Yesterday 7992 people logged onto this blog. The day before it was 10393. These figures are slightly exaggerated because they are so-called “unique visitors,” meaning those who logged on from different computers are counted twice (or three times, I suppose, if that ever happens). Still, these numbers are no longer exceptional and, though they are considerably lower than blogs like Instapundit, Sullivan and LGF, they are growing and substantial. Readers are coming from over 100 countries. Many of these readers are influential and, judging from their comments, quite educated.
This is hugely flattering, of course, and, frankly, scary. It is also sometimes embarrassing. (Who wants to see his late-night grammar or usage errors show up on Instapundit to be mocked by every English teacher he ever had, not to mention his publisher?)
Whatever pride I take must also be tempered by the fact that I am only part of a rising wave. The blogosphere is continuing to grow in influence. The recent discussions of the role of the mainstream media on here only underscore that. We are their editors.
Now here’s the self-serving part, though I don’t think it’s entirely self-serving. The better blogs are clearly performing an important function in our society on a variety of levels. Because Liebling’s old saw “Freedom of the press belongs to the man who owns one” remains as true as ever, we are uniquely positioned as critics, even, occasionally, as constructive ones. We have no Sulzbergers or Murdochs on our necks – only you. You must find a way to support us better.
(I notice some people were confused by the “subtlety” of my post. I was of course talking about financial support – ads, paypal, etc. Perhaps I was being more opaque because I find the subject embarrassing. Also, I was once again soliciting genuine advice on how to make blogs more financially viable.)
UPDATE: Both Jeff Jarvis and Hugh Hewitt are dealing with similar concerns today. Hugh’s book, btw, is zooming up the Amazon list. Number 12, as of this moment. [Don't be jealous.-ed.]
PJM Home
Pajamas Media appreciates your comments that abide by the following guidelines:
1. Avoid profanities or foul language unless it is contained in a necessary quote or is relevant to the comment.
2. Stay on topic.
3. Disagree, but avoid ad hominem attacks.
4. Threats are treated seriously and reported to law enforcement.
5. Spam and advertising are not permitted in the comments area.
The clause regarding "hate speech" has been deleted because readers criticized it as being too loosely defined. We agreed.
These guidelines are very general and cannot cover every possible situation. Please don't assume that Pajamas Media management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment. We reserve the right to filter or delete comments or to deny posting privileges entirely at our discretion. If you feel your comment was filtered inappropriately, please email us at story@pajamasmedia.com.
33 Comments
1. BigFire:Ok, You just got $10 from me.
Jul 14, 2004 - 8:57 am 2. John Lynch:How does one ’support’ a blog?
Possibilities:
1) use clean language, grammar and reasoning in the posts;
2) be respectful of others and if you don’t have something nice to say, don’t say anything at all. Reworked: If you can’t disagree nicely, don’t post;
3) include links to references, research, of relevant materials – avoid posting large copies of material that exists elsewhere;
4) and ?
Is this what you mean by support?
Jul 14, 2004 - 9:17 am 3. Zak Braverman:Hi Roger.
Support how?
Jul 14, 2004 - 9:29 am 4. JK Ribera:I assumed he was referring to financial support, just as the first commenter did. That’s what blogs need. The rest takes care of itself.
Jul 14, 2004 - 9:32 am 5. Skookumchuk:Roger:
If it were me, the issue would be how much of my professional time is taken up by blogging and whether or not it overwhelms my real work. Iíve launched two web sites and know how quickly these projects can become time sinks – and in your case you have to monitor the thing, read the comments and update it constantly.
Eventually, you may want to consider a group of trusted people to co-moderate the thing on a rotating basis. (Lets not all raise our hands at once now. . . )
But for the moment, ditto to BigFire and John Lynch above. Maybe you can hire a part-time web person, which was my solution. If it means ten bucks, fine with me.
Jul 14, 2004 - 9:57 am 6. MeTooThen:Roger,
But what to make of Albert Arnold Gore, Jr.’s invective against the “Digital Brownshirts”, which I’m afraid, would likely include you Mr. Simon?
If the blogosphere is to really act as an alternative, or companion to the MSM (mainstream media), how depressing or infuriating is it to have our former Vice-President rail against open and honest debate/dissent as akin to the National Socialists?
Is it just me or is the hypocrisy of the Left no better crystallized than in their hyperbole against BusHitler (which I must add here is a terrible form of Holocaust denial), Rummy, Condi (House Nigga’), Cheney, Powell (Uncle Tom), Haliburton, No Blood for Oilllll!!! (unless it’s for TotalElfFina), as measured be their calling any resistance to their nonsense as fascist?
I mean really, it is no longer risible to hear Katrina vanden Heuvel and Michael Moore complain about the crushing of free speech while she is on CNN for the umpteenth time and he is on the cover of Time. Rather, it is loathsome.
Jul 14, 2004 - 10:02 am 7. MeTooThen:Roger,
And yes, some blogs will require external resources.
But here the solution seems simple. The marketplace will decide which blog is supported and which not.
If and when people realize that their money is better spent supporting blogs than say their subscription to the NYT, Los Angeles Times, or NPR they will give to the blog(s) of their choice.
Whether through PayPal, advertisments, or grants, funding will, I believe, become increasingly available.
It is only a matter of time.
Or not.
Trust in the market.
Jul 14, 2004 - 10:10 am 8. Mark Poling:Speaking of digital brownshirts, I spent 30 minutes yesterday cleaning p0rn spam off my site. Someone technically sophisticated slammed me with over a hundred comments from obviously spoofed IP addresses. (So simple IP banning isn’t going to cut it with this guy.)
Somehow I doubt the attack came from pro-Bushies, considering my consistent support for the President’s foreign policies. Also, the fake email addresses used the “moil.com” domain name, which is registered to a Texas oil company that does business in Central Asia. So clever, our little revolutionary.
What’s funny is some of the comments were distributed through posts where I slam Bush’s domestic policies. But you know, for someone out there I’m just an enemy. The finer details have got nothing to do with it.
To wrench this comment back on topic, I know my site takes some work, and I’m a lowly inverterbrate compared to Roger’s higher being. You’ve got my respect, and another $10 via PayPal.
Jul 14, 2004 - 10:34 am 9. thibaud:Roger,
Here are some thoughts, from a technology/finance guy:
Blogs’ great advantage over Big Media is the linkage to a great multiplicity of sources and views.
The great disadvantage of Blogs is the unreliability of those sources. The Blogs that thrive are those whose authors are not only interesting but also have overcome the inherent tendency toward sloppiness and unreliability by establishing credibility with a highly-educated audience.
This is best done IMHO by broadmindedness, not only in selection of subject matter but also by suppressing any tendency toward excessive partisanship. Think about it: Which type of person would be more interesting to the greatest number of strangers in a bar, the partisan ranter who’s completely predictable, or the raconteur whose views on a wide range of subjects are not known? Most intelligent and educated people of the sort who seek out blogs would prefer the latter.
Given that a blogger’s credibility (and freshness) tend to diminish in proportion to his tendency toward partisan screeds– see Kos, TPM (Josh Marshall) for prime examples of such declines– it’s no surprise that the dominant blogs are those that are least partisan: Sullivan (who trashes Repubs as much as Dems) and Reynolds (who trashes Dems more often but is clearly a libertarian/independent sort).
I have other thoughts that may interest you: email me at onlyinmoscow@yahoo.com
Regards,
Thibaud
Jul 14, 2004 - 10:36 am 10. so it begins:Very graciously (and obviously) asked, Mr. Simon. Because of it I just donated to my 3 favorite blogs. Hey, you guys ask for money far less than the local rags who call up or knock on the door, and your content is far more substantive. When they call I laugh… when you ask humbly I ante up. That should speak for itself. If not let me spell it out: THE EDITORIALS HERE ARE FAR BETTER, MORE HONEST AND SINCERE THAN THE ENTIRE EDITORIAL STAFF AT the Seattle-PI and Times combined.
There is something in the air – I think its an information revolution and the free man soaks this up just as much as his unalienable right to life.
Cheers!
Jul 14, 2004 - 11:03 am 11. Mr Weather:Roger,
Don’t worry about the scary parts, including the grammar mistakes. We all know you’re a mensch. And my $10 is in the [paypal-post] mail.
Jul 14, 2004 - 11:14 am 12. thibaud:Bloggers’ other great advantage is the lameness of the contemporary journalism profession.
In terms of training, peer review, and adherence to agreed standards of behavior and ethics, journalism is today roughly where medicine, accounting and law where in the middle of the nineteenth century.
There is nothing close to agreed journalistic standards, training methods, ethical codes or certification, let alone a body of technical skill and knowledge one must master before presenting oneself as a professional worthy of public trust.
By ruthlessly exposing the comical unprofessionalism and, occasionally, the sheer stupidity of so many journalists, bloggers are doing what the muckrakers of the 19c did to the qucks and shysters of their time.
The next phase will probably entail a real improvement in the standards, training and ethics of our hack journos– the appointment of ombudsmen is a baby step in this direction– or else the increasing marginalization of old media until it morphs into infomercials-cum-newslets that are no more reliable than the junk that clutters an internet portal like AOL or Yahoo.
If the latter happens– and let’s not underestimate the potential for self-destructive incompetence of the Howell Raineses of our media– then networks of linked bloggers may in the near future actually provide the professionalism, expertise, depth and reliability so often lacking in today’s media.
Jul 14, 2004 - 11:22 am 13. Allah:I think you overestimate the influence of blogs, Roger. There are a handful — Glenn, Kaus, Sullivan, Marshall, Atrios, a few others — whose readership is so large that the mainstream media can’t ignore them. But for us littler fish, our influence extends, I think, only so far as our ability to call things to the attention of those uber-bloggers. There have been many times when I’ve found a particularly juicy story and have e-mailed it to Charles Johnson rather than blog about it myself because, really, what’s the more productive use of my time? Spending an hour on a post that 5,000 people are going to see or spending 15 seconds to hand it off to a guy with an audience of 50,000?
As far as financial support goes, I have mixed feelings. Back when I was blogging full time, I used to wonder why people couldn’t drop ten bucks in the PayPal every six months or so as a way of saying thanks for all the free content. But no sooner would I think that than I’d anticipate the rejoinder: “Get a job and blog less.” The problem with going that route, of course, is that unless you’re a dynamo like Reynolds or Johnson who can maintain a career and a full slate of posting, your site will suffer in quality and your traffic will start to decline. In that case, I think it’s better to close up shop entirely (as I plan to do) than to continue on in a half-assed manner.
The other problem with financially supporting blogs is the sheer supply. If we all started asking for twenty dollars a year (a la Sullivan), it’s doubtful that the average blog reader would shell it out for each and every site he visits regularly. I read about 25 blogs per day and there ain’t no way I’m paying five hundred bucks for the privilege. So I’d have to choose five or maybe ten sites to patronize — as would everyone else, and the uber-bloggers would, understandably, reap the lion’s share of the revenue. At least for us little fish, I don’t think there’s a future in it.
Jul 14, 2004 - 11:35 am 14. Rick Ballard:The subscription desk at my local bird cage liner (Contra Costa Times) called me again this morning – even though I’m on the national do not call list. After briefly explaining the meaning of ‘never again’. I logged on here and found Roger’s post.
The CCT offered me a three month seven day a week subscription for $19.43. I figure I’ll get a helluva lot better value for the $20 Roger just received through PayPal. Not only do I get to read well written pieces on subjects of current interest but I get to argue (discuss actually) the subject with people who can actually complete a sentence.
Roger, feel free to send me a nudge note on October 14 to renew.
Jul 14, 2004 - 11:48 am 15. MeTooThen:Allah,
Your points are well taken.
Your blog is one I very much enjoy. And as you, I visit daily some 20 or more blogs regularly.
I don’t own a televsion. I no longer subscribe to any newspaper. I get my news and views exclusively from the Internet (with occasional input from radio).
As I wrote above, the market will dictate whether or not blogs will be financially supported. And yes, the uberblogs will take the lion’s share of financial support should there be any.
But this is true too, of the MSM. There are national giants, city-wide outlets, local, and then community newspapers, TV, and radio outlets.
It is too early to tell, and as you suggest, people might be not be willing to give $500/yr. for blogs, but they may be willing to pony-up a $100 a year for the 20 or more they read. And no, bloggers may not be able to “quit their day jobs” but they may receive sufficient support to continue their work. If this happens, the blogosphere will become a lasting part of the marketplace of ideas.
Jul 14, 2004 - 2:12 pm 16. JK Ribera:This may be the uber-blog in terms of comments. I have not seen a more interesting one.
Jul 14, 2004 - 2:36 pm 17. Bill Roggio:Hi Roger,
I very much enjoy your blog, you are a daily read for me.
I decided to blog a couple of months ago to attempt to get out the truth about the war, to provide a warehouse of information for friends and family. To me, blogging is about the truth. I have considered putting up a Paypal, as I invested lots of money in hardware to help me blog (laptop, wireless, upgrade software, bandwidth, etc.), but decided against it. It just didn’t feel right. I like the idea that I am beholden to no one, that I am free to write on any subject I feel is important.
The investment for me really is about time. I have to work a full time job, help care for 2 children (soon to be 3 in a couple of weeks), take care of the house, have a social life, etc. The only way money would help is if it could fully replace my salary, but not at the cost of an editorial board.
The only support I am looking for at this time is readers, to me this will tell me if my message has an impact.
Jul 14, 2004 - 2:59 pm 18. so it begins:That’s good, Arem, except for the fundamental flaws with your arguement – mainly, that these blogs bring news stories to our attention that the MSM do not, and then offer their editorials. Not to mention the humor. I have never laughed at anything Dan Rather has said.
Jul 14, 2004 - 3:31 pm 19. richard mcenroe:Ya know, you could make it a requirement that anyone who wants to register here has to buy one of your books off the menu to the right…7,000 hardcover sales is nothing to sneeze at…
Jul 14, 2004 - 4:01 pm 20. Rick Ballard:Richard,
I’d recommend ‘The Lost Coast’ followed by ‘Director’s Cut’. The changes in attitude that Roger notes in his post on forest policy are laid out clearly in ‘The Lost Coast’.
Jul 14, 2004 - 4:16 pm 21. acassa:I discovered this web site about 4 months ago, and since then it has been on my daily to do’s.
I consider supporting this caliber of commentary more than worthy of my $25.
Jul 14, 2004 - 4:19 pm 22. so it begins:Arem,
Well, I guess we know what to think about your posts then – their jacks**t. Just sayin, s’all.
Jul 14, 2004 - 4:45 pm 23. Knucklehead:Roger was smooth and subtle, so I’ll be coarse and blunt. Apparently several of the regulars here are bloggers in addition to being commenters.
I most definitely find blogs valuable – interesting, informative, and fun. They are every bit as valuable to me as periodical subscriptions with the added value of getting to put in my $0.02.
But, like many others, I look at many more blogs than I do periodicals. I could not – would not? – pay periodical subscriptio rates to each and every blog I take my free infotainment from.
So what is a “fair price” (dollars and frequency) to pay for blogs (I have no trouble calling it a voluntary subscription fee) and how do others go about determining how many and which? Do you figure the “uberblogs” don’t need you’re $$ and therefore only pay the your favored “out of the way” blogs?
Just askin’
Jul 14, 2004 - 5:26 pm 24. acassa:Knucklehead,
For me, there are only 4 blogs that I feel compelled to “donate” to, and those are the blogs that I visit multiple times on a daily basis.
I feel that the information and commentary on those sites is without question worth the amount I would spend on any yearly subscription to a magazine or newspaper. Since the majority of these magazines and newspapers I have abandoned over the past few years, and replaced with these blogs, I have no problems at all treating these as I would formal publications.
While it is the free choice of these bloggers to spend copious amounts of their time and knowledge contributing to this great worldwide discussion, I consider the amount I donate to be a pittance for the amount of information and insight I gain thanks to their efforts.
Just my 2 cents.
Jul 14, 2004 - 6:54 pm 25. HarryForbes:A couple of comments:
1) The network of blogs quickly “raises” the visibility of a good story from an obscure source to a small blog to high-circulation blogs to (very often) the MSM. Thus the chief value of a network of blogs; it applies Metcalfe’s Law to the news, without requiring any help from an unsympathetic news media. However, it needs to be an organism or an ecosphere with many cells, not just a small set of uber-blogs. Excuse me but this reminds me of 1 Corinthians 12.14-26:
2) The financial problem could work out in a variety of ways, depending upon which part of “the body” you are. Lowly blogs, like mine, will have to subsist on volunteer work. Uber-blogs can exist through sponsorship and branding. In between blogs can use some of each.
Jul 14, 2004 - 7:33 pm 26. Allah:Harry — Excellent points both, although I’m not sure how they square with what I said earlier about e-mailing links to uber-bloggers versus blogging those links yourself. My own blog is a middleman in the great Blog Food Chain: No one in the MSM reads it but a few of the uber-bloggers (Charles Johnson, at least) do. That being so, I can call to Charles’s attention stories I find on smaller blogs that are worthy of wider exposure and he can pass them on to the professionals.
The question is, what’s the most efficient way for me to call it to his attention? Sit there and blog it myself or send it off to him in an e-mail and be done with it? It’s worth noting that, historically, he’s been far, far more likely to write about links that I’ve e-mailed to him than links he’s found on my blog in the course of his reading. Makes me wonder if all us little guys aren’t better off going the e-mail route with Glenn and the gang rather than toil away at stuff that’s ultimately not reaching people.
Jul 14, 2004 - 8:02 pm 27. RogerA:Roger: You are a mensch–your blog is the absolute best as far as I am concerned–comments are insightful, informed and have a certain panache unmatched on the web–accordingly, I have let my beloved subscription to national review lapse in favor of applying those funds to support your blog. Continue the great work you do, please. An outstanding blog, people by articulate and insightful people and it has become my sine qua non for input on our world. thank you so much!
Jul 14, 2004 - 8:37 pm 28. Yehudit:“Makes me wonder if all us little guys aren’t better off going the e-mail route with Glenn and the gang rather than toil away at stuff that’s ultimately not reaching people.”
But they get LOTS of email.
I do better posting a URL to LGF than emailing Charles.
BTW Allah, your posts are worth it even if they aren’t regular. If you stop many people will miss you.
Jul 14, 2004 - 9:58 pm 29. HA:Roger,
The problem with donating to bloggers is the same as donating to the homeless on the streets – there are just too many. If I gave my money to all the worthy bloggers, I’d soon find myself a beggar. I limit my blog donations to an annual $50 donation to LGF.
I have no idea what kind of direct cash flow you can expect out of your blog. But even if you are unable to develop a material revenue stream, I suspect that the PR value that you realize from blogging is quite significant for someone in your line of work. Your blog contributes to the value of the Roger Simon brand.
Jul 15, 2004 - 4:04 am 30. Knucklehead:RogerA,
Don’t let your subscription to NR lapse – you’ll regret it! It is one of the finest periodicals available.
To answer some of my own questions above, just this AM I got a sort of eureka moment (I keep telling y’all I’m a bonafide knucklehead!). My NYT subscription is roughly $20/month (well, it was). Its gone now. I won’t put the entire savings into blog support, but let’s just say its freed up some funds and a portion will go, inconsistently at best, to other, more valuable “subscriptions”.
Jul 15, 2004 - 6:48 am 31. Bill Roggio:Allah,
Bloggers do more than just regurgitate news. While there may be value in forwarding links to the Uber-bloggers, this is not our only job.
We can draw attention to overlooked stories and provide analysis and insight the MSM lacks. Like others, I get most of my news online now as the MSM is just horrendous, the content is shallow.
Bloggers also act to retain news memory, as opposed to the MSM, which forgets what they wrote a week ago. I cannot count the times I have read a journalist say one thing, then contradict themselves the next day. Unless someone is on top of this, there is very little the public can do to call a reporter on their poor behavior. Who saves all of those newspapers? With blogs, all of our articles are online, and a simple search of a site can determine if the blogger has failed in being consistent.
We are the lid to the memory hole.
Jul 15, 2004 - 6:55 am 32. Pat Curley:Roger, the guy who’s doing the Bill Clinton’s daily diary blog (not Bubba himself, but a really funny impersonator) talks about the books he’s reading, with links to Amazon where he gets a small percentage of every sale. Yeah, it’s commercialism, but my guess is it’s working for him. Another thing I would consider is occasionally talking about Director’s Cut in context with current stories. For example, there was a recent story about an Iraqi plot to blow up Radio Free Europe. That’s a perfect lead-in to your book.
Jul 15, 2004 - 11:34 am 33. Martin Lindeskog:Roger said:
“I was of course talking about financial support – ads, paypal, etc. Perhaps I was being more opaque because I find the subject embarrassing. Also, I was once again soliciting genuine advice on how to make blogs more financially viable.”
How are the ads powered by Blogads and AdSense working for you? I think that Pat Curley has a good point in trying to create posts with links to and excerpt from your book.
I will hit tip jars and donating money to bloggers more in the future when I am not a “poor” capitalist, student and job seeker any longer and I have a steady income. Right now, I have placed some ads on a couple of blogs (Blogads and Politburo Diktat) with money that I have received from Blogads on my EGO blog. I think that more and more people will start to think in terms of how much they think it is worth to read a blog on a daily basis and value it in the same way as a subscription to a magazine or newspaper, and pay for it accordingly.
I have discussed this topic in my post, EGO BLOG IS NOT BURNED OUT…YET…
All the Best,
Martin Lindeskog – American in Spirit.
Gothenburg, Sweden.
Jul 15, 2004 - 2:58 pm