaction. I’ve used to have a large gaming community (1M+ users). I’ve had a variety of sites however, I focus on business, web, technology and life principles. I’m an entrepreneur, my job essentially being to “fix” companies who of course would not want it known there was a problem in the first place. For the most part I have had my own business (my first one was a babysitting business) since I was 12. My parents were entrepreneurs and my Mother started teaching me business principles while my peers were playing with Barbies.
That said, I love learning new things and meeting new people. For me, the learning process never ends.
Nice meeting you.
We can go back and forth forever, but since time doesn’t permit me, all I can say in closing is that you are hardcore!
Ultimately readers decide what they enjoy and what they don’t. Fortunately for me, the response to well over 1,000 blog posts I have written, in multiple categories, has been overwhelmingly positive.
I am unaware of any SplashPress politics – good, bad or otherwise. I’ll leave their affairs to be handled by the SP head honchos. But if they are interested in buying Jobacle, I’m all ears!
Again, thanks for your post and for giving me the opportunity to reply. I’ve enjoyed meeting you and reading your candid thoughts. Be well!
I have an accurate timeline of how things happened.
https://twitter.com/scrivs/status/6238667701 Paul posted the link to the Blog Herald entry.
https://twitter.com/tyme/status/6243644593 Tyme said she was trying not to respond to the Blog Herald article
https://twitter.com/scrivs/status/6244735975 Paul encourages Tyme to write about the article.
https://twitter.com/tyme/status/6252336168 Tyme said she is going to write about the article.
https://twitter.com/scrivs/status/6259033697 Paul teases(?) Tyme about responding to the entries.
I put a question mark because it might not be a joke. I believe he baited Tyme into writing about the article. Why link to it in the first place?
https://twitter.com/tyme/status/6281416340 Tyme links to her article
https://twitter.com/tyme/status/6297115476 Tyme posts her credentials
https://twitter.com/tyme/status/6297203679 Tyme posts her credentials
Andrew comments 9:07am
Tyme responds to Andrew 1:13pm
Tyme responds to Andrew: 1:41pm
https://twitter.com/scrivs/status/6311649442 Paul said “Is there an expiration date on when you can stop using past accomplishments to justify what you are saying today?” 1:54pm
https://twitter.com/tyme/status/6311802130 Tyme responds to Paul about his tweet “But then of course in business, you can’t say you’re experienced without saying what you did in the past. That’s a catch, isn’t it?” 2:01pm
https://twitter.com/tyme/status/6311824558 Tyme responds to Paul about his tweet “That depends. If you’re introducing yourself and the other person said their past achievements, then it is proper to say yours.” 2:00pm
https://twitter.com/scrivs/status/6311935720 Paul said “Hm, I mean using it to justify your side of an argument for example. I got a hot girl’s number 13 years ago once, so I know how to get them.” 2:05pm
Andrew responds to Tyme: 2:06pm
https://twitter.com/scrivs/status/6313981645 Paul said “Twitter-land, when I make a general statement, please don’t assume it’s about you. Just not good form.” 3:25pm
I’m sure I’m not the only one that saw this coming through and wondered if he was talking about Tyme? He said before he hates it when she does that. I’d like to know if he was on her site between 1:41pm and 1:54pm? If he was talking about her, I think it was in bad taste to leave the 3:25pm comment without point out what was happening on this site at the time he made the comment. It wasn’t a general comment when the exact situation he spoke of happened within minutes of him tweeting it.
I have a friend that is an editor for a big news site online. I am going to send him a link here and ask his personal opinion as to whether the Blog Herald article was considered quality content. If he comments, I request Tyme post his comment.
Please post this. I took a lot of time typing it out and I think it will help people understand what happened as it happened.
I posted the above comment because I am tired of people asking what happened and this summarizes the timeline well. Scrivs said he was not referring to me when he made those tweets. I did not ask him if he was referring to me on the last one (about assuming) because I don’t care. I did not look in the logs because I don’t want to know and I don’t care. I’m done with that. It is what it is.
I am looking forward to the editor’s comments. If he or she posts their thoughts, I will publish the comment because I think it would make a wonderful learning experience for everyone.