Now on ScienceBlogs: Zihlman's 'pygmy chimpanzee hypothesis'

Seed Media Group

Collective Imagination

Search

Profile

profilepic9-09a.jpg

My scientific specialty is chronobiology (circadian rhythms and photoperiodism), with additional interests in comparative physiology, animal behavior and evolution. I am not an MD so I cannot diagnose and treat your sleep problems. As well as writing this blog, I am also the Online Discussion Expert for PLoS. This is a personal blog and opinions within it in no way reflect the policies of PLoS. You can contact me at: Coturnix@gmail.com


Buy the 2008 Science Blogging Anthology:

The Open Laboratory

Buy the 2007 Science Blogging Anthology:

The Open Laboratory

Buy the 2006 Science Blogging Anthology:

The Open Laboratory

Recent Posts

Recent Comments

Archives

Blogroll

Find me on...


Homepage

FriendFeed

Twitter

Facebook

Nature Network

YouTube

Flickr

Dopplr

Stumbleupon

LinkedIn

Make Me Happy

Add this blog to my Technorati Favorites!

Add Scienceblogs to your Technorati Favorites!

Make Me Solvent

Amazon Honor System Click Here to Pay Learn More

A Blog Around The Clock swag store

I Support

Carrboro Coworking

Project Exploration

Project Exploration

Bloggie Stuff

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 Unported License.

« Why can't journalists call it as it is? | Main | New and Exciting in PLoS ONE »

How to Blog?

Category: Blogging
Posted on: December 27, 2008 6:36 PM, by Coturnix


Slate has this good article with the same title (yes, read it if you are interested in becoming or becoming a better blogger). I agree with everything in it, except for one piece of advice that I often see bandied about but think is totally wrong:

Don't be too wordy. HuffPo says that 800 words is the outer-length limit for a blog post; anything longer will turn people off.

No. No. No.

This feeds nicely in what Ezra Klein wrote about it:

The specialized posts mix with the generalized posts -- in my case, health wonkery rubs elbows with garden variety political punditry -- and the two cross-subsidize each other. The rigor of the more technical work gives you credibility in the reader's mind and adds weight to the generalist posts. The generalist posts broaden the blog's potential audience and create access points that new readers wouldn't have if you let the blog become a repository of technical commentary.

------------snip-----------

One sidenote here is that I find the question of "specialization" is interesting. Health care is not the thing I write the most about: Somewhere between 5 percent and 10 percent of my posts are health care related. During periods of political drama, that number drops further. Far more of my posts are on the Obama administration, and politics more generally. But people define blogs by what they produce that's different from their competitors, not by what they offer that's the same.

This is excellent advice - blog about everything that strikes your fancy, but also sometimes blog about your area of expertise. Mix it up, topic-wise, but also mix-it up format-wise: videos, pictures, one-liners, linkfest, short posts and, YES, long essays, especially in your area of expertise.

If you write a long essay in your area of expertise, people WILL read. Why? Because your blog post is likely to contain information they can not find anywhere else on the Web, let alone in the media.

So, even if you mostly post a bunch of quick-and-dirty posts on various topics, when you have something special to say, don't be afraid to write 2000 or 3000 or 4000 or 5000 words. People will read that. And bookmark it. And put it on social networks. And e-mail it to friends. And discuss it in the comments. And respond to them on their own blogs. Those posts are the real gems of the blogosphere.

And how do you become an expert on a topic? You could go the usual way, through school or practice. But you can also become an expert if you constantly blog about something over the years. You dig through the literature, you read other bloggers who write about it, you get corrected by commenters, and soon become a knowledgeable and respected authority. You may still know less (but not always) than a person who got a PhD in the topic, but you will certainly know more than a journalist who writes on that topic because the editor said so - because you write, and thus learn, with passion.

Share this: Stumbleupon Reddit Email + More

Comments

1

...
It goes without saying ( until a clueless commenter stops to say it...) that if you are going to "write 2000 or 3000 or 4000 or 5000 words" you damn well better make it intelligent, easy to read, and well presented.


...tom...
.

Posted by: ...tom... | December 27, 2008 7:50 PM

2

A thousand words tends to be my limit. If there is more that needs to be said, I turn it into a series (I make sure to link the different posts to each other though).

Posted by: Romeo Vitelli | December 27, 2008 10:45 PM

3

Once I bookmark something interesting after reading a few stimulating paragraphs, this action - counter-intuitively - will typically indicate that I'll never ever return to it and finish reading it. I bookmark lots of stuff. I put stars on lots of stuff in friendfeed. I squirrel away lots of stuff in delicious. I never return to them.

If the Internet people ever stop putting new and further interesting stuff onto said network, then maybe I would go back to my bookmarks, starred things and other squirrelled items and finish reading them. Unfortunately, each morning google reader brings a new tide of stuff to store, star and squirrel. The information supermarket shelves are never empty.

Posted by: Ian Tindale | December 28, 2008 6:17 AM

4

I think Romeo is largely right - 99% of people just aren't going to spend more than 5 minutes reading one blog post. A series of posts, though, works well.

But in general I think the best advice is - mix it up. Short, long, funny, serious - variety is key.

Posted by: Neuroskeptic | December 28, 2008 8:09 AM

5
Don't be too wordy. HuffPo says that 800 words is the outer-length limit for a blog post; anything longer will turn people off.

Ha!

Then how do you explain the popularity of my blog? ;-)

Posted by: Orac | December 28, 2008 9:18 AM

6

I dunno--I think if the text is animated and informative enough, people will keep reading. Some of posts that people keep coming back to on my (albeit so far short-lived) blog are some pretty long ones where I provided some (cathartic) commentary on graduate school, academics, etc.
As long as the text is efficient in its use of words, I suspect that longer blog entries will be read. But then again, I'm relatively new at this so I suppose time will tell.

Posted by: mudphudder | December 28, 2008 12:32 PM

7

HuffPo can speak for itself, as there is enough drivel there to make even 800 words seem endless sometimes. The political commentary on several sciblog sites is better reading any day.
Diversity on the menu is no bad thing, in content and length of posts. Some days we want to read a short short, the next day it's Our Mutual Friend. Saving longer posts as text or PDF to read in the offline hours works. Good writing shouldn't be insulted by speedreading.
The quirky bits let the readers know more about a writer's interests, sense of humor and aesthetics, all of which enrich the longer posts.

Posted by: Luci | December 28, 2008 12:36 PM

8

Orac: yes, I was thinking about you in particular: extremely long posts are your norm, yet your blog is immensely popular. It's because we know your long posts are worth reading through.

Posted by: Coturnix | December 28, 2008 1:43 PM

9

Yes yes yes!

This has been a (not so) secret to the success of many blogs. Be a resource. Let twitter and friendfeed cover the snippets.

Posted by: Adam Singer | December 28, 2008 1:44 PM

10

I'm going jump on this bandwagon with my own "me too." The right length for a post is whatever constitutes enough space to cover the topic. Some of my most popular posts have been my longest. If you're posting the latest Hubble pictures, a simple "this is cool" is enough. If you're telling us about latest development in particle theory, two or three thousand words might not be enough. Science in particular (but not just science) is not a topic that very often lends itself to soundbites.

Serializing is sometimes a good idea, but only if the story has logical break points. Arbitrarily breaking off a narrative just because the word count has reached a certain predetermined number is just annoying.

Posted by: John J. McKay | December 28, 2008 9:03 PM

11

Orac in 800 words? Ha ha ha. Just imagining it's ridiculous. Glad he won't be following that bit of mouse turd advice

Posted by: nm | December 29, 2008 4:01 PM

12

800 words?! My introductions to what my posts are going to be about are 800 words!! I must be doomed on the blogosphere. :)

Posted by: Scicurious | December 30, 2008 6:51 PM

13

SImple, Interested content and also usefull for its reader will drive good appreciation from other blogger..
Cheers..

Monique

Posted by: monique | March 28, 2009 3:57 PM

Post a Comment

(Email is required for authentication purposes only. On some blogs, comments are moderated for spam, so your comment may not appear immediately.)





ScienceBlogs

Search ScienceBlogs:

Go to:

Advertisement
Enter to win a free copy of The Monty Hall Problem
Visit the Collective Imagination blog
Advertisement
Collective Imagination

© 2006-2009 Seed Media Group LLC. ScienceBlogs is a registered trademark of Seed Media Group. All rights reserved.

Sites by Seed Media Group: Seed Media Group | ScienceBlogs | SEEDMAGAZINE.COM