The Blogging A-List Is Far From Dead
The A-list debate rages on. Every couple of months it rears its head as people argue over whether the A-list exists and whether it remains relevant.
In this latest installment, Hugh MacLeod is arguing that social networks and social networking tools (Facebook, Twitter, Pownce) have given people more power and ability to build their own groups, and not be as reliant on A-listers as hubs of attention. I think blogs already gave people that power; there are plenty of “networks of blogs” and “blog communities” that are thriving without A-list support. You don’t need links from A-listers, nor will they suddenly turn you from a zero to hero overnight. But…
The A-List does exist.
The A-List is relevant.
What people miss (on both sides of the argument) is how the A-list is relevant.
The A-list is made up of tech-focused, early adopters. If you’re in the tech business, running a Web 2.0 startup, hoping to generate buzz and build key relationships in places like the Valley, then being in-tune with the A-list and being able to reach the A-list has value. Having Robert Scoble promote you, your business and your product will help. It’s not the “be all and end all” but it will help.
The A-list, within the tech community, has the power to create lots and lots of buzz.
That can be useful.
But for most people (since most people in the blogosphere aren’t starting Web 2.0 startups) it’s not relevant.
For me, that’s the end of the argument. It’s a question of relevancy. It’s a question of strategic value. Not celebrity, not hero worship, not “who has the most friends in every social network.”
The A-list exists.
The A-list is relevant…for certain people, under certain circumstances.
Where we all go wrong is that too many people believe that being connected to the A-listers will be of real value to them. In reality, it won’t.
In Tony Hung’s world, the A-list matters a great deal. He lives and breathes Web 2.0, reports on it and the relationships he builds with A-listers can help him further his own goals (whatever they may be.) And Tony points out the obvious, which I agree with — some people are more popular than others.
For Brian Clark, the A-list is irrelevant. In his brilliantly titled post, Blogging is Dead (Long Live Value Blogging), he says he’s thrilled that tools like Twitter and Pownce exist, so all the banal “stuff” people want to write about (like what they’re having for lunch, etc.) moves to those mediums, and blogging is left to those that, “…provide true value by teaching, informing and offering unique perspective are thriving.”
Fair enough, I’ll buy that argument. There’s no question that quality blogs are thriving in a huge way, irrespective of social networking tools. And I don’t see a time in the near future where we won’t have quality blogs growing bigger and bigger audiences. No amount of social networking tools will change the value of blogs.
But Brian’s focused almost exclusively on blogging. And in that case, he’s right, you don’t need the A-list for your blog to be successful. On the other hand, if you’re trying to launch a Web 2.0 startup and you’re hoping to get mentioned on TechCrunch, get Jason Calacanis as an advisor, and generate lots of initial buzz, then the A-list becomes much more important.
Some people will always be more popular than others. That’s how the world works. And in some cases it’s worth being buddy-buddy with the popular kids. And in other cases it doesn’t matter. Each of us has to decide whether it’s really worth it or not, and go from there.
Ben, I agree, and have always been interested at the power of the A-list.
I do have one comment though, which is, if you are starting a web2.0 company or something that the readers of TC (or another site like that) should be interested in, getting a mention will not be the silver bullet answer. You don’t say it will be but I want to just chime in - if your marketing strategy is to get mention or a post by the A-lister in question, it won’t take you to “wildly successful” - yes, it’s happened, but there are still core business principles that come into play.
My two cents, as I hope for the magical post but realize there is work to do before, and after, it happens :p
Jason Alba
CEO - JibberJobber.com
:: self-serve career management ::
Jason - I totally agree. I didn’t want to make the post a detailed explanation of how the A-list can benefit a Web 2.0 startup. I did sneak in words like “strategic” though…
Without a doubt, if your strategy is “Have the A-listers talk about you,” and that’s it — you’re in big, big trouble.
But without a doubt the noise and buzz they can create is of value.
Don’t mean to sound like a broken record, but I agree with Jason as well. Using the buzz to your advantage by timing phases, etc. is absolutely imperative.
On another tangent…the “A-list” seems to be thrown around so arbitrarily. Some bloggers even consider themselves A-listers as part of their strategy to create buzz or controversy…take your pick. I know my point of view is kinda random and callow, but I think you know what I’m getting at. I think.
[...] of Blogging Independence”. Other thoughts on the topic include those from Rex Hammock and Ben Yoskovitz, as well as The Last Podcast. But the best comments by far come from my friend Tony Hung at Deep [...]
Derrich - I don’t think your point is random or callow.
Lots of people believe their own hype. It’s human nature.
Ben,
Good angle in the final paragraph. A-listers — or whatever you want to call them — can be tremendously influential in generating buzz that can drive signups.
For some web2.0 outfits, getting the network effect in is absolutely critical for it to work … and the benefit of having Guy Kawasaki or Jason Calacanis front your outfit can’t be measured in dollars. Or, rather, it can, but you know what I mean.
Cheers
t @ dji
I think the relevance of the A-List bloggers depends entirely on what the individual blogger hopes to achieve with his/her blog. Nearly everyone would love to have a plug from an A-Lister. A bump in traffic is almost guaranteed. There are others, however, that are very content to just have a small core of loyal readers. I think your point about being buddy-buddy with the popular kids is well put. It certainly doesn’t hurt but it’s also not always necessary.
Bret makes a good point. There is a lot of pressure on bloggers to be A listers, but one question to ask is “why?” If you are a b or c lister, are you doing what is needed to satisfy your current readers?
Having a small group of loyal readers and giving them the content they need is just as important as the strive to be A-list
I never really gave that much attention to being a a list blogger to me it is all about page rank and great info….
I agree with the value of the A-list and am looking forward to your follow-up: how to approach people on the A-list! Thanks
Here’s the only A-list I’d like to be on: My blog is considered the best authority blog for my niche topic.
That may mean I don’t break 100k in traffic ranking or some other arbitrary measure of “A-list” blogs, but that’s OK.
I’d rather help one million readers and have them value the blog than look for 5-10 A-list bloggers to make my site something of “value.”
Good post, Ben; the important thing is to know the goals of your blog and work that to what you want to have happen.
Web Urbanist - Heh. I didn’t have a “how to reach the A-list” post planned, because I don’t think there’s any special way of doing it. They’re just people (whether they like to believe so or not.)
And reaching them is the same as reaching anyone, the only real difference is that A-listers aren’t likely to respond as quick. Part of that is because they’re overwhelmed with contacts…so you reach out in different ways: blogs, linkbait, Twitter, etc. and then get others to help you too.
[...] it was the social network that is re-organizing the hierarchy (Ben did make a great argument for why the “A-list” is still and will always be relevant) it follows then that if there is a new hierarchy then there are important folks in it. There [...]
Well said, Ben. Irrespective of what some may think, there will always be those bloggers who are considered to be a “cut above” the average blogger. This doesn’t mean that they are superior people, rather that they take their craft very seriously and do what they can to build up their base.
Blogging doesn’t work too differently from the world of business where pecking orders are in place. At least with blogging, everyone can be the king of his own domain, unlike in business where bowing to superiors is commonplace.
Hi Ben, I came by your post by way of Steve Olson’s blog and I’m glad I found you.
I’m not “in the mix” of blog or Web 2.0 A Lists in the same way as you and the other commentors are (more involved), but I wanted to say that I enjoy blogs themselves much more than social network communities - if for no other reason then the information is usually posted so straightforward and much easier to find.
I’d much rather find great bloggers and see what they have to say then weed my way through tons of comments, reactions, etc.
LOL, I thought that was called a “forum”
Thanks for the post! I thoroughly enjoyed myself.
Theresa - Thank you for stopping by and commenting. I appreciate it.
I agree with you wholeheartedly on blogs vs. forums - I’ve never been able to get into forums that much. Even just logging in holds me back. I do know there’s lots of value in forums, but I’ve never found a way to get hooked on many of them.
There aren’t many, but I’d have to say the forum I enjoy the most is v7n and yes, active participation can prove to be either a good thing or once again unreveiling the “what works” from the “what’s a waste of time.”
I enjoy blogs the most. Especially truly interesting ones that get a person thinking
Theresa - Thanks for commenting again. Hopefully this blog is one that gets people thinking!