The controversial Sarah Lacy spoke at Gnomedex. Yours truly argued with Lacy and Robert Scoble about business blogging, in what became a very public discussion (see extensive CNET coverage, image from said article). The usual, beaten to death PR Sucks meme arose (snore), but our specific argument arose over the feasibility of Lacy’s claims that bloggers can really monetize their business.
I believe most content generators a) don’t create for business/marketing purposes and b) won’t ever be in a position to successfully become superstars to the extent that the content itself will create enough opportunities to be self supporting. The era of turning on a blog and it being “special” ended last year (per last week’s Content Creation post).
CNET got my point right on the nose:
Lacy, Charlene Li [who is absolutely brilliant], Scoble and others, were “people who already have influential positions… Why should the average Joe Metroblogger care,” Livingston asked.
Both Lacy and Li came out of positions where their professional day jobs — BusinessWeek and Forrester — afforded them a much quicker ride to success. In the case of Scoble, he had to scrap his way to the top, but still had some special sauce as one of the first major corporate bloggers vis a vis Microsoft.
To really make it without these advantages, you need an unusual combination of skills to rise to prominence. You must be a natural. Scrapping your way to success through content creation today requires these four elements:
Not as simple as the wave of a hand from a former BusinessWeek reporter who had a easier path to prominence. By the way, Lacy’s journalistic past was something she needed to remind Gnomedexers of more than a dozen times. Most Gnomedexers seemed to feel Lacy’s laurels had worn thin, as demonstrated by the worst speaker rating of the event.
Breaking It Down
(Robert Redford starred as the Natural in 1984)
This discussion, while interesting to Lacy et al, is not a new discussion, but relevant in that so many individuals and businesses are trying to create blogs for business purposes. Technically “blogging” is not the right term; it should be content creation. A blog is a publishing mechanism for a variety of content from the printed word and podcasts to photos and video. Anyway…
Can an individual — and to some extent a new business effort — successfully leverage content for leading edge value? Yes, in our own business consider Valeria Maltoni’s rise to prominence last year, and this year’s Jason Falls success story. A rise to the top for business purposes can be done. Business value usually comes in the form of intangibles like more web site transactions through integrated marketing calls to action, personal or corporate branding, speaking opps, networking contacts, etc.
But let’s examine content creators by type:
1) The Naturals – Folks who would blog if they were stuck in Alaska, alone with no hopes for any commerce.
2) Business people and entrepreneurs – From consultant to corporation, these folks are seeking to achieve financial reward.
The two are not exclusive. But most bloggers fall under the category of one, naturally creative. Doubt me? Check out DC Blogs, a list of thousands upon thousands of local bloggers who create for the sake fulfilling their inner Picasso. Most have no aspiration for monetization.
Also, consider how many people create content versus those that simply listen or comment. The actual blogger is a rare person, one in 20 to 25, depending on your source.
In the case, of business types who do blog, unless they are also naturally creative, they rarely post with the necessary frequency, long-term tenacity and substance to succeed. If an entrepreneur’s natural creativity cannot be brought to bear in this sense, it’s going to be very hard for them. A corporation can better weather this deficiency by deploying several voices guided by an editorial mission and calendar.
In addition to creative fire to achieve success, you must have something to say. You have to have subject matter expertise. Creativity and subject matter expertise do not mutually co-exist. Further, is there enough of both, to deliver targeted content excellence over a sustained Stakeholders must find the content relevant consistently or they will stop following a creator.
Last, but not least comes, community networking skills. This represents more than half of the battle. Content is not king of much>Unless you already have notoriety, generating a community network becomes an organic process. Developing enough Groundswell to successfully compel communities to generate word of mouth and propel content, requires strong networking skills – a skill set completely different from content creation.
Networking requires a sustained participatory commitment from the individual on top of content creation. Much of Now Is Gone focuses on participation within communities, and that’s because it is the community that drives adoption, not publishing or even subject matter expertise. Those are pre-requisites. Instead, the community adapts, and they only do so when they believe you are credible, and there is clear value for them.
Applied to the Gnomedex Conversation
The Lacys, Lis, and Scobles of the world have an unfair advantage compared to the average blogger. Their credibility with the community — in the form of BusinessWeek, Forrester and Microsoft — was already established. Their communities were much more willing to embrace them than the average unknown.
To their credit, Li and Scoble are clearly positioned for long term success. In addition to their notoriety, they network, create content, and deliver substance over time. I am far from ready to don Lacy a champion due to perceived weaknesses in her thought leadership and community skills. That being said, she is undoubtably a Natural. Journalists and authors have to be content creators in their heart. But how much longer will the BusinessWeek cache carry her?
Those of us who have had to earn or are trying to develop business success through content creation know the road is not easy. If it was, everyone would be doing it. Much like publishing a book (according to Li there are only 50,000 published authors in the United States), for “the unfamous” the dream requires an incredible amount of perseverance and dedication. Trust me, I know. Because I’ve walked this talk from ground zero.
Not only am I a Robert Redford fan, but I am more and more a Geoff Livingston fan. =)
I would suggest, though, that there are perhaps more than just two types of content creators (anyone doing academic research, this might breathe thesis…). It would be interesting to conduct a study across different segments of bloggers (average Joes, entrepreneurs, biz peeps, community engagers, etc.) and survey what indeed motivates them. If anyone knows of such an academically-backed study, please share for the rest of us.
As, I think some may blog for money/business, other notoriety/fame, some just because-ers, some to do good, some as an art and so on it goes.
The post/convo brings up lots of questions. I like those types of posts best…the ones that make you think…not necessarily the ones that give you the how-tos and the 7 tips to gloryville.
Thanks again Buzz Bin!
I like the insight you have provide here. I’d agree that the battle to become a ‘superstar’ blogger is tough and that coming from a prominent organization/career REALLY helps to kick things off … but at the end of the day it’s like the American Dream … anyone has a chance to succeed and make a difference.
It’s also like most other professions in that not everyone is suited for being a pro-blogger – i mean – not everyone can be an all start football or basketball athlete.
Everyone has to find their niche!
(And sometimes finding that niche takes a long time)
–
http://twitter.com/franswaa
Hi Geoff,
So glad you posted about this. This is a big part of the huge misconceptions that exist about working – even in part – within and along side “social media”.
Companies and individuals look at the benchmark bloggers like Scoble and think it’s just a matter of tossing some stuff out there to see what sticks. But I love your point about building a network being more than half the battle. A strong community can help drive, support, and even improve content. But no amount of content can build a community if that’s all there is.
The rules of blogging have changed, and will continue to do so. The ubiquity of online voice for individuals, companies, and communities will no longer reward someone just for being there and for having the power of a big flashy brand behind them to lend credibility. Like anything else, it will become about careful planning and lots and lots of hard, dedicated work.
The standouts will be those that, over time, truly understand and artfully blend their creativity with business value for their audience, their need for self expression with the long-term needs of their community.
Thanks again for some thought provoking stuff.
Amber
Excellent post. I’m not sure why Scoble got pissed.
I’d add another reason why it’s so hard to get enough traction to be able to really monetize blogs: Time.
Not many entrepreneurs can find the time in their daily lives to consistently blog and connect and blog and connect. It blows me away when I see the Arringtons of the world suggest that entrepreneurs just forge ahead and they’ll have press contacts in no time.
Substitute the word “people” for entrepreneurs and its even more telling. People have spouses to be with, kids to read to and tuck in at night. Spending an extra two hours a day researching, writing, and responding is too much. Joining the conversation can get you notoriety – which is what most want anyway – but it will take a good dose of luck (if desired) to monetize.
Hmmm, I was passionate about one thing:
Anyone can make a big name on the Web. Anyone.
I hate it when people say that the A list is all decided and all that and that it’s too hard to break into it.
I have example after example of why that’s total bullshit.
That’s why I got worked up.
@Geoff – it is a bit more than just content creation +. It is also the ability to articulate thought in a way that paves the conditions to action. It needs to answer the unspoken questions “so what?”. I would also like to point out that there are many ways to build community. There are people who are tirelessly at work to help others connect and succeed behind the scenes.
@Alex – “how to” posts can be crafted to make you think. The two are not mutually exclusive. You just need to dig a little deeper to do it that way. Also, sometimes the content that makes you think/inspires to action long term is that you may not even agree with, or want to comment on short term.
@Scoble – you are invited to show me an example of an anyone just like me who has made their name on the Web without attending every new media event (I’ve got a day job that right now is a bit at odds with being fully immersed), covering a lot of news (again, you’ve got to be there or be on the radar to get the news in the first place). Finally, online as in my career, I have found that being a woman means I need to work at least twice as hard to get somewhere to the north of half or a quarter of the credit. I’ve got a lot of help and support to even be mentioned in posts like this one. C’mon, let’s be realistic. Give me a shout if you’d like to talk more.
As someone who tends to follow things like Zuckerberg-Lacy and now Scoble-Livingston from afar…it seems like there is sometime the “blow-up” factor, too. Surely, Sarah Lacy became known to a *ton* of more people after SXSW, no? And, it sounds like she put that notoriety to good use. This is an unfortunate way to grow one’s name online, but it’s not really anything new — just like the militant fringes of any issue tend to get traditional media coverage.
To complement that in a more positive manner, and maybe to support Scoble’s last comment, there is the value of having a distinctive voice/personality online. Gary Vaynerchuk comes to mind.
I like the four-legged framework you’ve described. But, it seems like there are other ancillary factors that can help someone successfully establish their online “blog” presence (along with “their pedigree”) — whether those factors become make-or-break depends on how solid they are on the four factors you described.
@Alex @Valeria @Tim I would say the frameworks outlined in this post could be expanded, but it would be a series of posts. Certainly your comments help do that.
@Alex I look forward to meeting you soon.
@Robert @Frank Agreed it can be done, but I agree with Valeria in that you have to be realistic. It’s not that easy anymore. People aren’t bubbling out of the woodwork like they used to… I think this is analagous to starting your own business and successfully building something. It’s a real ass kicker. Yeah, the dream is still there, but you have to earn it.
In the Washington Post today, there is an interesting article on blogging, which discusses some of the business uses: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/08/24/AR2008082401517.html
This is a worthy subject. While technically Robert is correct – yes anyone can end up on some sort of “A” list – that wasn’t Geoff’s point. It’s a lot more difficult these days. There are SO MANY people doing it, it’s that much more difficult to develop that influence. For many, they need a Forrester or a major company behind them.
To Robert, if you’re reading this. You were a pioneer, a true early adopter. Every industry has people like that. One of the first in the pool and you also have carried yourself with a certain ability to expand on it while not becoming too big for it.
Geoff is doing that as well – at least here in the DC area.
I often equate all of this to playing the guitar. Or acting. There are plenty of great guitarists that never make it big because a break didn’t come. They’ll have a regional following. People will wonder why they’re not huge. But the reality is that there is only so much room on that “A” list. Sometimes it’s about quality, sometimes it’s connections, sometimes it’s luck, sometimes it’s determination. Usually it’s all of the above. And it’s getting all the more difficult. So be it.
Jonathan (who was once ranked as a “C” blogger)
Ah, I really like how you are developing this idea. The bottom line is that celebrity blogging is a different animal than blogging for influence in a niche. Mix business in and you have an even more complex brew. Blogs are merely publishing tools, what we are talking about here is the building of influence, however you may define it. Blogs are a vehicle, and the roads are indeed getting more crowded. The competition for attention is fierce and I don’t expect it to get easier. Those with the talent for it will break through, but not just anyone can do it. There is much work to be done if it is your goal to be well-known.
Obscurity. Now that isn’t so bad. No special list or tips nor know-how. I am not shooting for even a few loyal and true believers as I am content being someone who writes on web things that interest me.
Now and then I might blurt out a post/content on something I really am passionate about but the quest to be an A-lister isn’t on my book and definitely not within my reach- speaking of of obvious personal limitations and difficulties.
Still, more than happy to connect with bright minds and kind souls online. I’d like to say it’s networking but I’d rather use the term distant friends.
Great post, Geoff along with the insightful comments.
Best.
alain