The Problem With Lists

Going through as many sites as I do, I see list entries quite often. What normally happens is the author will make the list of “resources” and leave out one very important piece of information. Why are these recommended things better than others? If an author is recommending cameras why are the five cameras listed better than other cameras? Because the author said so? For example, the writer/blogger will title the entry “5 Best Cameras under $250!”, then briefly lists the features of the cameras, but avoids saying what makes those cameras so special. I’m sure I could find three other cameras that are under $250, so why are those five cameras better than the others?

Often you will see these lists and the author will make the disclaimer that the list is in no particular order. The recommended cameras are all equally good. Well, how often does that happen? Companies make competing products to make it easier for the shopper to pick one product over another. Rarely are all the items equal. The disclaimer is a backdoor for the author to get around naming one product over the others because opinions are subjective. However, one of the attractions for a reader is valuing the opinion of the blogger/writer.

Let’s Turn an Entry Into a Clickfest…Not!

Another common trait to click entries: making the reader click through the list like a book. The problem? The entire list could be put on one page because the content for each list entry is minimal. An example: Top 5 WordPress Themes! type entry that has a screenshot and 50 words underneath each theme. That’s a 250 word entry. Put it all on one page. Readers aren’t stupid and they realize, if you do this, you’re trying to inflate your page views. Let’s face facts: if you have to resort to inflating your page views, you have a problem. Solve the problem instead of putting a bandaid on it.

A Picture Does Not Explain “Why”….

One of the common themes of list entries: including a picture or screenshot that “shows” the reader the product, design, etc. If I’m looking at the Top 5 Logos I expect to see an image of the logo but I’d also want to know WHY those five logos are on the list. The pictures alone do not legitimize the selected logos. This is why list entries can be traffic pullers but they have high bounce rates. It is relatively easy to pull people to a site. Unless the person finds substance in the site, they’ll quickly move on to the next site. If they go and view the Top 5 Logos, look at the pretty pictures for a minute and do not find a reason to stay (comment on your site, agree with your opinion and look for other articles, disagree with your opinion and tell a friend about it, etc.), they are on to the next site in less than a minute.

Back Up the Claims You Make

Anyone can make a list entry. The “good” writer/blogger backs up their list entries with facts, the logic behind the choices, etc. Know your audience. If you’re talking about the Top 10 Funniest Romantic Clips include video so your audience can see the funny parts your mentioned and come to their own conclusion. If you only include screenshots, what good is that, particularly if the reader never saw the movie? If you’re talking about cameras include pictures taken by the camera so the reader can see how great the cameras are. If you don’t have the camera (as in never had it)…why are you recommending it?

Prove your point.

But what if you can’t monetize what you love? Seth Godin wrote about this a couple of weeks ago. There are pitfalls to doing what you love and he nailed two of them on the head:

1. In order to monetize your work, you’ll probably corrupt it, taking out the magic in search of dollars

and

2. Attention doesn’t always equal significant cash flow.

Doing what you love is as important as ever, but if you’re going to make a living at it, it helps to find a niche where money flows as a regular consequence of the success of your idea. Loving what you do is almost as important as doing what you love, especially if you need to make a living at it. Go find a job you can commit to, a career or a business you can fall in love with.

Do your art. But don’t wreck your art if it doesn’t lend itself to paying the bills. That would be a tragedy.

(And the twist, because there is always a twist, is that as soon as you focus on your art and leave the money behind, you may just discover that this focus turns out to be the secret of actually breaking through and making money.)

When I had my first gaming site I started it for fun and my passion for gaming showed as I built the site. Then it became very profitable because I would do things (work) that didn’t feel like work to me. I wanted to talk to game developers. I wanted to spend the time in games thoroughly picking them apart.

With my second gaming site I’ve been slacking royally because I wasn’t having fun with the game. I was exploring areas I had not been to before but everyone else had so what was the point in writing about it? The character I really wanted to play wasn’t released yet. I was completely blah about the site. It didn’t help that it doesn’t cost me anything to have the site online. I had zero incentive and it showed when I attempted to write something.

I was talking to a friend about this and we were saying that with our upcoming new things the beauty of it was that we didn’t have to worry about monetizing it. We could focus on finding our groove and building up the content on our perspective projects. I realize one day the site will be monetized but I will have found my voice, the perspective I want to take with the site and it will be “strong”, instead of building something TO make money – which might take it completely away from what I really want to do.

Which is exactly what I felt myself doing and why I was slacking. I was thinking four or five steps ahead and thinking “this would be best since I’m monetizing it” instead of digging deep on what I want to do, which is not the norm for a gaming site. As the ideas first started to form into my mind I immediately rejected it because it “might be” tough to monetize it. My displeasure showed itself in my lack of enthusiasm for the game. If I had not figured it out even with the new expansion I still would not have fun in the game because playing the game I can’t help but think about the site.

Gaming is my source of entertainment. When I’m done with “work” I’ll play a game. There is a delicate balance turning entertainment into work. That is the main reason why, although I love clubs and my parents used to own a club, I don’t want one myself. I thought I did at first. I thought it would be a good fit but I realized when I go to the club for fun, the last thing I want to do is work. The “fun” is going there, having a good time, and not having any responsibilities.

I’ve seen many times people corrupt their work to pay the bills. I understand this completely but many times people don’t realize it is happening. Once you drop to rock bottom prices to compete it will be incredibly hard to raise them. If you cut corners on quality the end product suffers, opening the door for competition. Throwing up articles just to get them up doesn’t fool anyone if they don’t compare to the previous ones. Having millions of pageviews no longer means guaranteed ability to sell ads on the inventory.

Look at what you’re doing and more important why you are doing it. You might learn something.

I was reading Seth Godin’s article called Not so grand and I agree with his point:

The best time to promote something is after it has raving fans, after you’ve discovered that it works, after it has a groundswell of support. And more important, the best way to promote something is consistently and persistently and for a long time. Save the bunting for Flag Day.

How many times have we seen companies throw the elaborate launch parties to fade into the shadows? Honestly, how many people can remember the companies spotlighted by TechCrunch’s conferences and those that won – do you use it?

The “big” companies that are successful weren’t successes at launch. Twitter began in March 2006, Twitter launched in July of 2006 but didn’t get their big break until SXSW 2007. Unfortunately, they were unprepared for the massive amounts of usage they receive and failed to properly define their company. Jack Dorsey, CEO of Twitter, did a presentation about Twitter and there is a definite divide with how a large portion of their users use Twitter and how they envisioned the service to be used. Twitter was not built to handle the amount of use it receives today and the challenge to upgrade and keep the service live is a challenging one. The focus for Twitter was scaling (not monetizing). A better idea? Focus on building the architecture so when the people are there, scaling would not be so challenging.

See, that’s the mistake most companies make – the rush to get the people before the cement of the foundation is dry. Easy to do but usually has detrimental repercussions. While Twitter has irked many people it gave competition the opportunity to enter the space or worse, piggy back on their services. Twitter will probably come out of it okay because they have a ton of money being thrown at them that puts them in a better position to fix the issues.

Most companies do not have that luxury – millions after millions being given to them.

Let’s look at another example, Digg. It was launched in 2004 but really didn’t begin to gain traction until 2006, exploding in 2007. They scaled with traffic but then encountered a problem, a problem that could have been sorted out earlier. The company wants to take Digg more mainstream; their users prefer it stay focused on technology. Again, a divide between how the users want to use the site and what the owners envision for the site.

Launch is great but it’s just the beginning of (hopefully) a long journey to success that has to be achieved and more importantly maintained. Taking the time to make the right decisions, ensuring the foundation is strong and the challenge is easier to win and the road to success a smoother journey. Focus on the wrong points and watch your company slip through your fingers into a deadpool.

• You can win every fight.
• If you lose it’s your fault, not the game.
• Don’t beat yourself up over losing.
• Look back at the fight that was just lost. What could you have done differently.

Can he really win every fight? No, but he has an optimistic (and realistic) attitude. If he is up against an opponent that is better geared than he is, odds are he will lose but the reality: he could have had equal gear. Who’s fault is it that he doesn’t? Instead of beating himself up over it, he’ll grind to get better gear (if he is under geared), see what else he could improve from the mistakes he made, and try again.

Wouldn’t it be lovely if we could do that with life? When something doesn’t work, see why it failed, then do it again? We can…

Of course, it means learning from our experiences and other people’s experiences.

You can’t go back and redo the past (that’s important to note – what’s done is done) but it is possible to make sure the mistakes from the past don’t re-appear in the future. I don’t play a Mage in WoW but I suck at PVP. Yeah I said it, I suck at PVP. Admitting it is one of the first things I need to do to correct the situation.

Instead of whining like a little bitch that my character won’t do what I want it to do.

The other (harder) part is putting in the time and effort needed to correct the situation. Hahaha it means losing for a while to win the bigger battles later. I can’t put into words how much I hate to lose but a girl has to do what a girl has to do. Tyme wants to be a PVP Queen so I have work to do.

What Does This Mean to You?

No one is perfect, there is always room for improvement. Many times the opportunity is there to avoid a situation from happening if one would open their eyes to what happened previously (or to others) and correct the situation. If you have a blog on technology, you’ve had it for over a year, you submit your entries to Digg, Reddit, etc. and your articles never make it to the front page is it because the Digg community is “mean” or your articles aren’t as good as the others submitted that day?

If you want to start a business and your main competition admitted that although successful, they would have went in a different direction, why would you start a business following the same path the competition took without safe-guarding against those hurdles?

If you know people are getting fired for the things they put online for public consumption, why would you put yourself (potentially) in the same position?

Just like in PVP, the people who win the fight think smarter (and yes, take advantage of their opponent’s weakness). In life those who succeed think smarter (and don’t repeat mistakes they are already aware of).

Going through my feeds I noticed Dave Winer has a solution to this problem. RSS has a comments element built in. If a feed reader supports the comments element it will show an icon that, when clicked on, will take you to the blog owner’s page to make a comment. I like that. Correction, I love that. I hope all feed readers begin to support the comments element, especially online aggregators. I really think FriendFeed should refer the reader to the writer’s site, not allow comments within their site, especially if the RSS feed has the comments element in it.

I realized there is another layer of recognition needed. My RSS reader supports the comments element. I have no idea how long it has been supporting it. Unfortunately, I’ve never used it. I never even paid attention to the icon. While looking to see if my RSS reader supported the comments element (and feeling like a dumb ass when I realized it did) I noticed other icons I never paid attention to, like the ability to see who else linked to an article. I think the reason why I never paid attention to them: the icons are gray so they blend in with the text. Fortunately the RSS reader I use makes it easy to switch up the icons and I just might to that to enhance my user experience. Ironically newer icons added to the program have color.

Familiarize yourself with the interface of the applications you use. You may realize the program has ways built in to make you more efficient. Now that I know I can click to comments easily I will comment more. I don’t think some site owners realize how inconvenient it is to comment on their site. Two extra clicks can be the breaking point for someone commenting.

Check and see if your feed has the comments element. It seems WordPress has it by default. I looked at the ExpressionEngine blog and theirs have the comment element in it so it might be in ExpressionEngine by default as well. I have no idea about the other blogging tools. Check if your feed reader supports the comment element. Online readers might have to get with the program and add the element.

I just noticed some of our feeds on 9rules/Chawlk do not support the comment element. I’m going to be a brave soul and suggest we add it. Pray for me ya’ll.

I mean being presented with the same damn links.

I expect to receive some duplicates; that cannot be avoided. For example, if I subscribe to Chawlk, Digg, Reddit, Delicious, etc. I expect to see duplicates because those links are based on what people submit. If I am subscribed to a person’s blog, and they Twitter they wrote a new blog post, I’m receiving the same link a minimum of two times. If someone else decides to share that link, I receive it more. If it appears on Chawlk, Digg, Reddit, Delicious, etc. I receive it again. If I log into Facebook, I most likely will see it again.

That’s too many times. Twice is too many times, especially when it is happening over multiple blogs.

Thinking about this a bit, most people do not end up on the link submit sites, so all I have to deal with is Twitter, blog links, and profile pages like Facebook. In honesty, Facebook is only an issue when I log in (which is once a week at most) so I’ve narrowed it down to Twitter and site RSS feeds.

Well, that is an easy fix. If a person posts their blog entries on Twitter, what reason do I have to subscribe to their blog? None, zip, zero. I can easily drop the feeds for any writer that posts their blog links to their Twitter account and not miss a thing. Problem solved. Yeah me!

Sucks for the writer though.

By making Twitter more of a resource than their blog, eventually, people will do what I did, make a choice between which service he or she wants to follow. These things become more apparent when all of the data is in one place. I decided to place all of my data in an RSS reader because I can manage how often the data is retrieved. Some people opt to use FriendFeed, SocialThing, etc. With all the data in one place, in my RSS reader, I could recognize how often I thought to myself, “I’ve already seen that” or since my RSS reader provides statistics on usage, which feeds I was completely ignoring because I already absorbed the information.

Cross-posting data will eventually work against you because the need to cross-post is slowly diminishing. As new technologies evolve behaviors will naturally adapt with it. When the person adapts the new behavior often determines if a person is a follower (as in not a leader). Instead of managing the situation before it gets out of control (information overload in this case), the person will wait until everyone else starts talking about it, then take action.

If you cross-post, expect your numbers to drop somewhere. If you’ve made your Twitter feed more valuable than your blog/site feed, congrats on weakening your brand by allowing a 3rd party application to come between you and the people trying to follow you.

The truth of the matter is, like it or not, the conversations that once existed solely in the blogosphere have now moved on. People still comment, but in a lot of cases, those comments aren’t on found on the blog itself. So the question is, has the conversation become diluted among all the different services and applications? Or is it just adding layers to the original topic? And most importantly, how can you keep up?

Yes, the conversations are moving away from blogs but the problem is the same problem that has always existed, one I warned about at least two years ago. How many times has a writer published an article, a larger site wrote about it, and the conversation took place every where but on the writer’s site? Same problem – the writer would have to keep up with those conversations. Now, the same root problem exists, but there are many more sites where the conversation can take place. The writer publishes the entry and now a discussion can happen on the originating blog, any blogs that write about it, any site that aggregates content (Reddit, Chawlk, Digg, StumbleUpon, etc.), Twitter, MySpace, Facebook, any of the social sites that are popping up, forums…the list is long.

The question is: does it matter to the writer if the conversation takes place in other places? If the answer is no, the writer would have one strategy. If the answer is yes, it does matter and the preference is for the conversation to take place on their blog, well, that would take a different strategy, wouldn’t it?

By golly, yes it would. Go figure.

The reason why the conversation goes on without the writer being involved (and this is going to hurt but it’s the truth) is because the commenter doesn’t really care about talking to the writer. The commenter cares about commenting on the article. Unless the writer has a direct connection with their audience, the hurdle of converting a reader to a commenter is tough enough. If the reader finds the article on another site, it is a tougher hurdle to get the reader to leave the site he or she is on (particularly if it is a favorite site), and convert that reader into a commenter on the original site the article was published on. To achieve that type of interaction a deeper connection than publishing articles and hoping someone reads them is required.

Last weekend I talked some smack to Bill Cammack, which led him to do a live stream. Bill’s live stream turned into a show featuring Liz Burr, TheJennTaFur, Darren Keith and I.

In this clip we are acting rather silly, but you’ll get my point in a minute. We talked for over an hour and we talked about a range of topics from the crane accident in New York to politics to relationships. We had a good time. I met three new people (Darren and Jenn in the stream) and a guy named Clarence who was using a Japanese phone so he couldn’t participate in the audio. This was a very spontaneous interaction.

After interacting with Darren and Jenn for over an hour, exchanging web site and Twitter information, if an article they wrote was on Digg, what are the odds that I would comment on Digg and not on their site? Or not talk to them about their article? Not mention to them “Hey, your article is on Digg, congrats!” or Twitter congrats on their article being on Digg (or any other social site)? My preference would be to talk to them, comment on their site, Twitter their stuff, etc. On the flip side, Clarence was only there for a minute and I had no interaction with him but to say hello. If I came across an article of his elsewhere and if I felt compelled enough to comment on it, I do not feel a priority to interact with him at all. Why should I? I’d drop my words where ever I was at the time. Of course, if I never interact with Jenn and Keith again my priorities would most likely change but if I keep in touch my priority would be different than someone I never interacted with.

For the longest time I’ve been telling this to people but the preference was to use 3rd party services because it was “the thing” instead of branding themselves and connecting to their readers. Essentially, it was like watching thousands of people walk into a brick wall. Watching them push themselves further away from the goal they expressed. I said, “Hey, you really might want to watch out who you let access personal information about you” and their response would be, “I don’t put anything online that I wouldn’t want everyone to know”, then I’d laugh to myself and try a different approach, “Hey 3rd party sites, how about implementing levels of privacy/friendship for users since (on average) most people do not think about how what they do today will impact them tomorrow?” It took two years, a lot of embarrassment and frustration for users on social sites to listen. I know, people didn’t care they linked to their boyfriend/girlfriend/spouse because it didn’t matter.

Until the breakup or divorce happens.

They also didn’t care about putting up those photos that got them fired or reprimanded.

Or saying something publicly that cost them the job/project/contract they wanted without realizing a potential client/employer saw something and misconstrued it because the words/pictures would have been better served if they remained private.

Imagine if all the time a writer spent placing 3rd party sites between themselves and their readers/users was spent forming a direct connection with their readers/users? Sure, one cannot stop conversations from going on elsewhere but there would be one happening on the writer’s site as well and the different conversations (in different niches, with different reader expectations) can give the writer different perspectives on their writing.

As a writer, how you interact with people matters and directly impacts how they interact with you.

Period.

End of story.

She would have to live a lie.

That made me think about how many people I know live in a similar situation, but the consequences might not be as severe or living a lie is not as obvious. Think of the people who create alternate personalities online, where the reader would have no way of knowing the personality they begin to like over time is not real. Imagine meeting this person face to face, can you imagine the let down? The person who is mean, spitting venom online all the time but in person could never say those words. The person who is paper rich and cash poor. Let us not forget the person that makes every attempt to make their blog appear to have more traffic than it actually does.

Or worse, the person who begins to believe the lies because deep down, they want to be that other person so bad, particularly if the persona is more successful or accepted.

Be yourself because in the end, that is all we have. Even though Tasha is a great soldier, can she continue to be a good soldier if she has to watch everything does so that her relationship remains a secret? Her entire life becomes a battlefield, one wrong step and the game is over.

Just like putting an inappropriate picture online can get someone fired. Or some of the things writers publish on their blog could prevent them from getting a job because the employer took five minutes and Googled potential employees. The marketing department did their job (technically) and lied about a product’s features to get people in the store but will it be enough to keep people in the store? Which is more important, getting those people there or the consumers purchasing something (isn’t it the equivalent to those seeking Digg traffic)? Those investors start-up owners lie to in order to get the funds to take their business to the next level usually find out someone lied their ass off.

Doesn’t the truth usually come out? I have no idea where Tasha’s storyline is going but I am curious to see which path she decides to take. Shackled by a lie or free picking the truth.

Honestly, everyone starts of with zero readers so we have all been there. The point remains that sometimes showing those stats can cripple you instead of help you. This isn’t a discussion about whether the tools should be in place to measure traffic. This is about making those statistics public.

Think about this for a minute. There are some sites that start, hit the ground running and accumulate large readerships quickly. This is not the norm. Most take a considerable time investment to grow. It’s a gradual process. When I come across a site that has a FeedBurner badge that shows 10 readers, I see Adsense on the site and there are Digg/Reddit buttons showing most of the articles have no submissions and add to it there is minimal comment activity, what impression do you think you’re making on the reader? Do you realize what you are saying…without actually saying it?

1. You have a very small following.
2. If you’ve been writing for a while and still have no traffic, you suck.
3. You can’t be making much money with advertising if no one is around to view ads.
4. If I advertise on the internet, I’m not going to advertise with you because you don’t have the audience.
5. If you want your blog to be commercial what business logic did you use to justify making those stats public? (Exception – a blog being used as an example on how to build a blog from scratch. Those stats are a measurement tool. Most do not fit in that category.)
6. You’re a follower not a leader. You followed everyone else using the new tools even when the odds are they cripple you more than help you.

Let’s really think about this. If you don’t have much comment activity (makes sense, few readers), do you think the average person is going to take time out of their busy day to write a comment that no one is going to read? Some will, most won’t. You are discouraging people to comment. You are discouraging people to read your site because there are other more qualified sites…you know, the ones that have people reading them. If you really want to be a top player in your niche, it’s time to start thinking better, making wiser decisions, tapping into some leadership qualities – the main one: realizing what you do today can screw you up tomorrow so you best think about what you do today and how it will impact you tomorrow.

If, five months later, your blog proudly shows you gained 10 more readers what does that mean? At that rate by 2025 you’ll be actively competing with the other blogs in your niche, which is the goal right? You’re writing is great, that’s all it takes to have a successful blog, right?

You didn’t really believe that did you?

My point? Using the new cool “thing” isn’t always in your best interest or even better…if you’re going to use the new cool “thing”, use it to your advantage.

Fighting the digital revolution ain’t one of them.

Someone posts code on your site that is knowingly against ToS. You think it’s cool but in the end take it down to avoid the legal hassle. It’s knowingly again the ToS and it’s not the first time something has been removed. People felt they had been censored, start to revolt by posting the code all over the place. In the end you decide to listen to the people, and refuse to remove the code any more and go one step further by submitting an article to your own site violating your own ToS, and asking people to support the article.

That’s what happened on Digg this week and this is when Digg lost control of their company.

The MPAA, RIAA, etc. are lawsuit happy. They file suits they doubt they will win. I’m sure Digg made their day because this is a lawsuit they will most likely win.

Let’s face the facts: if the Digg community gave a damn about Digg, they wouldn’t have forced the owners into a position they clearly did not want to be in. Digg has employees they are responsible for. Investors that they have contractual obligations for. True, they have an obligation to their users but those same users want the site up AND free, right? If the majority of people are wrong do you listen to them? No.

It’s not about the key anymore. Everything Kevin and the crew has done will be up for grabs…that’s not a good thing. If the MPAA, RIAA can’t win “this” fight there is enough ammo for them to win others, against Kevin and the crew personally.

Gotta love that community support, don’t ya?

Sure, having the ability to control the content purchased would be nice but it’s how this fight took place. Did the founders of Digg decide “we want to take this fight on”, seek legal advice on how to actually win, accumulate the funds necessary so the site would not be in jeopardy, THEN start the fight? No. Did the Digg community give them the chance to do that so it would be a win/win situation for everyone? No.

This week we learned how immature, irresponsible and selfish the Digg community is. This week Digg learned that they no longer have control over their company – any decision that goes again what the owners want to do, the users will revolt…and it doesn’t matter if it’s in the best interest of Digg or not. Digg learned this week they are too weak to stand up to the pressure.

What dumb ass enters a fight without being in the strongest position possible? Oh, well, hmm…gotta love that Digg community, right?