January 24, 2006

Poll - Do A New (Google-ish) Site?

Given the recent Googlevents, I'm again thinking about whether it would be a good idea for me to set-up a more "professional" site, focused currently on publishing Google investigations (though I wouldn't want to lock it into Google/search as a topic exclusively, that's definitely where the action is these days).

Pro - People ask me for Google stuff. Google doesn't sue (compare censorware legal risk). Some A-list Google bloggers like me, and none of them hate me. It occasionally even pays!!!

Con - I'm reasonably employed at the moment, so I don't need to drum-up consulting business. It's still work. A lot of people are in the field already, it's downright crowded. There remains a potential downside of getting flamed for contradicting the ranty net.catechism (repeat after me : It's An Outrage. They're Coming For You. The Feds Are Gonna Get You.)

Question: Did I get any new readers from the past week's Google-punditry? Specifically for Google material?

By Seth Finkelstein | posted in activism | on January 24, 2006 11:59 PM (Infothought permalink)
Seth Finkelstein's Infothought blog (Wikipedia, Google, censorware, and an inside view of net-politics) - Syndicate site (subscribe, RSS)

Subscribe with Bloglines      Subscribe in NewsGator Online  Google Reader or Homepage


Poll - Yes, please. Sure, lots of others have shotguns and loudspeakers. But those wielding scalpels, and who know where to aim them, are few and far between.

Question - As one of your 13 or so(?) existing readers, I don't know if you got any new ones. You will, of course. Enough to warrant the extra work? Only one way for you to find out (haphazard polls aside), I'd have thought.

Posted by: Milly at January 25, 2006 01:57 PM

... and if you start now, you can tackle both Google and censorship at the same time (again)! What could be more appealing?

Posted by: Milly at January 25, 2006 02:30 PM

Milly, thanks. The idea of the haphazard poll was to get some piece of data as to whether the last week's Google punditry got me ANY new readers, as guide to whether more Google punditry will get me new readers. It's not precise. But I suspect in fact I got NO new readers (or maybe a small handful).

Indeed Google+censorship is very appealing. But the flacking required to get noticed is very unappealing, sigh.

Posted by: Seth Finkelstein at January 25, 2006 10:53 PM

Yow, still no one else in this poll! You may be right about the number of new readers :(

Though interactivity is a poor measure of readership numbers or readers' wishes (which must be some kind of blogoblasphemy). Usually I'd have just kept my opinion to myself and not bothered to register it here ('because others will do that').

I wish I could offer some help or advice on how to get your sage voice a wider audience, but I can't. (Maybe your typically good guest post at Philipp's will help). Or on how to deal with the slings and arrows, but you've considered all that already.

I really like your stuff, anyway, FWLIW.

Posted by: Milly at January 26, 2006 02:42 PM

Count me in as number 14 :) Actually, I think there are a lot more, but you just don't hear from them. Good stuff!

Paul Wynant
Moscow, Russia

Posted by: Paul Wynant at January 26, 2006 03:22 PM

Keep plucking away. One day what you do over 'there', will catch on very much over here in the Free world. (Ireland)

Posted by: Tommy at January 26, 2006 06:04 PM

Some people build sites designed to attract Adsense revenue and others put Addsense adds on their sites. The difference is motivation. It seems to me that to involve yourself in something you find “truly worthwhile” and let the chips fall where they may is the best way to go. Seldom does mind fucking about the outcome of an event before it happens “pay off. Get in...give it your best shot and the path reveals itself.

And yes I am a constant reader. I doubt if it matters to me what you write about. I find you interesting.

Posted by: Bob Turner at January 26, 2006 06:18 PM

Once more, I appreciate the good wishes, thanks.

But remember, there's real-world opportunity costs involved for the work. Since I didn't become a dot-com millionaire (in part because I wasted a lot of time on free-speech activism ...) I cannot follow my bliss. Or at least, I'm not sufficiently free of material desire.

Again, disappointingly, there don't seem to be new readers. That is, the readership statistics have barely budged.

Posted by: Seth Finkelstein at January 27, 2006 12:52 AM

This is my first visit here so I am a new reader. I got here through a link posted in the GRC newsgroup by Milly. (Thanks Milly.) Keep up the good work Seth. I am looking forward to reading more from you, Thanks.

Posted by: Lloyd at January 29, 2006 04:32 PM

So how many regular readers do you have?


Number 14

Posted by: Daran at January 29, 2006 10:09 PM

Lloyd: Thanks

Daran: The subscriptions from all feeds and main page views seem to add up to about 600 (six hundred). But that's somewhat of an upper limit, as many only skim title/summary. My best guess is that of those 600, somewhere between 100-300 people actually read further. It's good compared to the friends-and-family diarist, but trivial for having much of an overall influence.

Posted by: Seth Finkelstein at January 30, 2006 02:47 AM