This Blog Is Relocating

If you're a reader or subscriber of this blog, first of all, thank you. Secondly, if you'd like to keep receiving updates, please follow me over on my new site & blog.

Years ago, I started Cafe Witness as an outlet for my casual observations. (I've always considered myself to be an armchair sociologist who just happens to make a living producing media.) But since my "personal brand" (if we must use that term) includes all aspects of my personality -- including the cynical, sarcastic and idiosyncratic side most often on display here -- I feel comfortable merging this POV with my allegedly more "professional" side.

(Also, many wise people tell me it's good SEO to merge my two sites, and I prefer to merge them into the domain I own, rather than this one that's owned by Goooooogle.)

So please, follow me here (and update your RSS subscriptions accordingly). I can't say Cafe Witness will never be updated again, but for now, let's consolidate our efforts and see where that gets us.

If YOU'RE Not the Boss of Me... Who Is?

Last week, blogger Joyce Dierschke asked a not-quite hypothetical question: Do you censor yourself online? Her example, of whether or not she should have re-posted a link to a (biased) political video that she personally found amusing, encapsulates a question we all ask ourselves on a regular basis:

When I'm online, am I allowed to be me?

The answers to the question are (if you ask me) far too complicated, because they can only be revealed by first determining who you are AND what you believe.

Some Things to Consider About Who "You" Are:

Are you a person or an employee?

Are you a brand or an individual?

Are you more concerned about being authentic or about getting paying work?

If a potential client decided they didn't want to work with you because of something you said or did online -- essentially, because of who you are (and the judgment they believe you display) -- would you regret the action in question?

Are you using the internet for communication or self-promotion?

Is your belief system permanent, or does it evolve over time?

Would the person you are today be embarrassed or ashamed of anything you did 10, 5 or even 2 years ago?

Are you steadily advancing toward a specific goal, or are you exploring for the sake of experience?

Do you expect greater integrity from others than you do from yourself?

Does transparency trump ethics?

Forget Big Brother -- EVERYONE'S Watching

Every decision we make online is a personal decision, undertaken privately (or so it seems) yet available publicly to anyone who knows how to look for it. Classic concepts of privacy, identity and "the self" are in flux now due to the web's multiple layers of "personal branding" and anonymity. And while Jonah may have believed that God could see him even when he was inside the whale, Jonah also never had to deal with recruiters scouring his friends' Facebook accounts for all his potentially incriminating kegstand photos.

So before you start censoring (or uncensoring) yourself online, perhaps you should first figure out who YOU are... and who you answer to.

Image by amanky.

5 Ways to Increase Your Blog Traffic: Chris Brogan vs. The Watchmen

As I've mentioned before, I notice whenever Lijit reports a spike in my blog traffic. Normally, that spike is caused by someone with a wide online reach (like Chris Brogan) mentioning something I've written, which then drives that person's audience to me (for that day, at least).

But this week I learned a huge lesson: Chris Brogan is no Rorschach.

When Chris (and the rest of the standard social media Twitterverse) mentions something I've written, I may see a peak of 700 views on that particular post.

When I wrote my review of the Watchmen film last week ("10 Things People Don't Seem to Get About the Watchmen"), I had no idea what would happen next:



Somehow, that Watchmen review really touched an online nerve.

Admittedly, Chris Brogan's original retweet of my post (which referred to it as the "best Watchmen review. Ever.") had something to do with it first finding an audience. But that 17,000+ traffic spike is 25 times the normal "Brogan Effect" on one of my posts. This means my Watchmen post reached some kind of escape velocity and broke out of our social media fishbowl (where most of my and Chris's audience tends to live), and crossed over to an equally-passionate (and, presumably, much larger) niche: traditional comic book fans. (It also had legs: look at the numbers 5 days later, vs. the 8 readers from the previous Sunday.)

My attempts to figure out exactly where all this additional traffic came from have been patchy at best, but I suspect Reddit had something to do with it. It also appears to have been retweeted at least 50 times (with another 15 thanks to Copyblogger), and then it may have continued on being retweeted under other names / descriptions.

All of which leads me to...

5 Thoughts on Increasing Your Blog Traffic

1. Write Something That Appeals to the Hubs. I could write amazing blog posts all day, but if none of them were interesting to the folks that OTHER people listen to (like Chris Brogan or Copyblogger), no one would ever see them. I could spend months building an audience that's comparable in size to Brogan's, but that's also time I could spend making interesting media, which is what provides the hubs with interesting things to talk about. (It's a cycle, people; find your spoke.)

2. The Title Is the Hook. If someone likes what you wrote, they'll want to tell other people. In this age of Twitter, they need to be able to explain WHY your article is interesting in about 100 characters (not counting the characters they'll use for the link, plus any "retweet" attributions, etc.). What better shorthand than an interesting (or provocative) post title that does their work for them?

3. The Summary May Also Be the Hook. Sometimes a title doesn't sum it all up. In that case, provide a one-sentence summary of your article or a series of mini-theses within the post itself that readers can cut-and-paste as their "aha" quote to explain the post's relevance. (Things move quickly on the web; making the promotion of your work as easy as possible is imperative to getting it seen.)

4. Don't Confuse Your Traffic with Your Niche. I make a living doing social media, so that's where the bulk of my audience comes from. As a result, the majority of my blog posts are aimed squarely at the audience I expect to be serving. But that's also a closed loop; if all I ever wrote about was blogging, social networking and Twitter, I'd never attract an audience with other interests, and my total possible audience would have a limited cap.

On the other hand, I doubt most of the 17,000+ readers who saw my Watchmen post are interested in social media, which means 95% of them probably have no reason to return to my blog; they were simply passing visitors who were here for one specific post. (In fact, my subscribers have actually gone down since the Watchmen piece ran.) So as great as it is to see a massive bump in numbers, don't kid yourself into believing that the people who find you are necessarily interested in everything you have to say. (And don't get depressed when your subsequent posts fail to reach those eye-popping numbers.)

5. Pay Attention to What's Working (and What Isn't). Personally, I think every blog post I write is great. But not every post resonates with my audience. Some of my best articles (in my opinion) languish with nary a comment, while others (that I wouldn't necessarily expect to catch on) somehow find a life of their own.

Studying the habits of my readers helps me understand what topics most often generate comments AND which posts (or titles, or summaries) most often get redistributed. It also helps me understand when I might be wasting my time. For example, I have a tendency to share my convoluted theories on why and how certain aspects of social media work, but my audience doesn't seem to care. So no matter how interested *I* may be in my ideas, it's evident that my audience isn't (yet), which means I'm much better served by writing articles they ARE interested in (based upon past indicators), with the presumption that my aggregate audience will eventually grow to include new readers who WILL care about what the old readers didn't.

Oh, and a bonus tip:

Don't Feel Compelled to Write Something Every Day. Some people believe that daily content is the only way to maintain an audience. Wrong. People aren't reading you because you're around, they're reading you because you're good. Sure, it's great to be both, but when forced to decide, most thinking mammals prefer to read quality over quantity. And the better you are, the more your audience will forgive your infrequency between bolts of spine-tingling relevance.

The Comments Ate My Baby

Some blog posts elicit more comments than others, and when the occasional "hot button" post (or anything on Scobleizer) attracts massive amounts of comments, it gets me thinking...

How many comments is TOO many?

As a Blog Writer...

... I would say "there's no such thing as too many comments," because the more people take the time to respond to something I've made, the more I know I've connected with my audience. (Minus all those people who post comments that add zero value to the conversation and simply act as a free ad for their own URL).

I also enjoy hearing people's differing opinions, or seeing them make additional suggestions that are relevant to the topic at hand. One author can't nail a topic from every angle, so it's great when interested commenters can add depth and breadth to the conversation.

As a Blog Reader...

... I rarely read beyond the first 10 comments on a given post, because so much of it is either empty congratulations or a stock battalion of "yes, but" arguments.

That said, when a topic DOES spur a healthy (or heated) debate, I'll read much further down the comment stream, usually until the sentiments begin rapidly duplicating themselves.

And, as a Commenter...

... I'm more likely to leave a comment on a post if I'm either among the first responders to that post (and, thus, more likely to have my comment read by others) *OR* if I have something to add that I believe is both valid and as-yet unsaid by anyone who's commented before me.

In my opinion, there's no sense in adding yet another voice to a string of comments unless that voice extends the conversation beyond its existing borders. Which is ironic, because as a blog author, I don't mind redundancy in the comment stream; when I'm in that role, every comment carries with it the added value of validation.

So, how do YOU handle (or leave) comments?

Image by lammy.

The Brogan Effect

Last week, I witnessed the direct impact of a referral from Chris Brogan on my blog traffic, and I thought it was significant enough to share.

After having not blogged since December, I finally got back in the blogging habit last week. One of those posts, about the reasons people don't talk to each other at social events, grabbed a lot of attention on Twitter -- and the bulk of that attention was driven by a single re-tweet from Brogan:

My friend @justinkownacki doesn't want to meet you - http://is.gd/jihd

True to the form of a verified thought leader, Brogan's acolytes ignored his warning and swarmed my blog in huge numbers. (Huge for me, anyway.)

By the Numbers

* According to Lijit, my normal weekday traffic (as measured by their service) hovers somewhere between 30 and 40 hits per day.

* On Thursday of last week -- the day of the blog post mentioned by Brogan -- my traffic jumped to 769 views. (That's 21 times my normal traffic.)

* I have over 2,000 followers on Twitter; Chris Brogan has over 40,000 followers. That means Chris has approximately 20 times the reach I have on Twitter.

* That one retweet by Chris of my initial blog post announcement was then retweeted at least 6 times by Chris Brogan's followers.

* My Friday traffic also jumped to 224 views, which is 7 times my normal traffic.

* I gained over 100 Twitters followers on the day that blog post hit; most of whom were already following Chris, but not me.

Admittedly, Some Other Things to Keep in Mind...

* The blog post itself was titled "I Don't Want to Meet You." It doesn't take Copyblogger to tell you that contentious blog titles often elicit clicks and rewteets.

* In point of fact, my own mentions of this post on Twitter were retweeted at least 7 times all by themselves.

* Influence is disparate. Fellow Twitterer Lily Hill also drove new traffic here, with her followers retweeting her mention of my post another 2 or 3 times.

* Despite the influx of new readers (and commenters), my RSS subscriptions only jumped by 6 people.

So What's It All Mean?

* It's currently impossible to track EXACTLY how much traffic was driven by any one of the mentions of my blog post on Twitter, so all traffic estimates are just that -- educated guesses.

* It's often hard to tell which retweets come from where, since people often paraphrase the original in order to fit within the 140 characters while also hopefully giving proper attribution to where they found it.

* Either most blog readers still aren't using RSS subscription tools, or the new readers who came here via Chris and Lily decided that the *rest* of my blog output wasn't worth subscribing to.

And, of course, the one undeniable truth:

* In the aftermath of a huge awareness spike, I now feel the need to be INCREDIBLY RELEVANT to anyone who stumbled across my blog and now expects pearls of Brogan-approved wisdom on a daily basis.

Or, as Randy (one of Brogan's followers) put it:

Glad @ChrisBrogan yelled it out, he's rarely wrong, if ever

So if I think *I* have pressure meeting people's expectations, something tells me Chris's followers' expectations for *him* are almost Neo-like. (Somehow, I doubt that makes either of us sleep any easier at night.)

Photo by m0xie.

Twitter Is a Mistress Who Demands All My Time

As you may have noticed, I've not blogged much lately -- but I've been Twittering like a fiend.

Why?

Because Twitter is far more immediate than blogging, requiring far less attention to detail and almost zero long-term commitment; it's the one-night stand of social media communications, while blogging involves trust, semi-permanence and the occasional post-hangover apology.

But as fellow Twitterer (and blogger) Mack Collier mentioned in a recent tweet, there's still a reason or two to blog: comments and perpetuity.

Twitter is great for stream-of-consciousness observations and spur-of the moment conversations, but it provides minimal connectivity or context. Unless you were "there" when that "conversation" took place, you'd never be able to piece the whole story together without painstakingly searching through the timestamped tweets of everyone involved. (I know Plurk does that better, but let's be realistic; no one you know is using Plurk BUT NOT Twitter.)

Blogs allow a coherent (we hope) thought to exist in relative perpetuity, web-wise, and it also allows the comments of all involved to be attached in context, so that something resembling a "whole story" can be easily understood even months or years after the fact. So, obviously, there's SEO-driven and self-legitimizing reasons to blog, and to allow others to comment back to you.

But in this age of 140-character Twitter gratification, is anyone thinking in structured paragraphs anymore? Or have we reprogrammed ourselves to make sweeping statements in the shortest sentences possible? Does the concept of expanded and supported thought wither when everything we know about someone is gleaned from text bites?

I'll be attending the Social Communications Summit in NYC tomorrow; perhaps I'll come home with answers. Meanwhile, look for tweets from the event, and (if it warrants one) a blog post afterward.

(Wise men once claimed that "content" is key, but I wonder if "context" will surpass it...)

Image by ClawzCTR.

PittGirl and the Trouble With Being Anonymous

As most Pittsburgh bloggers have already noted, veteran 'burgh blogger PittGirl has closed up shop (although she's still Twittering). Easily the most popular blogger in the area, she was also a mystery of sorts, due to her strident anonymity. And, in the end, it appears that a potential compromise of her anonymity is what led to her decision to commit blogging seppuku.

As much as PittGirl's anonymity was the "hook" of her self-created brand, it was her writing style that kept her core fans coming back for more. (After all, a mystery is interesting, but a comedy is eternal.) So it's ironic that her anonymity -- aka the packaging that surrounded her REAL product, her writing -- would be what ends up robbing her fans of the opportunity to enjoy more of what they've come to enjoy.

It's a bit like Reese Cups going off the market because someone told them they had to change their wrappers to green instead of orange; I sincerely doubt the Reese Cup fans would stop eating their favorite candy due to a packaging change any more than PittGirl's readers would have unbookmarked her if they knew her name.

But PittGirl's decision to walk away is less about the foibles of packaging than it is about the cultural problem that led to the packaging conundrum in the first place: the need to be anonymous.

Who... ARE You?

In her case, PittGirl genuinely believed that blogging under her real name might get her fired (or, to speak the parlance, Dooced.) Whether that concern was real or perceived, it was a risk she wasn't willing to take. But why did it have to be a risk in the first place?

Why is society so uptight about what its citizens say?

Why should what YOU, the employee, say or do in public directly affect anyone's perception of your company?

Because everyone is afraid. Of what? Of everyone else? Despite the fact that we no longer have to fight one another for food and shelter, we still live in a constant subconscious fear of what everyone else THINKS of us -- and we all believe that ANY OTHER PERSON could squash our lives just by blinking.

That has to stop.

Who Do You Think You Are, Anyway?

Are we still operating in the perceptual Dark Ages, where we believe that everyone else is as perfect as they claim to be? Does showing a glimpse of humanity, a personal flaw or a whiff of disagreement with the party line automatically brand a person as "dangerous," worthy of being shunned or shown the door?

Why do we give companies the benefit of the doubt, but not the people who WORK in those companies? (And your instincts might lead you to believe that we actually do just the opposite, but if we did, why would people be afraid to post photographs of themselves at a party on their Facebook account for fear that an HR troll would find a reason to fire them as a result?)

Something tells me that PittGirl would have been ENCOURAGED to blog on behalf of her company if all she had to say was glowing and positive. So why does society only want to reward the people who DON'T encourage us to improve upon the status quo? What good is a coal mine without a canary?

And, in the extreme, what is it that any one person could possibly say or do that's SO MUCH WORSE than what any of the rest of us could say or do?

Look around. I guarantee you that everyone sitting near you right now is hiding a secret that they think would make you shun them for life, IF YOU ONLY KNEW.

Guess what, people: if we shunned everyone who had a secret, we'd all be eating alone forever.

So let's each grow some backbone and admit to a very unpleasant truth: that not everyone will like us ALL the time -- including (for various reasons) our employees, friends and families. Get over it. The ones who tell you how wrong you are from time to time are the ones you can trust when they actually tell you you're right.

And as for the anonymous folks out there, whether you're noble or trolls, here's a thought: whatever you have to say is far more resonant when you believe it enough to say it with a straight face -- preferably your own.

PodCamp Pittsburgh 3: Meet Our VIPs

Although PodCamp Pittsburgh 3 is a free event, we decided to offer this year's attendees the opportunity to pre-register as VIPs. The perks of being a PCPGH VIP -- in addition to having a lot of abbreviations to throw around -- include some advance notoriety (i.e., a listing here), a swag bag and a free PCPGH3 t-shirt.

Following are the profiles of some of our PCPGH3 VIPs -- namely, the ones who wanted to take advantage of the opportunity to get some extra exposure for themselves and their work. (Those who didn't must only be coming for the free t-shirts...)

PCPGH 3 VIPs (Listed Alphabetically by Last Name)

Aaron Aiken (Twitter)

Aaron is a Web 2.0 junkie who will jump on any bandwagon offering private beta invites. He is passionate about personal finances and happens to write a blog on the subject with his wife, Lindsay. He writes to fulfill his passion and dreams of writing full-time one day. Aaron believes strongly that change can only come if one is willing to grow. His advice (to anyone who does not ask for it): “Track your spending for the next 30 days and get on a budget.”

* Areas of expertise: Writing, creativity, learning, and his Blackberry Curve 8310

* Areas he'd like to learn more about: Podcasting, getting more traffic to our site and developing repeat visits, growing a community, and using social media to raise awareness of our website.

********

Lindsay Aiken

Lindsay is a full-time nanny and part-time college student studying Massage Therapy. When she’s not working, she enjoys writing for her personal finance blog that she maintains with her husband, Aaron. She hopes that their blog will be useful to other people their age, helping to teach them the importance of properly managing their money so they will be prepared for the future.

* Areas of expertise: Writing, creative organization, and frugal living

********

Kathleen Danielson (Twitter)

"I am a college student just learning about social media. I'm eager to learn more about the way information spreads online and how people connect and develop relationships using different tools across the web. I'm studying International Affairs at George Washington University, concentrating in Global Public Health. Hopefully, I'll eventually be able to combine my passion for international affairs with my passion for social media."

* Areas of interest: viral marketing, social networking, human interaction, lolcats, video, blogging, building community, evangelizing web 2.0

********

Megan Engle (Twitter)

Megan is the Social Media Manager at the Michigan Nonprofit Association, and is currently working on revamping the MNA blog. She enjoys exploring new ways to cook vegetarian food, polishing her near-extinct Arabic skills, and figuring out what's going on in the world of social media.

Outside of work, Megan can generally be found walking her chocolate lab Mort, sporting a Kentucky Wildcats t-shirt, thinking about whether she passed the Michigan Bar Exam, and mourning the loss of The Wire, which she thinks may possibly be one of the greatest television shows, ever.

* Areas she'd like to learn more about: blogging, audio (podcasting), video, social networking, and ways for nonprofits to use social media.

********

Shawn Farner (Twitter)

Shawn Farner is a senior at IUP with an unhealthy passion for both social media and community service. After his December graduation, he hopes to work for a web startup or for a business trying to establish a social media presence.

********

Tim Grubb (Twitter)

Tim podcasts with Jen Sadler on Brain Gravy and insists, "We're not alcoholics with a drinking problem, we're Alcohol Enthusiasts with a podcasting problem."

********

Tim Hindes, Pittsburgh Tech Council (Twitter)

In his current position, Tim oversees all aspects of marketing and communications efforts for the Pittsburgh Technology Council -- one of the sponsors of PCPGH3. Tim's job focuses primarily on electronic media and strategic communications. In addition, he was responsible for project management of the Council’s new Web site, dedicated to highlighting membership benefits, member profiles, case studies, new products and added services. Strategic planning, brand development and marketing partnership relations were additional areas of Tim’s responsibility. While at the PTC, he developed other viral marketing media, including social marketing channels, blogs and interactive networking groups. His communication plan helped earn the Council the ASAE Gold Circle Award - Honorable Mention, in 2007, for electronic communications.

Based upon his marketing expertise, Tim also serves on two advisory boards including the Business Administration Advisory Committee for Pittsburgh Technical Institute and the Sales & Marketing Network Advisory Board of the Pittsburgh Technology Council. Tim is a 2000 cum laude graduate of Allegheny College in Meadville, PA, with a bachelor’s degree in Communication Arts and a minor in Society, Art and Science. He currently resides in the South Hills of Pittsburgh, PA.
 
* Areas of expertise: Marketing, Blogging, Lead Generation, Social Media Strategy

* Areas he'd like to learn more about: Networking, More Blogging, SEO, Podcasting, Business Usage

********

Blake Imeson (Twitter)

Blake is a junior at Grove City College, working on a degree in Entrepreneurship. Blake does part-time SEO and Social Media consulting. Connect with him on LinkedIn.

* Areas of expertise: SEO, Blogging and Social Media

* Areas he'd like to learn more about: He is a huge fan of Wordpress and Firefox.

********

Alan Jakub (Twitter)

Alan is a Web Designer with experience in WordPress, Podcasting -&- Graphic Design  He's also online at Dr-T.

********

Julie Morey, ElasticLab (Twitter)

Julie Morey is currently the Chief Creative Officer at ElasticLab -- one of the sponsors of PCPGH3. In 30 years as a designer, art director and brand strategist, Julie’s work for brands like Vehix, AT&T, Quiznos, Nextel, Herman Miller, American Express, Nordica and Public Television has resulted in both dramatic results and creative recognition. With a strong background in commercial production, a mid-career opportunity to lead creative efforts promoting a spirit of ethnic diversity for AT&T, MTV, HBO and TBS has fueled Julie’s love of the social medium. In 2007, she began developing Elastic Lab with a firm belief in the creative future of film and new media. Julie has earned more than 150 awards including the One Show, Communication Arts, Clios, and International Broadcasting Association (IBA).

* Areas of expertise: brand design, film production, advertising

* Areas she'd like to learn more about: music, new technologies, blogging


********

Melody Platz

* Areas of expertise: Travel writing, maintaining multiple blogs and creative writing

* Areas of interest: Humor, History, Eating, Science, Good Friends and Sleeping

********

Walt Ribeiro (Twitter)

Walt Ribeiro's "in your face" teaching style has created an entire community of those interested in music or not. "The Internet's Music Teacher" has consistently created a fleet of dedicated viewers, and shares his lessons, passion, and knowledge of music (and more) everyday. Ribeiro now teaches music lessons full-time online as "Your Daily Music Lesson with Walt" for sites like Revision 3, Ustream.TV, and more.

* Areas of expertise = The Internet's Music Teacher, Social Media marketing, Orchestration

* Areas he'd like to learn more about = Networking, production, distribution, marketing

********

Jen Sadler (Twitter)

Jen is a Podcaster/Freelance Social Media Consultant from Essex, Ontario, Canada. She podcasts at Brain Gravy.

********

Scott Tyler

A beer geek and snob extraordinaire...

********

Come meet these fine folks and hundreds more at PodCamp Pittsburgh 3 on October 18-19!

PodCamp Pittsburgh 3: Three Questions

Fellow PodCamp Pittsburgh 3 planner Dawn Papuga posted three questions aimed at social media people this week, as part of her weekly "Friday 5" series intended to provide bloggers with writing prompts. Here are my answers:

Q: What brought you to social media, and what keeps you hanging around?

A: I started creating web video in 2003 (and I still am) because I liked the idea of immediate feedback. I knew I could release an episode of Something to Be Desired and hear what people did (or didn't) like about it within minutes, rather than months or years. It's that sense of instant communication, and the interesting people I've met as a result, that keeps me involved in creating media for the social set.

Q: Which social networking tool gives you the shakes when it’s not updated or is experiencing down time? (Podcasts, Blogs, Micro-blogging, etc)

A: I'm pretty sure this question is a not-so-thinly-veiled primal howl over the Fail Whale sightings at Twitter, and I'll agree -- for a tool whose sole purpose is to connect people immediately, it's quite frustrating when that tool is down (and quite addictive when it's up, which is why none of us complainers have migrated away... yet... even though we idly threaten to do so on a regular basis...)

Q: What kind of insight could you offer to others on a topic at PCPGH3?

A: I'm already on the hook to host several sessions and moderate a few panels, so if you join us at PCPGH3, you'll hear my POV on such topics as:

* Creating serialized, sustainable content
* Avoiding social media burnout (and bouncing back when it happens)
* Using Twitter (and other social media tools) for business
* What constitutes "success" in social media?
* Feedback: The good, the bad and the ugly (and why we need it)

If you'd like to learn more about social media, or simply commune with fellow bloggers, podcasters and other content creators, you're welcome to join us at PCPGH3 -- and it's free! See you there.

Two Ways to Spend a Night in the Dark

The Pittsburgh Symphony Orchestra recently issued a call for bloggers to cover this year's season of performances, so I threw my text-based hat in their web-based ring. They took me up on it, and now I'm one of nearly a dozen bloggers who'll be offering "outside perspectives" on various PSO performances over the next 8 months. If you're a fan of classical music (or incongruous and occasionally insightful commentary about it), you can follow the PSO group blog here.

Meanwhile, a case of celestial irony: Shortly after attending the PSO's "sneak preview" concert -- at which new maestro Manfred Honeck was not in attendance -- I posted my first PSO blog entry, entitled "A Night Without Honeck". Suitably amused, the gods then caused a wayward tree branch to collapse on some electrical lines in my Greenfield neighborhood, resulting in A Night Without Power for me and about 30 of my neighbors. (Since Duquesne Light is still swamped with reports of outages, we're not expecting ours to get fixed anytime soon.)

As a result, four of my neighbors gathered on their shared stoop last night and listened to the end of the Steelers-Browns game by candlelight, on a battery-powered radio. I couldn't quite hear the details from my open window, so I wandered down and listened to the closing moments with them. Funny that it takes an act of nature (and NFL scheduling) to force people who live less than ten feet apart to actually make the effort to introduce themselves.

Lastly, the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette has an interesting profile about the hard-fought rise of Maestro Honeck, who -- since he wasn't the apprentice to an established conductor -- decided to become one by starting his own orchestra. Talk about innovating your way to success...

Photo by Sriram

Social Media Twist: Big Brothers Big Sisters Is Blogging

Last weekend's post about the danger of confusing the APPEARANCE of activity with activity itself affords me an opportunity to point out some folks who ARE taking action through social media: the Big Blog, created by the folks at Pittsburgh's chapter of Big Brothers Big Sisters.

In a recent email, BBBS's Communications Director, Ian DeJesus, said:

The purpose of the blog is to give the public a glimpse of what it is like to volunteer as a mentor. With any luck, these stories and testimonials will serve as an inspiration for others to become a Big Brother or Big Sister.

The optimist in me sees this as a great opportunity for BBBS to connect with new people. The power of stories from actual volunteers or mentored kids will be more effective than simple statistics or altruism at hooking potential volunteers on a relatable, human level. Plus, these kinds of one-on-one stories are what social media, at its roots, is really all about.

The cynic in me worries that this approach could easily slide into a thinly-guised marketing ploy, using potentially electric channels to service an un-engaging, top-down message about one's obligation to give back to the community.

Either way, the realist in me is heartened to see that social media tools continue to carry the conversation beyond the fishbowl of us, the evangelists and pot-stirrers. If even one child's life is improved by a volunteer who stumbles across Big Brothers Big Sisters on their blog, is that not a success?

Your standards may vary, but in this case, I'd say it certainly would be.

Test-Driving BlogRush

Andy Quayle asked (via Twitter) if anyone else was using BlogRush. Having never heard of it, I checked it out and, suitably interested, dedided to give it a shot myself.

What Is BlogRush?

It's a traffic aggregator for your blog.

See the new BlogRush widget in my sidebar? Those are all links to other people's blog posts, which BlogRush thinks cover some of the same bases as my own blog posts. Kind of like Google ads, but for blog referrals instead of retailers.

How Does Blog Rush Work?

That remains to be seen, since I just installed it. But, in theory, every time someone comes to this site, one of my blog posts gets pinged out into the BlogRush referral network. If I get 100 visitors a day, the BlogRush network will ping my posts through that widget 100 times.

Where it gets interesting is in the "tiered structure" of referrals: if you sign up for BlogRush by clicking on the tab below the widget (or by clicking here), my blog(s) get additional views via the BlogRush network. (And if someone signs up through your widget, we both benefit... and on and on...)

So It's a Pyramid Scheme?

I'm not sure.

On one hand, yes, it does seem structured that way. But since the resources being aggregated are page views, not actual cash, it somehow seems more benevolent, no?

On the other hand, it could easily become a tool for spammers, so I'm very interested to see how BlogRush combats that.

And, lastly, I have no idea how this applies to RSS views. If someone reads my blog posts in a reader and never actually visits the site... does that register as a "visit"?

It's all food for thought, but I'm interested in seeing how it plays out. I'm also interested in seeing how accurate the widget aligns other blog posts with mine. Semantic web, here we come...

TwitterAir Meets Cambodia

When Michael Bailey decided to try a group donation experiment to buy me an air conditioner (thanks again, Mike, Jim, Amy and everyone else who contributed), he based that idea off a similar concept: Beth Kanter's Cambodia Blogging Summit, in which she was seeking $4,000 from her readers to help fund an event that will give Cambodian students, workers and media sources the training and encouragement necessary to join the global social media movement.

This morning, I noticed via Twitter that Beth needed another $57 to meet her $4,000 goal. So I chipped in $65 (unsure if PayPal would keep some or not -- it didn't), putting her over the top. Now the event can move forward as planned, and Michael Bailey and Beth Kanter can BOTH sleep easy, knowing that the power of interpersonal fundraising is alive and well in the social media community.

I know $65 isn't the same as a new air conditioner, but I think it might have an even bigger impact in the long run, don't you?

Next?

People Are Nicer Than You Think

A few days ago, I mentioned it was impossible to work in stifling 90 degree conditions when your apartment feels like a heatbox.

Michael Bailey responded by creating the TwitterAir project, intending to raise money to buy me an air conditioner. I argued that the power of the people could be better focused on something truly useful, like helping people who are REALLY in need, instead of my pasty white self.

Apparently, Jim Shireman of Sportsocracy didn't get that memo. Today, he and his wife Amy tracked me down at the Quiet Storm cafe to give me a surprise -- a brand new air conditioner.

Thanks, Jim and Amy. Now it's time for me to pass it on. Good deeds shall not go unrewarded...

Meanwhile, what can we do to put the power of TwitterAir to more good use?

Fragmented Conversations

When someone blogs about someone ELSE'S blog post, where should YOU leave a comment?

For example, yesterday I blogged about Lan Bui's troubles with Podtech. As a result, some folks left comments on my blog, which I dig... but unless Lan himself stopped by, he'd never have seen them.

Conversely, had everyone only commented on his post, I'd have been under the impression that my two cents hadn't furthered the conversation.

Proposed Solution

What the blog world needs is a conversation tracker.

This way, after Lan made his initial blog post (for example), anyone else who'd blogged about the issue would have their post automatically included in that conversation stream. Then Lan (or whomever originates a blog post) would be able to see all other posts made regarding the original post / topic.

Plus, everyone else further down the conversation chain could see up and down the trail in both directions, AS WELL AS seeing any nodes that grow off their OWN posts about the subject.

In addition, any comments made on subsequent branches of the topic could also be cross-posted back to the preceding blog posts -- for example, Roxanne's comment on my post could also be CC'ed back to Lan's post, if so desired.

So, in the end, the structure looks more like a tree than a river.

Programmers of the world, you have been prompted.

Lan Bui vs. The Public Mindset

As you may have heard, West Coast podcaster Lan Bui had some concerns about Podtech using one of his photos on a commercial advertisement for the Vloggies without proper accreditation OR compensation.

He tried to settle the issue through the proper channels, including invoicing Podtech for the usage of his photo. Three months later, he's still awaiting closure on the matter.

Having now blogged about the issue, he's brought the subject to the public. The comments on his blog typify the real problem that he -- and the rest of us -- face in trying to obtain respect for our work.

The podcasters who stopped by were all supportive. Then came the (as always, anonymous) trolls, whose statements include:

you are being a cry baby. get over it the net is about free content

and

from a paparazzi perspective, yeah... that's your picture of casey mckinnon and you perhaps deserve some kind of compensation, I guess. but I wouldn't make a big negative stink about it. this company that has money clearly likes your work and by acknowledging their oversight you could probably leverage doing some work for them... why be a cranky self-righteous photographer.

This is exactly why podcasters aren't making money: no one outside the fishbowl respects web content (yet). They don't respect the time, effort and talent it takes to produce quality content, and they don't believe that investment is worth the creator being paid -- at the very least, not by them, the audience.

It's telling that the second commenter suggests that Lan shouldn't be upset because a company "that has money clearly likes your work," and he should be thrilled at maybe approaching them for some legit freelance. After all, they did "steal" his work, so that's a validation worth enjoying, right?

Since when did being ripped off by a corporation become a cause for celebration?

Sorry, anonymous trolls, but someone pays you for what you do, and someone should pay the best of us for what we do as well. It's capitalism. Surely you understand that, right?

Steve Garfield vs. The Wall Street Journal

Yesterday, Steve Garfield found a problem with a Wall Street Journal article that referenced the blog he creates with his mother, Millie. His problem? The article was filled with factual errors and misrepresentations.

In a nutshell: the article portrays the blog as Millie's way of staving off memory loss, and paints her relationship with Steve as something more contentious than it ever is. It seemed their story was being strained through a pre-determined filter to meet the needs of the reporter's angle.

So, Steve contacted the WSJ, only to get the runaround from the reporter.

Compounding the issue, that article is now being syndicated through OTHER newspapers that are redistributing the wrong information. At this stage, it's nearly impossible to stop the spread of incorrect information. Even a retraction or correction won't change the fact that anyone who's read that article will have THAT version lodged in their memory banks.

As Steve says:

If the Wall Street Journal can't even get the facts right in a human interest story, what are they doing on the real news?

It all comes down to intractability: once something is in print, it's incredibly hard to make corrections. Contrast this to blogs, where everything is fluid, and you can see why print media is in trouble.

Of course, you can also see why society has been in trouble for hundreds of years, since the printing press had made it nearly impossible to correct a mistake -- or a lie -- after it's been circulated for a day... or a week... or a generation...

If You Don't Have Something Relevant to Say, Don't Say Anything at All?

Sometimes, I'm swamped with work. Other times I'm swamped with real life. And still other times, I just need a break from the computer.

And yet...

... there's always that unspoken obligation to blog.

But why?

Blogging Dodos?

Since the advent of Twitter, much buzz has been expended on the decreased rate of blogging.

"If I can connect with people in 'real time,'" so the theory goes, "why should I spend more time blogging about what I just Twittered?"

(Context, for one. Evergreen-ness, for another. But I digress...)

If we can agree in principle that the minutae of our day is best left to Twitter, IM and email, what then is there left to blog about? Items of relevance, of course. In fact, that's all anyone SHOULD be blogging about anymore: concepts that are too large for Twitter's 140 character limit.

The funny thing is, once you get used to breaking your thought process down to Twitter-sized morsels, that pool of topics is a lot smaller than you might think.

Justified and Recent

As I've mentioned before, I get upset when the bloggers I read regularly don't update for a day or two. Judging by the ebb and flow of my own subscriber base, so do my readers. A couple days of radio silence in this ADD-addled attention economy is the kiss of death for some audiences who need insight AND immediacy from their punditry.

But should I blog just because I haven't blogged much lately? Or should I wait until there's something extremely topical AND worthwhile to blog about? What's more important: the quality or the frequency?

What do you need? Regularity or relevance? (Presuming "both" is not possible, of course...)

The Sound You Hear Is the Flapping of Pig Wings

It finally happened. I agree with a blog post by Michelle Malkin.

Next thing you know, I'll be pimping Rush Limbaugh in my sidebar...

I guess this proves that no one has a monopoly on common sense.

My Two Cents on Kathy Sierra (Or, Why We Can't Let the Bastards Win)

This is old news, but Kathy Sierra has ceased blogging (or appearing publicly) due to a number of death threats and generally misogynistic behavior from a number of anonymous blog followers.

Needless to say, the blogosphere has been electric with the news. Nearly everyone agrees that this is a horrid situation. As Seth Godin points out, quite accurately, "Isn't it sad that misogyny is so common that there's even a word for it?"

Robert Scoble's response to the situation is to let his blog go dark for a week, in a form of peaceful protest.

But, as many of his commenters point out, this is probably the least effective way to go about ENDING the problem.

Drawing attention to it? Absolutely -- CNN noticed. But silence won't do anything to stop the overwhelming problem of internet trolling and, more broadly, ignorance-based hate from the scum of the web world towards people who are different -- women, minorities, homosexuals, etc.

So What Do We DO About It?

How you respond to news like this depends upon how strongly you feel about personal responsibility.

Judging from the bulk of asinine behavior powered by the anonymity of the web, I'd say very few people believe in personal responsibility these days -- which means it's all too easy to sweep this kind of behavior under the rug as "an aberration."

Personally, I'm fully on the side of John C. Welch, who writes:

"When someone threatens you, out them. Publish the comment, with IP address, and whatever other kind of information you can find. If you can dig up real names, publish them too. No, I don't have qualms about it...

Oh yeah, call the FBI, the Cops, and Dear Abby's daughter too...

The point is, don't YOU be the one doing the hiding. Expose and report the little fuckers every time it happens. Don't give them the power to attack you from the safety of darkness. Make them operate in the light. Someone threatens you or your family, don't ignore it. Handle it in whatever way you feel safest doing, but don't ignore it, don't silently take it. That's what they want. Don't give them what they want. Make it so fucking painful to threaten you that they'd rather eat glass than do it a second time. Better yet, make them not want to do it the first time."

Internet Bullies Don't Want Your Lunch Money

They want to intimidate you because they want power.

They NEED power.

They need to know they have the upper hand in a situation because they lack the upper hand in their own lives.

Internet bullies hide behind the spectre of anonymity because they believe it offers them the ultimate power: to control the people who DO make themselves public, and bend them to their will.

John Carman is right when he says (via Twitter):

"The internet is a power tool, and I think parents should caution their children about it in the same way."

It's one thing to have to handle the problem of internet bullies who ARE picking on someone their own size. But when you draw children into the mix, things get even uglier.

Those of you with kids and computers: how do you plan to prepare them for the wild ride ahead?

How do you plan to educate your kids on the proper way to handle someone who's not just bullying them in the schoolyard, insulting them to their faces and demanding money or toys?

How do you train them to deal with someone who hides behind an avatar or a handle -- or, even better, an "anonymous" posting -- and can spend hours a day spreading rumors, lies and reputation-damaging information on the internet?

Fight or Flight?

Someone in school calls you a name, you have three choices: take the high road and ignore it, take the middle road and deny it, or take the fight directly to them and make them very sorry they started a problem in the first place.

Those rules still apply online, except the processes are very different.

Taking the high road means the bullies believe they won. Anytime they start a problem, they know your response will be to ignore them and hope your friends come to your rescue. That could become very inconvenient in a world where a week of silence is akin to becoming a technological Rip van Winkle.

Denying the allegations is insanely time-consuming online. As fast as information (or misinformation) spreads, there's no way you can track down every hotly-Googled, troll-laden Digg article that could hit the circuit. You'd have to hope, once again, that your friends have higher Google rankings and Technorati authority than the trolls do.

But, as we've learned with insurgents in a ground war, having more firepower doesn't mean you'll stamp them all out.

Your only recourse? Take the fight to them, but not in a way that glorifies the attack.

Think of what evening news programs are doing now with "to catch a child predator" shows. Think any of those idiots will try that activity again? (Sadly, some probably will, but if they get caught again...)

Now apply the same logic to the embittered 17 year-old... or 24 year-old... or 52 year-old... who takes pot shots at you in the dark, from the safety of his (yes, almost definitely his) online hidey hole.

You really think THAT guy wants to be dragged, kicking and screaming, into the light by the feds? (Or, worse, a group of vigilante hackers who know how to make his every move public knowledge?)

An End to Anonymity

The end result in all of this is simple, of course: we need an end to anonymity.

If we can't use it properly -- and history has proven that mankind is almost universally incapable of making the best choices for itself when saddled with crowd mentality -- then we shouldn't be able to hide behind it at all.

What if your every move online were trackable, and everything you did meant you'd be held accountable? How much asinine shit would YOU do on a daily basis?

Maybe you'd still be a member of AdultFriendFinder, and then we could finally have a conversation about why America is so afraid of sex.

Maybe you'd still complain about bad service, false promises and lousy bosses. But now the world would know how to make it up to you -- and, if you were fired for complaining about your job, everyone would be able to see which companies value freedom of speech and which ones are working to learn from their mistakes.

And maybe you'd still insult everyone you already insult, but now the world would know you meant it because you weren't doing it from behind a closed door. You were standing in the light, like a man (or a woman), and saying, "Hi, I'm ___, and I think you're full of shit because ___."

And then maybe we could all move forward in this great big experiment we call "life."