Size of audience not what matters for blog success
.png)
Scoble's spot on this morning that building a big blog audience is not what matters in blogging.
Robert was referencing what advertisers care about, but the same applies equally to you lawyers trying to achieve blog success.
So, what should you care about per Robert? (with my added commentary)
- Are you getting content that no one else is? Some lawyers are all over niche subjects that no one is covering. Cover a niche and you will not be able to keep your target audience away with a stick.
- Does that content cause conversations to happen? If you use Google Blog Search, do you find anyone linking to it? Conversations take place by others referencing points you raise, not necessarily via comments on your blog.
- Does that content get noticed in the niche you're covering? Do you get noticed by conference coordinators and trade magazines?
- Even more importantly, does it get the most credible and authoritative to link to you? Who are the bloggers most respected in your area of law or in industries who want to represent? Who are the reporters covering your niche? Get referenced by them and it's ten times as valuable as any ad or any PR person plugging for you.
- Don't ask how big your blog audience can be. That's not the end game. Ask how far can I take myself as a lawyer. Ask can I take myself to the top in my niche area of the law.
Again, blogging isn't about search engine dominance (though you'll do very well) and getting a huge audience, it's about establishing yourself as an authority in a niche through entering online conversations with the key influencers in your field.
Couldn't agree more. I'd rather have a handful of dedicated readers, commentators, and contributors than 1000's of daily hits. When you see the numbers non-niche blogs are racking up, it can get a bit overwhelming and intimidating, but all it takes is one reader to post a comment or a post on her blog on the same subject matter, to make it worthwhile. I find it a very cost-effective form of marketing.
What I like best about substantive law blogging is it provides an avenue to to connect to the network of practitioners, professors, and pundits in my area of law. Before, this would have required attending conferences, cocktail party schmoozing, and time-intensive participation in Bar Association sections. Not that there's anything wrong with those venues, mind you, but blogging seems like a much more direct way to connect on the issues of common interest.
Great that you commented on this post Robert. I've referenced your blog on Inverse Condemnation more than once when citing the value of a niche blog.
May just quote your second paragraph in an upcoming post on the cost effectiveness of blogging. Lawyers regularly ask about the ROI from blogging. I respond with exactly the factors you mention - the alternative methods of networking and how much more time they take.
Happy New Year Robert, continued success for the New Year.
Thanks, Kevin.
Feel free to quote away -- as for ROI, I think all it really takes to "break even" (at least in my area of law) is a single decent new client or new matter per year. Much of the effort that goes into blogging about my practice areas I would have to do anyway: keep up on new cases, scan the papers for market directions, maintain contacts with my peers. Now, instead of "continuing legal education," I can now consider these tasks marketing efforts.
Also, these tasks used to be too easy to shuffle aside in the rush of day to day practice, but now, when a new case comes out, I'm reading it as soon as I am able because I have a compelling reason to. So I believe that blogging has actually made me a better lawyer.