Great Video on Blogpost Frequency

I get this question a lot, especially as I am doing many more blogs and CMS run sites.

I am definitely not in favour of blogging for frequencies sake. You need to make sure that the content you are adding is of value to your readers.

Think of these options for content:

  • Is it new? ie new creative content, stories, artwork
  • Is it a new angle on a news story? A new perspective or raises a point that has not been widely discussed.
  • Is it well researched?
  • Is it an opinion? Controversy is not necessary.
  • Is it an experience you can relate?
  • Can you solve a problem? (This is a great way to bring in the visitors)

All of these options will help you produce good quality content. If you can build a site that has regular good quality content, you will bring in the visitors.

One thing that Matt discusses, that I have found to be true is that generating new content does bring in visitors. It also feeds your readership. An increase in your subscriptions via RSS can be an indication of long term loyal readers of your content.

So while frequent posting can bring visitors, for SEO purposes write quality content. Coupled with a regular frequency, quality content will also hook your readers and keep them coming back. It’s called being Sticky!

Combining Blogging and Twitter

I have been running workshops on Social Networking, talking primarily about Twitter Blogs and Facebook.

Once of the questions I am asked is which of these are most important, what should they focus on first.

As usual, there is no definitive answer, but it becomes more about :

  • What you want to achieve from social media and social networking
  • Who do you want to say
  • How much time do you want to apply to this

Twitter only gives you 140 characters at a time to talk aobut something, this is OK for many things: announcements, short comments, conversations, but not so good for somehitng more detailed.

This is where Blogs have it over most other forms of social media. The ability to be as brief as you like or as detailed as you like.

Also, your content is more permanent. Twitter tweets are much more “in the moment” as they pass in front of your followers.

Recent changes in search, where Bing and Google have both announced that they are entering agreements with Twitter to provide tweets in search results, means that what you say in Twitter will be available to more than just your followers.

So there is a place for both (or any facet of Social Media). There are plenty of addons that allow you to synchronise your entries across the different platforms (just make sure the duplication is appropriate for each audience)

Here is a video from Webpronews about Blogs (specifically Blogger) and Twitter and how you can get the benefits of both

Claiming David Bain is guilty online could get you sued

Reading Stuff today, I came across an article that talks about how posting comments claiming that a person is guilty of murder (in this case David Bain) can get the poster in trouble.

I know that there are some really blurry lines when it comes to what you can and can’t do online. Most people will be unaware of the risks they may be taking by (in some cases) commenting or speculating about legal matters.

For the record, David Bain was found not guilty of murdering his family 13 years ago in a retrial.

There are Facebook groups you can join called “David Bain is Guilty”

Legal opinion in the article says that these people are open to defamation cases if Bain decided to take action. Whether he would bother after 13 years of fighting the original conviction is up for debate, but it hilights a real issue in the openness of the internet and the ability to discuss and provide opinion on current events.

One key commnet was this:

People could also be sued if they wrote on their personal Facebook page that Mr Bain was guilty.

if they put it up on somebody else’s site, then if David Bain wanted to
sue he could sue either the person who posted it or the person who is
hosting the site, or potentially the web server (ISP) itself,”

The culpabilty goes far and wide, not only the poster, but the site owner, host and ISP.

I don’t expect this to cause people to stop commenting or tweeting about current events, but it does show that the laws have not caught up to what is happening online.

In a separate case showing some judges are getting a better grip on it, name supression was denied due to the inevitability that the names would be found and published.

Is this a good thing? Name suppression is there for a very good reason. How well the legal system adapts to the online age and particularly social networking will be interesting to view.