Last Thursday afternoon at the IPR Summit on Measurement there was a panel discussion entitled "How to Measure the Impact of Blogs and Other Consumer-Generated Media." Near the end of this I stood up and asked a question that went something like: "It's obvious that there's a lot of ego involved in blogging. In fact, the panel maybe has been talking so much about what blogging means to themselves -- about their links and their comments and their conversations -- that perhaps they haven't talked enough about the impact on the readers. What about readers that don't care so much about you, that are just there for the information?"
To be honest, I was trying to yank their chains a bit. But still, with so much ego involved in blogging, doesn't it sometimes get in the way of objective measures of impact?
Well, the session was almost at a close, and the panel could respond only briefly on the topic. I made a point of talking to each of the panelists afterward; some had taken the question in stride and some seemed a bit taken aback. Our talks brought out some great points about social media measurement, blogging and ego:
1. Content is what brings readers. Regardless of links or comments or whatever ego the author might have, if the content isn't there, the readers aren't there. Three of the panelists, Shel Israel, Kami Huyse, and Katie Delahaye Paine are well-known and accomplished bloggers; their readers come for their content. Whatever personality or ego is also expressed is secondary. (The other two panelists were Todd Parsons and Donald McLagan, both also experts on social media and its measurement. All the panelists had important and interesting things to say, see Lee Aase's blog.)
2. Links, comments and conversations, while very gratifiying to the author's ego, are also the connections that make blogging so powerful. They are the social part of social media and in part are the source of its amazing power. One blogger's link is also every reader's link, and that's why they are important to count.
3. What the hell's wrong with a little ego involvement? Social interaction, in any context, has something to do with status and self-image and self-gratification. It's the nature of social media to involve the ego of the author, and surely ego is the source of a lot of it's power and popularity.
Kami Huyse has some excellent thoughts and data on this exchange. (I am "Bill from the audience" that she mentions in her post.) -- Bill Paarlberg
Recent Comments