The Problem with Web Popularity
As a social work major in college, I took a lot of psych courses - before I realized I couldn’t make a living wage and save the world. One theory I still remember is that everything everyone does comes from a inherent need to be loved. (Yes, even the pursuit of money.)
I recall that theory when looking at Technorati rankings. Man, do we bloggers want link love. Recently, following on the Z-list, Tino Buntic started another meme, 2000 bloggers. This is a bit of creativity where the faces of lots of bloggers are in a collage. It’s great fun and a terrific llustration of why I call the blogosphere “blogville.” We’re a community, with a wildly diverse population and we love to connect with others. So far, so cool. And, I appreciate that the originators of both included me. However, my rise in Technorati is now largely due to my image being included in a collage, rather than people reading my blog and linking to it. When all is said and typed, links coming from the images are quantity, not quality. (There are some brave and enthusiastic souls diligently checking out each and every person in the collages - some of them have arrived here. Thanks for visiting!)
Thus we come to the problem with web popularity. Such memes blow the traditional methods of ranking “good” blogs all to hell - which is at least part of the intent. (Technorati is working to regain control.)
The problem isn’t with the people, the memes, or Technorati - it’s with the way we define “good.” Technorati figures if a lot of people link to you, you must be “good”(which has validity as far as it goes.) So, the little people reacted, “Hey, wait a minute! We’re ‘good’ too!” and the memes were born.
Personally, if being really popular means I’m in the same crowd as pathetic hate mongers such as Michelle Malkin (Technorati rank #19) and boring Ann Coulter (#937, dropped from about #600 last time I looked), I’m very happy staying with the little people. (There are some excellent, even brilliant popular blogs. They’re at the top because we masses don’t always just follow the herd. We also appreciate intelligence and thoughtful, thought-provoking writing.)
Tags: blogs, blogging, Technorati
View the Blog Roll
February 13th, 2007 at 10:32 am
“The problem isn’t with the people, the memes, or Technorati – it’s with the way we define “good.—
Bingo. And something else that never gets mentioned is, how most of these A-Listers got all those wonderful links that Technorati says defines them as being superior bloggers writing superior blogs.
Most of the A-List bloggers have literally been blogging for YEARS! And what’s more, they started blogging at a time when there were 60,000 blogs, not 60 million. So it was MUCH easier for their voices to stand out, and to find and build an audience.
And think of how many bloggers over the last 4-5 years have added them to their blogrolls. Take a Scoble or Jarvis that might have 4,000 links now, how many of those are from bloggers that added them to their blogrolls back in 2003 and 2004? IMO it’s much more impressive to see a blogger in 2007 get up to 500 links in a year’s time, than it is to see a blogger that started in 2001, now have 3,000 links.
IMO new bloggers today start out in a massive hole. I was hoping that the ‘Z-List’ would help correct that, and for many blogs it has. And many bloggers have told me that they have added many new blogs to their feed readers, which was also what I was hoping. These new links will disappear according to Technorati, if they aren’t replaced in the next 6 months. By building a larger community, we’ll help assure that doesn’t happen.
February 13th, 2007 at 10:52 am
Mack,
Good points! And, I’m with you re building the community. We can’t force good relationships - but we can certainly work to find them - and be supportive of good writing and thinking (even when we don’t always agree.)
February 13th, 2007 at 6:02 pm
I’m a bit torn myself Mary - yes, I did the “z-list”, I participate in memes - and yes indeed, I check my Technorati ranking. I think it’s in our nature to be “joiners” in these types of things, especially when we are not “popular” in the sense of the A-listers, as well as more than a bit prideful in a ranking (even if we all know it’s NOT a true indicator of quality). As you said, a need to be loved. Why does Technorati need to “rank” in the first place? Because we all seem to be drawn to it despite our misgivings. Genius. All the best.
February 13th, 2007 at 7:59 pm
Technorati’s rank is calculated by counting the unique set of blogs linking within the trailing 180 days. Blogs rise and fall in their rank as time advances, the A-listers who sustain their rank do so by maintaining a readership of other bloggers who will cite and reply to them in their blog posts or add them to their blog rolls.
Technorati never had a negative response to the 2000 Bloggers face collage or any participants, the changes made were simply to account for the impact cut-and-paste sets of links had on rankings.
thanks,
-Ian
February 14th, 2007 at 7:40 am
Terry - as always thanks for dropping by. Sure, I admit I enjoyed watching my humble little blog climb from 43,000 to 19,000 thanks to the memes - but it was a short thrill.
Ian - thanks for your clarification of Technorati methods. And, while it wasn’t stated as “negative”, Technorati did in fact respond to the “cut and paste” impact. So, the end result is the same, regardless of how you position it (for or against such things.) Rankings got skewed, people had some fun and Technorati had to adapt in order to maintain some credibility.
February 14th, 2007 at 2:19 pm
Really thoughtful post, Mary. I like your money quote: “The problem isn’t with the people, the memes, or Technorati – it’s with the way we define “good.â€â€
I like a bunch of links and a meteoric rise as much as anyone… but at the same time I’ve developed my blog reading habits and favorites based on content, not rankings. Somme of the blogs I drop by are huge… others are teeny. I like their voice and perspective — not their audience and following. And believe me… I’m just as thrilled by a new, little-known blog “find” than I am by any ranking, any day…
Thanks for the post.