Failed Experiment
By sovknight | May 21, 2008
Well, I guess a 3,200 word post just wasn’t a good idea. I gave it two days, but my readership actually went down after posting it. For a couple of weeks, my reader base was on the upswing. I managed to go from 2 unique visitors per day to an average of 16. Pretty good results. I grew excited. Ideas were coming to me frequently and updating was becoming easier.
Then I killed it.
I was so sure my story device would work too. Maybe garner a few more comments than normal, but it backfired. In the end, I just suppose the article was too long. I got a couple comments (thank you, by the way), but I suppose I’d hoped for more.
According to my stats, a majority of the visitors to my blog stayed an average of 0.0 seconds. This is interspersed with a few 2 or three minute visits, and a couple of 20+ minute visits. Proof enough for me that the shorter the article, the more people read them.
I’m thinking 250 - 500 words is probably about right. It runs against my natural tendency to be super-wordy, but I’ll make adjustments. Perhaps I’ll just post more often.
That’s what my blog is for though. It’s an experiment, and a fun one. Forward and onward.
Topics: Thoughts |
3 Responses to “Failed Experiment”
Comments
« We Made it this far, you and me | Home | Fear »
May 21st, 2008 at 10:46 am
I really liked the post, however, it took me three attempts to read. Most people read blogs at work and get interrupted so much it’s hard to keep focus on anything longer than a couple paragraphs. The longest posts I ever write are my columns (500 words) and I don’t think those even count.
ADD, it’s for real.
May 21st, 2008 at 10:51 am
I agree entirely. It’s just so hard, because I love to write. You have to tailor the material to the audience though. Lots of words = book. Fewer words = blog. I’m still learning.
May 21st, 2008 at 11:46 am
You know what? Roughly 75% of my daily readership stays for less than 5 seconds, which means I was some search hit, but not exactly what someone was looking for. On the whole, I’m happy with my readership, which seems to be pretty stable. I probably have about 20 regular readers, most of who never comment, but I appreciate the ones who do, just so I know people are out there listening. Still, I find it’s best not to check your numbers every day. Otherwise you obsess too much.
I think you’re right that certain lengths work for certain formats. Shorter is generally better for blogs, and Sarah’s point up there is valid. I also read blogs during down time at work, and sometimes there’s not enough time to read a long post without interruption.
You could always try what I tried with the history of my love life blogs: episodes. Granted the episodes were rather long in themselves, but I tried to end each of them with a sense that there was more to the story, and so you’d have to check in next time. I feel like it was pretty effective, but I didn’t receive a lot of feedback about how that worked.
Still it’s something to consider when tackling long topics.
I don’t know if you could have broken your post up, though, but maybe it could have been abridged. When I’m editing for length, I really consider each sentence with the thought “will the piece be at a loss if this is cut?” Then cut everything that isn’t crucial to understanding and a solid telling. That’s just when I edit, of course, which I usually don’t on my blogs. (I proofread, but no editing usually.)