I'm a week behind...
...which has put me ahead in some ways. Coming back to a pile of email, snail mail, and feeds made me realize how much time I spend absorbing information that is either useless or redundant. Do I really need to know that Mike Arrington is burned out or that he's thin-skinned? Is it absolutely necessary to read in six different places that Jason Calacanis and Nick Denton are bickering over whether Netscape is a dismal failure or burgeoning success (Loren Feldman at 1938 Media has some commentary, though)? Did I really gain anything by scrolling through over 400 Digg posts that were, for the most part, repeats of what I'd already read elsewhere or just silly nonsense? The answers to all of those questions was "No."
I had well over 2,000 unread blog posts in a bunch of different categories and it was overwhelming. This was after sorting through 400 emails for the biz, the job, personal, and advertising that wasn't spam. ADHD overload. That's what I was feeling. Moreover, a week away from it all proved that the world kept turning even if I didn't read the very latest news in the zillion areas of interest that I have.
Still, there were some posts in that 2,000 that were extremely important to me, that I would have been worse for not reading. Denise's post on her ClubMom blog about how she felt about the Walmart contribution to Out & Equal: Workplace Advocates Summit really hit home with me. Amy Gahran had a great post on blog popularity, influence, and the Technorati formula for "authority". Doc Searls wrote a terrific post about having a relationship with Flickr, but not Yahoo! in relation to the value of the Flickr brand (Amen, Doc!).
Other posts from www.chaturbaterooms.com that were worth reading: Pam's post on Blogher singing the praises of train travel, though her posts focuses more on European trains — we really have to get Amtrak some positive blog buzz going! Dave Slusher, on the other hand, has had an abysmal airline experience, including lost luggage, delayed and cancelled flights, and killing time in airports. They made me glad we opted for the train. Lee's wonderful elves, Robert Scoble's newest Photowalking videos, 4AlterEgo's post discussing the recent bizarre report about abortion being to blame for worker shortages (some of the most bizarre logic I've ever seen is in that weird report), Liz' admonition to parents contemplating divorce, and Maryam's hysterical post on husbands, laundry and household chores. I even found a new blog to ADD to my feeds (SIGH) — design fckr (make what you will of the name — it's a great resource for design ideas).
Reading Lea Hernandez' blog "Dangerous Beauty" is humbling. I cannot imagine losing my home in a fire, having my in a school where the principal is a bully who not only bullies but parents, dealing with trying to recover years of art I created along with memories and the horrible memory of losing beloved pets in the fire, yet still having a heart of thanksgiving.
Are you seeing a trend to the blogs I've mentioned? I did. And identifying the trend called for a feed housecleaning. The first thing I did was to delete every single mainstream news feed except two: the first is our local newspaper, the second is a feed from my employer. All of the other news feeds went — Washington Post, CNet, NYTimes — all gone. I did this because this is fact: I am NOT a newsbreaker. That's not what I do here. What I do here is write about stuff that interests me, and if it is reported on the mainstream feeds, I'm blogging it because it showed up on one of my favorite bloggers' feeds and I find myself having something to say about it or just want to bring attention to it.
The second thing I did was to arrange my feeds into Bloglines Playlists according to categories. My major categories are: Friends, Design, Tech, ADHD/Education/Parenting, Internet (Web 2.0), Photography, Politics, Health and Local News. Using their new Glimpse feature, I can peek at the first 5 posts per feed and scan the posts I want to read quickly.
Hopefully doing this will help to deliver the blog content that is most important to me, that carries the most authority (regardless of how many blogs link to it) without reading through a bunch of repetitive news that I don't need to have in the first place.
Any suggestions on how to do even more streamlining? Oh, and if you haven't visited some of the posts I linked to, they're all highly recommended and carry a LOT of authority with me no matter what Technorati or Techmeme have to say. (Techmeme went out the window, too, by the way)
Women, Blogging, BlogHer, Chickens, Eggs, and Advertising
Yesterday's thought-provoking Twitter question of the day was this: Why, Karoli, are you moaning about being placed in the Style section of the NY Times when the ad running on the side of your blog is for JC Penney's home store?
My response: No matter what subject I blog about, furniture is relevant. It's pretty universal, that idea of having things to sit on or at, sleep on, work on, or put your stuff on.
His response: But if your ad was an Intel ad, you'd be featured in the tech section.
Mine: Which begs the question: Why aren't tech companies rushing to do ad buys on women's blogs?
It's really a chicken/egg question, isn't it? Do we blog to the ads or do the ads stem from the blog? Or do they have to be linked up at all? If you start from a premise that ads and bloggers are somehow inextricably entwined, the answer seems obvious, which is what rocks Google's world. Context-sensitive advertising is what it's all about. Blog about Intel; Intel advertises. Blog about politics; campaigns buy ads, because of course, the readers of those blogs would be most likely to click through those ads to discover the product, candidate or service.
I disagree. This is partly because I live in a world of intersecting circles, diverse interests and passions, as do most of you reading this Jasminelive blog. You may be a photography nut but that doesn't mean you don't buy shoes. You may write about health or ADHD or parenting or your , but that doesn't mean you don't give a damn about politics (especially this year!).
If I followed the model of context-sensitive advertising on this blog, Entertainment Tonight and alarm companies would be rushing to buy ads here, because the top searches for content on this blog relate to the posts I did on Britney Spears and Firstline Security. Those posts are less than 1% of what I care about. I'd guess that's true for just about every one of you folks who visit this blog or spend any time there.
Another word for this idea of context-sensitive advertising might be this: stereotyping. Perhaps Intel isn't doing ad buys on BlogHer blogs because they assume that readers of blogs written by women would not be interested in their latest enterprise technology, or fastest chip, or graphics accelerator, etc.
They're dead wrong. I love new hardware like I love fast cars and great pens. It's one of the joys of being a geek. But I don't always blog about it; I just use it. And if I like it, yes, I write about it, just like I wrote about the Prius, the Chevy Tahoe Hybrid and the BlackBerry (which is truly God's gift to mobile technology...hear me, RIM?). I love my Nikon cameras and blog with and about them often, but Nikon doesn't advertise here either. If they did, would that mean the New York Times would place an article about women bloggers in the Travel Section?
The fallacy in the argument that ads define the blogger is this: Most women don't write to the ad revenue. (That's also true of many men who blog, though blogs with a ‘business model' seem to be built for that context-sensitivity thing) It's nice, but it's not why we write. I run BlogHer ads on this blog because BlogHer is responsible about who they accept ads from, and they're fair about sharing the revenue. But the day I start deciding what to write or how to write it based upon what ads might pop up on this site will be the day I tell you all good bye. I don't make enough money from the ads on this site — my site, under my control — to let anyone define what I will and won't write about and where my focus will or will not be.
The editorial decision to run an article about the BlogHer Conference in the Style section because the ads on our blogs are for furniture companies is a sign of dangerous and stereotypical thinking. While I appreciate the NY Times reporting on BlogHerCon at all, I also think they would have done well to focus less on the obvious — marketing opportunities to women — and more on the important — women empowered to raise their collective voices in support of issues, people, , fathers, mothers, and society as a whole.
The point here is to be heard, not sold. The takeaway from BlogHer for me had very little to do with making money and everything to do with making noise and making connections. Isn't there something newsworthy about over 1,000 women plus many more in virtual attendance via Second Life leveraging technology to make a difference?
I think there is. Do you?
Memo to the NYT
When you publish an article about women bloggers, including women political bloggers, and seem to be making the point that women are a force of nature in the blogosphere, as well as being responsible for spending 83 cents of every dollar spent, don't you think it's just a bit of an insult...
...to publish said article in the Life and Style section?
There is a certain bitter irony about seeing a New York Times report about the BlogHer conference entitled "Blogging's Glass Ceiling" published in Life and Style.
Blogher shoesBecause, um, we're not all about shoes and hairstyle, though there's something a little scary about a political blogger with a pair of kickass shoes, for sure.
But as long as we're on the subject of women and political blogging, let's take a look on https://www.jasminlive.mobi to see what the NYT had to say about the most excellent session at BlogherCon on women and political commentary (or as I like to call it, "Finding my Inner Pundit"). Or not. Because it wasn't much, beyond acknowledging that such a session took place.
Instead, this was the punch line:
This year, women seemed to have moved on to other issues, such as gaining influence and making money. There were practical workshops on issues like building Web traffic and using open source software, sessions that dealt with emotional issues related to blogging, and specialized meet-ups (like one for boomer bloggers).
Now, this much is true. We were certainly courted by companies looking for a receptive audience. Not that there's anything wrong with that — there isn't. I would do the GM Tahoe carpool thing again in a heartbeat. But...
That wasn't the heart of what BlogHer was about. Not at all. At its heart, it was about connections, community, building friendships and renewing old ones. It was about stretching our voices, coming out of our exiles as second-class bloggers in all areas of the blogosphere , from tech to politics, to speaking out directly as consumers about what we like and what we don't like, and learning to be strong, credible, confident.
It was about being what has come much more easily to men in this space. About some equality. Not pushing men away, just stepping up to their level, joining our voices with theirs.
Perhaps a conference like BlogHer for men wouldn't even be news, so they wouldn't have to be exercised about being stuck in the Style section, but do you think that if it were, the Times would have put it in the Style section?
Women are much more than a pair of shoes and a credit card. Yes, we spend and should have a voice with those who want to sell their products. But we also think, we parent, we build and are community, we volunteer, we are professionals, we are laborers, we are voters....
We are entitled to be considered as a multi-faceted part of the larger whole that is the world we live in. Don't boil BlogHer down to boomers and mommybloggers. There's just much more than that.
When Shooting Photos at the Beach...
...consider the possibility that waves which look harmless are usually the ones that getcha. This little wave popped up on the rocks, knocked me back on my butt, forcing me to choose between the camera and my phone.
The camera won, at least in that split second. Got out of the way of the water, yanked my BlackBerry out of my pocket, pulled the battery and staggered up the beach to safer ground.
Fortunately it looked like the water just got in around the edges of the BlackBerry, so I was optimistic, but also in need of a phone. When your whole life is on your phone you can't afford the 48 hours to dry it out, especially on a Monday.
I went home, changed clothes, I was going to burn this time to replace it, and ran to the AT&T store. After a fair amount of angst about the fact that all my data was on the old phone, so having a new one was about half the joy, but less filling, I realized that I had not backed up the phone data to my PC.
Oh, stupid one. Yes, there was no. backup. 500 contacts in a phone that took a swim in the Pacific Ocean.
After 24 hours of grouchy Twitter grousing, a friend gave me some advice that worked...and so after the phone dried out, I managed to get my contacts transferred from the old phone to the new one.
I also want to kiss every employee of RIM responsible for the durability of their phone, because the old phone, now completely dried out with a new battery installed, works just like nothing happened.
Only problem...I can't convince the kid whose upgrade I burned to take it. She wants the Tilt. I say, start saving. In the meantime, I've got two perfectly good, identical phones and no upgrades for 14 months. Think she'll change her mind?
Intersections: Twitter, Track, and CNN
Twitter-like services are hitting the mainstream, and there is no better example that what Rick him over at CNN has been doing for the past few weeks by bringing Tw*tter and Facebook into the political conversations he's been having on his Saturday shows.
I was intrigued by his use of Twitter last week, and followed after his last show. With the Biden announcement today, it seemed like a good time to join the conversation, especially since his question intersected with the question we were discussing on NewsGang Live — whether or not the Great Obama Text Message Experiment was a failure or success.
I shot a message to him saying I believed that the text message announcement plan accomplished exactly what it was intended to accomplish: Buzz, and a large audience available at the send of a single text message. Since we were in the middle of a pretty interesting and intense NewsGang Live discussion, I left it at that, and went on with our show.
That would have been the end of it except that I received a direct message from a Twitter friend telling me that he saw my icon pop up on Rick's twitter page on-air. That intrigued me for a number of reasons, not the least of which was that it meant that Rick was using Tw*tter in real time, unedited. (At least, in as real time as Tw*tter can be, given that they've disabled track and hobbled conversations. Hence, the use of the asterisk in their name.)
I was impressed. Impressed enough to return to his 10pm show.
My suggestions and criticisms for Rick follow:
Rick, props for understanding the value of real-time conversations with people on Tw*tter and other social media. Props for understanding the value of bringing the audience into your conversation in a real way, and props for understanding that by interacting with us, the conversation can evolve.
I believe you understand the value and power of these conversations. However, in your 10pm show, you made the mistake of harnessing the collective idiocy instead of the collective intelligence of those following you, and then turned that into some kind of "Tw*tter shaping the story" thing.
Now that tells me a couple of things. First, it says that you read my earlier tweet to you about Tw*tter breaking the Biden story ahead of you all. It also says that you understand the value of real-time conversations as they relate to news.
These are good things. However, the third factor in an effective use of Tw*tter and like services is the most important: Your own participation in the conversation.
Seriously, the only reason that 3AM lunatic comment got any traction is because you gave it traction. You skipped over really well-stated opinions in favor of the one that was utterly ridiculous.
If you're going to have a conversation one to many, make it count.
Oh, and you could completely lose your pundit panel, too. Let the folks who really follow these issues be the center of the conversation. Kind of like Talkback Live was back in the days when I worked for CNN Interactive. Talkback Live was the prototype for what you're doing now, use that audience power to propel you.
To the folks like Mark who took me to task for criticizing him:
You make the point that him' followers jumped from 500 to 950 in the span of an hour. How do you think that happened?
It happened because I, and a few others, sent him' message out to those folks who follow us, who then sent the same message out to those who follow them, widening and overlapping the circles.
And Mark, the way I found your critical remark? I track my name. So when you sent me a message without following me, I was able to discover it and have a real-time conversation with you about the whole thing because track worked.