A Different Model for Writing Blog Posts
This is a blog that I have been meaning to write for some
time. I occasionally take a look at the
download statistics for this blog, and recently I was prompted to do this by
other bloggers who were reporting their end-of-year statistics (e.g. see Laura McLay’s review of the Punk Rock OR blog).
Unlike Laura, I do not have impressive download statistics
to report about the many blogs I have written in 2011; frankly, I did not
create many posts. However, an interesting pattern has emerged regarding this
blog’s readership: there are a few key
blog posts that are frequently downloaded.
For example, my most frequently downloaded blog post is a survey of
Python plugin software, which I wrote in 2009.
I suspect that other bloggers have seen the same thing; they have a few
posts that are very popular because people do web searches on that topic. However, it is worth stepping back and
thinking about the implications of this when writing a blog.
When I first started blogging, I imagined that readers would
view my blog the way that I view Laura’s blog.
They would use a RSS feeder to collect and view blog updates. These would be read shortly after they were
published, and afterwards they might be used as a reference. This led me to create blogs that referenced
each other as part of a larger conversation on a topic. For example, after blogging about Python Plugin Frameworks, I had several
follow-up blogs, including a brief description of PyUtilib Plugins that I had developed.
However, I have realized that my blogs are more likely to be
found through internet searches focused on a topic. Consequently, the Python Plugin Frameworks
post gets frequently read while the PyUtilib Plugins post rarely gets
read. Readers are finding my blog posts
after searching for “python plugins”. The narrower topic covered by the
PyUtilib Plugins post is not frequently referenced on the internet, and
consequently it is not strongly associated with the more general topic of
Python plugins; for example, I did not see it in the first three pages of a
google search for “python plugin”.
This suggests a different model for writing blog posts that
has already begun to affect my blogging.
Since blog posts are individual artifacts that may have enduring value
to readers, updating a blog post with new content makes more sense than
creating a new post that continues the previous discussion. For example, I’ve updated the Python PluginFrameworks post to include references to PyUtilib’s plugins. This may confuse readers of RSS feeds, and I
do not know that RSS feeds will automatically update their feed to capture updates
like this. I would assume not. However,
this is clearly a strategy that will enhance the long-term impact of a blog
post on a specific topic.
I'm pretty sure that your assumption that RSS feeds do not reflect updates to past posts is correct. On the other hand, no need to worry about updates confusing those of us (myself included) who use an RSS feed from your blog. They won't confuse us because we won't know about them. Ignorance may not be bliss, but it's generally less stressful.
ReplyDeleteNice post and thanks for the comments! The longer I blog, the more I realize that many people who are totally uninterested in operations research find my blog by googling for obscure terms like "composition notebook" and "plantains." I, too, am reevaluating how to write posts and perhaps how to revive really old posts I wrote before anyone read my blog. It's a challenge.
ReplyDeleteOne way to help more regular readers who want the RSS feed would be to post new short entries pointing back to significant updates of older posts. Alternatively, make the update a new entry and update the old post with a forward reference so that people who find the old post via Web search get a link to the new one as well.
ReplyDelete