February 10, 2006

Jacobs launches campaign website

http://www.electmikejacobs.com/


What?

Oh!

Nevermind.

posted by The Inside Dope @ 2/10/2006   6 comments

6 Comments:

At 2/11/2006 1:24 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

From what I can see there is no reason to open a web site. As they play to the committed and like this site, don't seem to be growing or expanding.

 
At 2/12/2006 9:53 PM, Blogger The Inside Dope said...

...and you're basing this analysis on... what exactly?

The readership for this blog has been on a steady upward curve since it launched, with an all time daily high number of unique visitors, 744, set just last week. (and that's the lower total of two traffic monitoring services, the other reported over 850)

Feeds and posts from this site are featured on at least 5 blog digest sites, it's linked to from over 20 other blogs, and was recently nominated for a Koufax Award for Best State/Local Blog, a nation-wide award.

Not sure where you're getting the view that it's not "growing or expanding".

This is a one person operation and neither it's critics nor those who enjoy it seem to feel like contributing financially, not even so much as a couple bucks now and then. (not even a dime, for that matter.)

So how exactly do you propose I should grow and expand?

Should I sell ads and plaster them all over the place?

Should I do pledge drives and bug the hell out of people?

Should I hire staff out of my own pocket just to please you? Hire a reporter to go out and do original stories? Hire a couple extra writers to produce more content? A graphics expert and a tech person would be nice too.

If I had a penny for every time a reader read The Inside Dope, I'd have $610. Wonder how far that would go?

Or should I charge nearly a dollar a day for it, like Rich Miller does for his Capitol Fax service?

Or maybe, like Rich, I should start a site and just invite OTHER bloggers to contribute their stuff, thus creating a site where other bloggers provide the content for nothing, but allowing me to sell ads and generate revenue from all the viewers they bring?

I kind of like things the way they are. This blog will never be all things to all people, nor do I want it to be. I think attempting to do that would result in a watered down, generally uninteresting attempt at being a newspaper.

Maybe that's the problem? You're tired of paying $0.75 for a newspaper every day and want it's equivilent here for nothing?

Hmmmm. 61,000 viewers times .75 cents equals... um.... carry the one.... $45,750.

Now with that, I might be able to "grow and expand".

 
At 2/13/2006 12:25 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

According to availabe research data relatively few Americans are even familar with the phenomenon of blogging.

According to the Pew Research Center, "Only one is six Americans are even familiar with web logs (blogs)."

Even among the most hardened internet users, only about 21% are very or somewhat familar with blogs.

All in all: bloggers tend to skew younger, edcuated, and wealthy. While the crowd is politcally balanced (35% Democrat, 34 Republican, and 10% Independent) blogs have little, if any, bearing on the outcome of modern elections,.

While some suggest blogs impact opinion makers, there is no proof that the assertion is true.

Perhaps in the future, but right now --- not so much!

As for your antidotal evidence, you had no where to go but up. Let's wait see what your numbers are after the primary election!

 
At 2/13/2006 1:53 AM, Blogger The Inside Dope said...

And again, what's your point? I don't know who or what you're arguing against? I've never suggested that this blog will determine the outcome of any elections! I have no idea what influence, if any, it will have. So who are you arguing against?

Has anyone suggested that everyone is familiar with blogs? No. But judging from your attempt to demean the blog, I feel safe in saying that you're certainly not, and I can safely say you've never had one or run one.

First of all, I'm not so sure I'd trust your poll numbers, as I don't know when that poll was taken. If you're trying to argue that blogs are some minor phenomena or passing fad, you're sadly mistaken. The number of blogs are growing exponentially every day and corporations, particualarly newpaper and cable news, are going nuts trying to slap blogs up all over their sites.

Secondly, you cite a couple poll stats, then in the next breath make a completely unproven assertion that blogs don't have any bearing on the outcome of elections. There's no evidence to support that.

But there are many anecdotal cases where bloggers had a very definite impact on a race, such as the amazing amount raised for the Dean campaign and several instances where they were critical in electing candidates to state and national office by both fundraising and calling attention to the race. I cited one such case (Hackworth in OH) within a post recently.

Even though I've never suggested that this blog is some ultra powerful force or that it will have great influence on any elections, you seem to feel the need to argue that it won't.

Why is that? A little nervous?

My evidence of the growth of this blog provided in my comment above are facts, not "anecdotes", and 100% verifiable by independent sources. If you'd like to see the stats in black and white, drop me a line. I'd be happy to provide them.

You can argue all day and night that the blog has no influence, blah, blah, blah, but the only verifiable facts are the ones I cited in my comment above.

People read it, and more and more and more people read it as time goes by. Period. That's the story so far.

And no.... I didn't have anywhere to go but up. Things could have gone nowhere.

This blog could have very easily never attracted many readers at all. Or it could have attracted readers at first, maybe grown a little out of curiousity but then lost them as they dropped off or lost interest. Attracting readers and retaining them are two different things.

It certainly IS NOT a given, especially over a year's time, that readership will constantly increase. For you to try to dismiss this a pretty dumb attempt to demean the blog's growth.

There are actually very few blogs which survive a year. It's a very time and labor intensive job to put up and manage a blog, and frankly, most people can't handle the attacks, the headaches, the constant need to find material and supply posts on a regular basis, moderate all the comments, etc.

I'd say that about 80% or more of all bloggers give up within the first year. Frankly, it's a pain in the ass, very hard to find and write content, and demoralizing when you get smart-asses telling you how you should do it, what they think you're doing wrong, and how the blog isn't doing very well in the face of clear evidence that it is.

So now your fondest prediction is that traffic goes down the tubes after the primary? What a weirdo.

It doesn't take a genius to realize that traffic will likely peak as the elections approach. Will they go down afterwards? Probably. That would come as no surprise, as they peaked and then slowed a bit after the last election.

But then they steadily grew again, as always.

I'd imagine there's a limit to how many readers I can attract to a blog that focuses on local politics. That isn't everyone's cup of tea after all, and there's only so many people in the area. It might flatten out at a plateau at some point. Who knows?

I'm just amazed at the numbers that I do get, and I think sneezing at them is pretty strange, especially in light of the fact that this blog gets more readers than any other Quad City blog, despite the fact that it's partisan, and deals primarily with only the Illinois side of things.

Yet I have to endure those who haven't liked what they've seen written here, who don't like the fact that the blog has done well, don't like that the stories here have been widely read and discussed, don't like the fact that it's read by judges, lawyers, academics, candidates, politicians, political staff, activists, major universities, the statehouses of both Iowa and Illinois, the U.S. House, many local corporations and executives, and just plain ordinary folks, don't like the fact that they can't control what is written here, and so sit there taking pot shots.

That comes with the territory I guess. But they sure don't impress me.

I shouldn't even waste my time responding, but I don't like it when people try to deny the facts. I'm not saying this blog is the best. Could it be better? Hell yes! I'm working on trying to figure out how to do that all the time, though I'm limited by what one person can do. It's far from the best blog around, and I've never said it was.

But I'm not going to sit here and let people try to diminish what is after all, a pretty good blog, (for what you pay for it) and something which I've spent an amazing amount of time and effort to produce.

The Inside Dope has done very well, I'm afraid. I'm pleased, most readers are pleased. And after all, that's all that matters.

The fact that there are some who don't like it is only confirmation that I must be doing something right.

 
At 2/13/2006 10:46 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Blogs are a passing fads like hoola-hoops and yo-yos, rather than a shift in the way media is used.

Rather than report news, all too often bloggers make up stories to suite their own preverse agenda. If you want people to take you seriously, come out from behind the curtain and stand by your stories. As no legitimat news source is going to print the kind of idle gossip you peddle.

But from my perspective that's what makes your silly little site so fun and politcally usefull. As to your point about Howard Dean, his campaign was more hype than politcal reality. Meet-ups and e-mails supplement can campaign tactics, but they will never replace television, newspapers, direct mail and/or old fashioned shoe leather.

From my perspective, web log owners are little more then gnats of the giant rear ends of prime bulls. Sorry about that DOPER, but them is the facts.

Don't let it take away from what you have accomlished. Yes, it's alot of fun, but not very important.

 
At 2/13/2006 1:37 PM, Blogger The Inside Dope said...

Wow. That was amazing. Lot's to work with, so let's go....

You write:
"Blogs are a passing fads like hoola-hoops and yo-yos, rather than a shift in the way media is used."

If you believe that, you're truly the Dope here. You blow it right off the bat.

"Rather than report news, all too often bloggers make up stories to suite their own preverse agenda."

Blogs don't exist to "report news". That's what newspapers do. Where did you come from? You don't know squat about this, yet you act as though you know all.

Blogs don't "make up" stories. Most of my posts highlight stories printed in newspapers. Are you saying they're "made up"? Again, you make no sense.

And your "preverse (sic) agenda" remark really adds to your credibility too. Yep. Every one of the millions of blogs out there each have their own "preverse agenda". Amazing, ain't it? We're all "preverts", every one.
What a clod.

"If you want people to take you seriously, come out from behind the curtain and stand by your stories."

You mean the way you come out from behind the curtain and stand by your ill-considered comments? I thought so.

"As no legitimat (sic)news source is going to print the kind of idle gossip you peddle."

Where in the world did you get the impression that the goal of a blog is to get "legitimat" news sources to print their stuff? What planet are you on?

"But from my perspective that's what makes your silly little site so fun and politcally usefull."

What does? You never say!

"As to your point about Howard Dean, his campaign was more hype than politcal reality. Meet-ups and e-mails supplement can campaign tactics, but they will never replace television, newspapers, direct mail and/or old fashioned shoe leather."

Uh... did anyone here say they would? Can you possibly post one comment without resorting to inventing your own strawman to argue against? Just once?

"From my perspective, web log owners are little more then gnats of the giant rear ends of prime bulls. Sorry about that DOPER, but them is the facts."

Nope, them is your uninformed and largely ignorant OPINIONS. Except for the fact that the "prime bulls" are giant asses. Glad I could straighten that out.

"Don't let it take away from what you have accomlished. Yes, it's alot of fun, but not very important."

Well, I can't argue with that. While it' important to me, there's no way of judging if it's important to anyone else.

But important or not, apparently a lot of people find it useful, interesting, and/or informative. That's enough for me.

 

Post a Comment

<< Home