The results are in!
– Along with a passionate trail of comments from committed readers bemoaning long and waffly posts! (Many from Norah Colvin who is now way out in front as the person who comments most on this blog! Norah I love you ❤️)
I set up this poll because I’m interested in the behaviour of the casual reader on sites like mine. If this were science I could claim little ‘proof’ for my own views from a one question questionnaire with less than 100 participants, but I’ll share them nevertheless!
Initially I was quite surprised that post length is ‘not often a factor’ for 41% participants but then I considered the number of factors we all quickly take into account when we open a post, like topic, novelty, how well it’s written and whether the writer manages to ‘grab’ you in the opening paragraph. I do asses most of those things if I have bothered to open up a post in the first place. Mostly this is driven by the title sparking some curiosity or confirming something I have been searching. However once I’m there, post length is a significant factor in whether I read on and to the end.
My views and these results are sort of backed up with some of last week’s comments. Personally:
1. I like to read shorter posts because my time and attention are limited.
2. I like to write shorter posts for fairly much the same reasons.
3. I also enjoy and appreciate the craft of making succinct, plain English enjoyable to read.
4. There are exceptions to all of the above, when for example, I am seeking detailed information to help with a problem or gap in knowledge. Occasionally something novel will also intrigue me and I will keep going with almost anything that makes me laugh.
When I analyse my own blog traffic, it is clear the CHEMOBRAIN series of posts is head and shoulders above anything else I have written. These posts still attract views nearly every day and they’re my longest posts by far. (I might guess that that is because there isn’t an unending supply of information out there for people dealing with this issue.)
Last week I didn’t attempt to properly explain what Google’s new ‘quality drive’ is all about. I’d only caught site of an article about it on LinkedIn – enough to give me an excuse to have a go with PollDaddy.com for the first time!
For those looking for a succinct explanation, Charli Mills offered this (Thanks Charli 😊):
“The 2,000 word ranking covers a category they launched in 2014 called “in-depth.” Their intent is to curate well-researched content and there’s more to it than word count (evergreen, take-aways, headlines, unique, pagination, logos). Why the feature? Because marketers got good at supplying content to promote or sell products or services, but some marketers got sleazy about supplying cheap tricks to get higher SEO rankings. In-depth, evergreen content overrides all that promotional-based content so readers can find actual information and not a gilded sales pitch or affinity reviews masquerading as content.
So, as a blogger, do you want the in-depth rankings? Say I was a serious journalist who wanted to write Rock Creek as non-fiction. I’d be better served to have a strategy that fit the in-depth model because I’d build credibility as a researcher. But I’m writing fiction. Yes, I love the research, but I’m not a serious journalist — deep within me is an imaginative soul who can’t help but ponder human motives and what if twists. I’m an artist as much as a writer. My canvas is the page, words my paint. Therefore, what matters to me are readers who like to read what I craft…readers who like my style, voice and imagery. I doubt I’d find those readers on Google’s in-depth category.”
So to sum it all up, whilst I prefer shorter posts, if you grab my attention I can be drawn to read a longer post when there’s a sense of it being worthwhile. Is it fair to say it seems the same may apply to many of you?
(PS: Word count 693 with 225 of those to be credited to Charli Mills!)
January 19, 2016 at 10:28 am
I am always fascinated by the connectivity that develop. What I mean is I may read something short (kind of what everyone has said, it’s what we do these days) but that awakens interests and ideas and I start to look for more to feed my thinking. Not necessarily with the same heading, it’s a relational thing.
LikeLiked by 1 person
January 19, 2016 at 3:17 pm
Yes! And two hours later you’re still reading but can’t quite remember how you got from A➛ Z! It’s a great way of exploration for the open-minded 😀
LikeLike
January 18, 2016 at 3:48 pm
Hey! You’re stepping all over my 200-word Thought Bubbles, Lisa. 😉 Okay, they are short. They started out as a challenge but have blown up.
LikeLiked by 1 person
January 18, 2016 at 7:43 pm
Actually I’m jealous of them! You always have either an interesting observation or question and both create great discussion 😘 xx
LikeLiked by 1 person
January 18, 2016 at 3:47 pm
Never did get back to participate in your survey Lisa (it’s still languishing in my inbox) but resonated with your findings. Post length is definitely a factor, but as you found, not as important as the relevance and quality of the post. And I think writers need to take a stand against the increasing tendency towards “bytes” and “clickbate,” SEO-driven posts. I’ll take time to read an intelligent, well-written post once. Once the title pulls me in, I want some substance. Thanks for the valuable experiment, and appreciated your sharing Charli’s comments here on the “in-depth” category and evergreen.
LikeLiked by 1 person
January 18, 2016 at 4:07 pm
Thanks Jeanne. I’ve never heard that excellent term.. “clickbate”! To bear in mind crafting post titles 😀
LikeLike
January 18, 2016 at 12:19 pm
Interesting, Lisa. This might not be your thing, but I’d be interested to see the 200 to 600 category broken down – is it the case that, when length does matter, the shorter the better, or is there an optimum length?
Thanks for posting Charli’s longer explanation – again I’d wonder why fiction writers should be/should exclude themselves from this category? Can’t we be authoritative too. My own preference in this regard would be for some kind of middle ground, posts that are neither too fluffy nor too erudite (although agree we might have different interpretations of what this would mean).
LikeLike
January 18, 2016 at 1:18 pm
I do suspect Anne that if there are proper statistics on post length, that there are too many variables for us sciency types to be satisfied with demarcations on the ‘perfect post length’. What we’d really need is some sort of indicator in posts to see whether there’s a consistent point at which readers give up regardless of all the writer’s quality interventions. 200 words is very small. Many post comments reach that!
The few articles I read on the subject didn’t actually discuss the middle ground. Although a very succinct post can be interesting and informative, 200 words is a challenge for most matters. You for example, couldn’t hope to do justice to your book reviews in less words. There’s Amazon for that, so put the kettle on and Carry On! xx
LikeLiked by 1 person
January 18, 2016 at 11:07 am
I agree with your points 1 – 4 and your summing up.
I do apologise for having the rant on your post last week, but not for being your most frequent commenter, though I think my rant may have skewed those results a bit. At least it didn’t skewer them. Seems like most of us are in agreement. Thank you my lovely friend. 🙂
LikeLike
January 18, 2016 at 1:24 pm
Really no need to apologise. Your ‘rants’ are my ‘controlled discussion‘! In itself Norah it may give you pause to reflect on just how diligent you might be at commenting.. Especially at times when there feels pressure to read everything (because you are indeed just about the best there is and yet I don’t under-value the others.) Perhaps you could Lighten Up when things are busy and still be a great friend to the blogosphere? ❤️
LikeLiked by 1 person
January 19, 2016 at 10:56 am
Thank you, Lisa for your kind words and suggestion. I will try to implement your advice. There are a few areas in which I could lighten up! 🙂 Thanks for linking back to your Blog Lite post. I am of this variety: “A minority are a noisy supportive rabble of writers and bloggers all enjoying the intellectual exchange of creativity and mutual appreciation. They come for new posts, to comment and enjoy a social reciprocation.” SMAG that! I’m definitely in for the intellectual exchange and the mutual appreciation. Too bad I had already “liked” the post. Looks like I couldn’t upsize that! 🙂
LikeLike
January 19, 2016 at 3:19 pm
It’s so difficult to give some threads or people the sort of attention they deserve. I suppose the same goes for real life but in some ways, that’s easier because people are often more aware of the efforts you are having to go to to squeeze a bit of everything in! xx
LikeLiked by 1 person
January 21, 2016 at 4:54 am
That’s an interesting observation. I’ll have to think about that. 🙂
LikeLiked by 1 person
January 17, 2016 at 11:50 pm
Interesting!
LikeLiked by 2 people
January 19, 2016 at 6:52 pm
Thanks 🙂
LikeLike
January 17, 2016 at 8:44 pm
I could have written your 1-4. Exactly how I feel. If a post pulls me in, I’ll read it of course but in general I much prefer short and to the point. 💖
LikeLiked by 2 people
January 18, 2016 at 1:26 pm
Twinny 😀 👭
LikeLiked by 1 person