Skip to main content

Blogging for Dollars

I've been toying with the idea of increasing how much I might get back from this little place. At times it gets down right exciting to watch my hits rise day after day, until I get writers block again and drop back to double digits for a month or so. I can't help but listen to the entrepenourial spirit in me that suggests a little more devotion and disipline on my part would push the pocket pennies to a threshold the likes of my ramen-eating self would just drool over. Hell, I could even buy two flavors of ramen.

So, I played with a few things. I naively made an attempt to jury-rig my Google Adsense snippets into my actual posts, to test what would come up in my reader. Squat, that's what. I looked around for feed-specific advertising services, and I found nothing but closed betas. I was seriously surprised at the lack of services in this area. Anyone who gets there first is going to have a serious advantage. Now, many someone is there first, so let me rephrase it as "someone who gets there first, in a noticeable way". It's enough to make a guy want a startup.

The dead-ends I've crawled back from in this pursuit must have been littered with the sweat of others out there, looking for just this sort of thing. Some places are doing in-feed advertising in-house, such as Slashdot, but the rest of us are really left hanging. Every day I look at my hits through Adsense and I really have to wonder what I'm missing. If I'm getting so many people actually making their way to my page, how many aren't even doing that much and just read it through the aggregators and never browse to the site proper?

One might suppose that the "real" hits are more important anyway. Those are the ones that really measure interest, not passive consumption. That isn't what this is about, anyway. I need some cold, hard cash.

What is everyone's opinion on the different routes? I'd like to know both what anyone thinks personally and/or what experiences you've had with the options available.
  1. What is to be done about the feeds (which are great) taking users away from our sites? Does this change the perspective of the entire web?
  2. What about our feeds being interlaced with advertising, text and banner?
  3. What reaction, if any, should the public have to paid advertising posts by bloggers and are they worth it?

Comments

metapundit.net said…
I've been watching the evolution of ads in an RSS driven world with interest. Slashdot, for instance, strips the links out of their stories now - if you're interested in a story you have to click through to slashdot in order to follow the links. I can see this in a site that's always been community based (ie - the comments are as much the deal as the news for nerds is.)

I think I actually like this model better than what they were doing previously - graphical ads embedded in the feed that sometimes dwarfed the story. Very annoying - I thought about unsubscribing for a while.

If you do pursue ads do it the google way - ads should be text based and unobtrusive. Don't ruin my reading experience! If I start seeing flash ads in my bloglines I'll unsubscribe in a heartbeat...

BTW, did you look at feedburner.com? I've never used their service but have always been under the impression that they do exactly the ads-in-feeds thing you're talking about. Maybe they're not contextual. Sure seems like the sort of thing Google would be good at, doesn't it?
Fuzzyman said…
I only provide partial feeds, which means that people have to come to my site to read the full entry.

Some people argue that this actually *reduces* traffic to your site as some people won't read partial feeds.

Personally, the reason I use partial feeds is because I haven't *bothered* to put the effort into changing over... but it is an interesting debate.

I'm sure that somewhere I saw some company that would put ads into RSS feeds. Can't remember who they are though. :-)
Fuzzyman said…
Feedburner offers an 'ads in RSS' service:

http://blogs.feedburner.com/feedburner/archives/001762.html

I knew I had seen it somewhere...

Popular posts from this blog

Respect and Code Reviews

Code Reviews in a development team only function best, or possible at all, when everyone approaches them with respect. That’s something I’ve usually taken for granted because I’ve had the opportunity to work with amazing developers who shine not just in their technical skills but in their interpersonal skills on a team. That isn’t always the case, so I’m going to put into words something that often exists just in assumptions.
You have to respect your code. This is first only because the nature and intent of code reviews are to safeguard the quality of your code, so even having code reviews demonstrates a baseline of respect for that code. But, maybe not everyone on the team has the same level of respect or entered a team with existing review traditions that they aren’t acquainted with.
There can be culture shock when you enter a team that’s really heavy on code reviews, but also if you enter a team or interact with a colleague who doesn’t share that level of respect for the process or…

CARDIAC: The Cardboard Computer

I am just so excited about this.


CARDIAC. The Cardboard Computer. How cool is that? This piece of history is amazing and better than that: it is extremely accessible. This fantastic design was built in 1969 by David Hagelbarger at Bell Labs to explain what computers were to those who would otherwise have no exposure to them. Miraculously, the CARDIAC (CARDboard Interactive Aid to Computation) was able to actually function as a slow and rudimentary computer. 
One of the most fascinating aspects of this gem is that at the time of its publication the scope it was able to demonstrate was actually useful in explaining what a computer was. Could you imagine trying to explain computers today with anything close to the CARDIAC?

It had 100 memory locations and only ten instructions. The memory held signed 3-digit numbers (-999 through 999) and instructions could be encoded such that the first digit was the instruction and the second two digits were the address of memory to operate on. The only re…

How To Care If BSD, MIT, or GPL Licenses Are Used

The two recent posts about some individuals' choice of GPL versus others' preference for BSD and MIT style licensing has caused a lot of debate and response. I've seen everything as an interesting combination of very important topics being taken far too seriously and far too personally. All involved need to take a few steps back.

For the uninitiated and as a clarifier for the initiated, we're dealing with (basically) three categories of licensing when someone releases software (and/or its code):
Closed Source. Easiest to explain, because you just get nothing.GPL. If you get the software, you get the source code, you get to change it, and anything you combine it with must be under the same terms.MIT and BSD. If you get the software, you might get the source code, you get to change it, and you have no obligations about anything else you combine it with.The situation gets stickier when we look at those combinations and the transitions between them.

Use GPL code with Closed S…