why blog post frequency does not matter anymore | marketing profs daily fix blog
why blog post frequency does not matter anymore | marketing profs daily fix blog
blog home archives the newsrss/xmlbook clubmarketing profs
eric kintz bio
06.06.06why blog post frequency does not matter anymore
"thou shall post every day” is the most fundamental and most well known principle of blogging....
every new blogger is warned about “the” ultimate rule and is confronted with the pressure of a day going by with no new post. every one has in mind the examples of successful bloggers, like robert scoble at microsoft, who post several times a day. daily posting shows that you are serious about blogging, generates traffic and drives reader loyalty, as readers come back daily to check your new posts. you cannot be successful if you do not go by the rule, right? right?
wrong. daily posts are a legacy of a web 1.0 mindset and early web 2.0 days (meaning 12 months ago!). the pressure around posting frequency will ultimately become a significant barrier to the maturity of blogging. here are 10 reasons why.
#1- traffic is generated by participating in the community; not daily posting – the blogosphere doubles in size every 6 months and cutting through the clutter will become ever more difficult with a new blog emerging every second. daily posting deals with the clutter by adding more clutter.
although this strategy made sense 12 months ago and still makes sense for the top bloggers, its effectiveness diminishes with every new blog created. traffic is generated by successful bloggers linking to you either in their posts or in their blogroll. mack at viral garden has a series of great posts on the importance of joining the community.
#2 – traffic is irrelevant to your blog’s success anyway– unless you specifically target bloggers like bruce, are a blogging consultant or blog about your latest book, traffic is irrelevant to you. what matters most is whether you are reaching your target audience (which may be narrow and focused), not necessarily how many people read your posts. engaging with the audience you want to have a relationship with is a much smarter strategy than posting frequently
#3- loyal readers coming back daily to check your posts is so web 1.0 – as the blogosphere matures, the number of new readers and bloggers will decrease and loyal readers are going to matter more. i have heard many bloggers tell me that they will lose reader loyalty if these readers come back daily and do not see any new posts. this perception is still very strong although irrelevant. loyal readers subscribe to your blog via rss feeds and have new content pushed to them. they will remain loyal because they have subscribed, not because you post frequently.
#4 - frequent posting is actually starting to have a negative impact on loyalty: seth godin (a frequent blogger) has a very interesting theory. according to him, rss fatigue is already setting in. with too many posts, you run the risk of losing loyal readers, overwhelmed by the clutter you generate. readers will start to tune off if your blog takes up too much of their time
#5: frequent posting keeps key senior executives and thought leaders out of the blogosphere – my colleagues and industry peers cite bandwidth constraints as the number one reason for not blogging. they are absolutely right: frequent posting is not very compatible with a high pressure job. as an example, not one single blog is authored by a senior corporate marketing blogger in the top 25 marketing blogs listed by mack. not only does the blogosphere lose valuable thought leadership, it runs the risk of being overlooked by these very same marketers.
a recent study by forrester found a reluctance among marketers to shift from more tried-and-true online channels like search and e-mail marketing. just 13 percent reported using blogs or social networks in marketing, and 49 percent said they had no plans to do so in the next year. if the blogosphere wants to become more mainstream (vs. being the latest hype), frequent posting and required bandwidth are undoubtedly a major barrier to adoption.
#6: frequent posting drives poor content quality – the pressure of daily posting drives many bloggers to re-purpose other bloggers’ content or give quick un-insightful comments on the news. few bloggers have enough time (or expertise) to write daily thought leadership pieces, thus adding to the clutter. ben at the church of the customer blog explores the 1% rule and cites the wikipedia example: 25 million readers visit wikipedia every month, but the number of people who actually contribute content to wikipedia is about 1-2 percent of total site visitors. i would argue that the same is valid for the blogosphere as a whole where most of the original high value content is driven by 1% of the bloggers. some of the most insightful –and most quoted- marketing thought blogging leaders are actually infrequent posters, from sam decker to charlene li or randi baseler.
#7: frequent posting threatens the credibility of the blogosphere – as many bloggers re-purpose existing content under the pressure of daily posting, they do not take the time to do any sort of due diligence and conduct effective research. errors snowball in the blogosphere as they spread from one blogger to the other. the collective wisdom of user generated content was supposed to provide an alternative to biased traditional media content – it is instead echoing the thoughts and biases of a few.
#8 - frequent posting will push corporate bloggers into the hands of pr agencies – as they struggle with bandwidth constraints as well as peer pressure to join the blogosphere, more and more companies will resort to partnering with their pr agencies to create blogs. the blogosphere will in turn lose some of its effectiveness and value.
#9 - frequent posting creates the equivalent of a blogging landfill – according to technorati, only 55% of bloggers post after 3 months of existence. the pressure of the first months to write frequently certainly contributes to people abandoning their blogs. is that in the blogosphere’s best interest to have a third of its participants frustrated by their initial efforts?
#10 - i love my family too much - ann pointed out to me this cool blog that highlights the challenges of blogging addiction – bloggers anonymous. very funny…..
if you want to be a top 50 technorati blogger, you will most probably still need to post several times a day. but for the rest of us, we should think seriously about the added value of frequent blogging. actually, according to technorati, only 11% of all blogs update weekly or more. what will matter more and more is what you write and how you engage, not how often you write.
as the blogosphere matures, the measure of success will shift from traffic to reader loyalty. as seth godin says in his post, “blogging with restraint, selectivity, cogency and brevity (okay, that's a long way of saying "making every word count") will use attention more efficiently and ought to win.”
as for me, i will continue to post only when i have something to say.
eric kintz is vp global marketing strategy & excellence for hewlett-packard. read his blog here.
read more on this subject:
read all posts by eric kintz
go to eric kintz's site
trackback
trackback url for this entry:http://www.mpdailyfix.com/cgi-bin/mt/mt-tb.cgi/1093
listed below are links to weblogs that reference why blog post frequency does not matter anymore:
» blogging pace minset from schestowitz.com
why the frequency of blog posts no longer matters [read more]
tracked on july 15, 2006 7:44 am
» stop posting so much? gah! from finding the money
a *very* interesting view on why frequent posting doesn't matter anymore. [read more]
tracked on july 20, 2006 8:07 pm
» increasing blog traffic from thebrotherlove.com
choose your words wisely [read more]
tracked on july 27, 2006 2:19 am
» infrequent is best from the computer vet weblog
all this time i thought i was just a procrastinator. i’ve never really been able to post more than two or three times a week on this blog; sometimes i’ll go a whole week without writing anything, or more! and... [read more]
tracked on july 29, 2006 1:56 pm
» in defense of the semi-regular post from welcome to the hinterlands: a narrative nonfiction blog
i am not generally, it is true, a daily poster. i prefer the post with pith, rather than flyby commentary (she said, defensively). also, sometimes, alas for my blogging life, i actually have to spend time on work i'm paid [read more]
tracked on july 30, 2006 12:26 pm
» blog post frequency - too much talking not enough listening from capture the conversation internet marketing blog
blog post frequency is not the issue with getting a solid readership. it's actively listening and participating in the conversation that drives readership loyalty. [read more]
tracked on august 8, 2006 1:14 pm
» quality, not frequency from the geek within
[read more]
tracked on august 24, 2006 8:07 am
comments
great post. i recently removed hugh of gapingvoid from my feed because he posts so much it fills the screen on my rss reader. besides he seems less interesting now that he's the louis vuton of the blogophere (the photo of hugh whining about signing "so many posters" did it for me). boy, with the latest godingate etc. i wonder if someone needs to start the blog equivilent of "jumped the shark" for a-listers :-)
posted by:
karl long |
06.06.06
excellent thoughts, eric!!!!
although aggregating by technorati tags still puts the most recent blog posts at the top of the page.
very true about keeping senior exects. out of the blogosphere. well done!!!!!!!!
posted by:
andrew jones |
06.06.06
as i told eric, frequency is largely dictated by your blog-goals; the huffington post has a different blogging strategy than, for example, eric kintz. regardless, eric offers a good reminder that all blogs are not the same, and therefore all bloggers needn't follow the same prescription.
posted by:
ann handley |
06.06.06
post early in the morning.
post often.
"do this, don't do that, can't you read the signs?" (i'm singing that in the office)
like all marketing (if you consider blogging marketing), targeting it to the appropriate niche is always the way to go. find out what readers want, expect and need from you as a blogger, otherwise you'll be overwhelmed with "blogging advice" from people that may not (and likely do not) understand your target market.
there may be a few fundamentals to blogging well (write good content, link to others, etc.) but in terms of things like frequency, time of day, etc. i think we're going to see more and more dissenting and varied opinions. and the debate will only heat up.
posted by:
ben yoskovitz |
06.06.06
i agree with these comments. quality content posted once or twice a week is far more important than pithy comments posted seven or ten times a week.
posted by:
kevin hillstrom |
06.06.06
eric i've told you this privately, but i just wanted to add that it's so refreshing to see a corporate blogger making such an effort to join the blogging community, and get involved with other bloggers in their space. i've seen you commenting everywhere, on a-lister blogs, down to blogs that likely only get a handful of visitors a day. you haven't been interested in getting links, just getting involved with the community at their level.
i think it's great, and hp would be very wise to listen to the ideas you will be taking back from the community.
posted by:
mack collier |
06.06.06
"as for me, i will continue to post only when i have something to say."
you hit the nail on the head there. which is why trying to blog about something you're not really passionate about is a sure sign to failure.
good piece here eric, thank you.
posted by:
jim kukral |
06.06.06
really good post eric. lots of food for thought. i agree with both you and seth re: rss fatigue. i am now starting to selectively ignore the feeds that just keep multiplying day after day (and by this i don't mean one post a day but several). it's tough to keep up with all the quality content out there while trying to sort through the clutter of hit-and-run posts (i.e. check out this link or 'wow, look at this cool new campaign').
posted by:
tamera kremer |
06.06.06
this is something that's been floating around in my head for about 2 or 3 months. i have been so busy at work, i haven't posted on a daily basis as i used to... and lo! and behold! my traffic didn't suffer a bit. i think this is a wise post, with wise information. write when you have something worth saying, write to your audience, and do your best to write well. it can't get any simpler than that.
of course, then there's the likes of steve rubel who posts numerous times a day. offering links to this and that. sometimes useful, other times just jibber-jabber. but, that's his style. and, he doesn't drone on and on. that's also key - i often tend to write too much. i think it's time to scale back.
glad i stopped by.
posted by:
yvonne divita |
06.06.06
frequent blogging, like frequent writing, is a discipline and, in theory, should result in a higher quality of stuff. but we all know that isn't the case. most of the stuff posted on blogs isn't all that great or all that insightful.
but does that mean we shouldn't post frequently? should a daily newspaper go to a weekly or twice-weekly format because the bulk of its daily content is ignored by the majority of readers? should usa today quit publishing its money section because the wall street journal provides much more comprehensive coverage and is more often read by the influentials?
just wondering.
ac
posted by:
andrew |
06.06.06
wow thanks guys, it's refreshing to see so many bloggers willing to challenge the golden rule!
eric
posted by:
eric kintz |
06.06.06
i do try to post every day, but i generally won't post unless it's something that i find interesting. when i first started, i was just re-hashing news from other sites. now i've learned to keep it topical and try to come up with original content.
since then, i've gone out and done my own interviews, made my own contacts, and come up with nearly completely original content. and it has worked.
my rule is no more than one post every 24 hours. posting more than once just buries the previous post, and nobody reads it. everybody gets a chance to read it within the 24 hours, and then i can move on. and if it's a slow day...maybe i'll take a day off. maybe.
posted by:
j.d. |
06.06.06
thanks eric for the kudos and recognition of benefits to infrequent blogging. there is so much content out there, i do try to reserve posts for original thoughts with limited time. also note my thoughts are split between two blogs, www.deckermarketing.com and www.bazaarblog.com.
posted by:
sam decker |
06.07.06
phew! my computer screen was starting to glare at me for not posting often enough. what a relief! i, too, would much rather write useful posts less frequently than repurpose other bloggers' content when i can't come up with original ideas. there is too much repurposed and redundant material in my inbox already. thanks for bringing this issue into sharper focus.
posted by:
monica powers |
06.07.06
before i even started my blogs, i knew i would not be able to keep up even once a week, but thought better to begin than worry about protocol. afterall, before i started my blogs, i read about blogs for months till i was to numb to do anything. thanks for the validation!
posted by:
bea |
06.07.06
one thing that is very useful is to set the expectation for updates. the sharps barber blog has a note on it that it is updated on wednesdays and fridays. not a bad idea to set the expectation.
actually the scheduling aspect of new media was recently debated on joe jaffe's podcast "across the sound". he was interviewing the guys behind the "american copywriter podcast and lamenting there lacsidasical attitude to their schedule (apparently they dont' always make it on wednesday). one of the interesting comments toward the end of the debate was "media that we can consume on our schedule should be created with the same philosophy". here's a link to the podcast
posted by:
karl long |
06.07.06
thanks for this. i knew something had changed because the traffic was harder to get. i really appreciate the insight.
i'm trying to gather personal consumer stories from the blogsphere and have been amazed that only a few commments have come back http://www.consumertells.blogspot.com my other blog, www.mediarelations.blogs.com has had no trouble with traffic because it is targeted to a group of professionals i know.
posted by:
jeri cartwright |
06.07.06
i agree. originally when i first started my blog over half a year ago, i was posting and pushing posts through in a frantic pace practically daily. i sustained that feverish pace for a while until i was feeling the tension of always trying to push something "on time". i was starting to get burnt out, and didn't want to write anymore since it was such a chore, etc. then, i decide to take it a bit easy and try posting less frequent until i finally think i've settled on posting once a week.
it takes me way too much time to do my posts as well as research, creating the flash simulations, preparations, etc and i'm surprised that i was able to do it so crazily then.
now, i have a bit more time to spend with my family and it's nice to balance things out.
we have rss feeds and isn't that what it's really for? to let someone who subscribed to know when you have new material so that they don't have to visit your site everyday looking for something that isn't there.
thanks for reading.
posted by:
may c |
06.07.06
eric -- are you just trying to trick the rest of us into posting less???
(j/k)
quality trumps quantity every time. not just in posts, but in the quality of the readers you cultivate.
posted by:
ike |
06.07.06
this is brilliant, and i pray to god you are right because i can not stand being forced to make crappy posts when i have nothing thought provoking or provacative to say. i know i do not subscribe to gizmodo anymore because they started posting 20 times daily, and 80 percent of it started to be junk.
posted by:
brian |
06.07.06
this is an excellent article but i think that the nature of your blog. for exmaple, my blog is about south asian business and i cover business sectors of nearly 8 countries. so, naturally, if i do not post daily more than once, i will not get good readership.
posted by:
razib ahmed |
06.08.06
right on eric! way back in the web 1.0 days (last year) i tried to post daily even multiple times each day but found myself just regurgitating news stories and posting links. reposting news stories is exactly what i didn’t want to do. if there was an issue out there that really fascinated me i wanted to digest the information, formulate an opinion, and effectively communicate it through my blog. one day i said screw it, it's not worth losing my job or family over, plus it's my blog anyway! i pay the bill, nobody else. i should be able to post what i want when i want to. i don't get paid to do it so why stress out over the daily posting think. as a result i’ve decided to only post when i have something to say and only after i have had time to really think through the issues.
posted by:
merrell ligons |
06.08.06
whew! i've been writing a blog on customer service and only post on mondays and thursdays. i've been feeling guilty on the one hand about not posting more often, yet struggling at the same time to provide relevant information that will keep people coming back. i think i'll print your post, blow it up to poster size and hang it on the wall i face in my office.-)
posted by:
glenn ross |
06.08.06
interesting observations and as one who has recently taken up blogging for the pleasure of writing i understand how easy it is to fall into the trap of posting several times every day.
it certainly doesn't improve the quality of the blog and quality, not quantity, is what i've enjoyed on other blogs - including this one.
posted by:
amin |
06.08.06
this is funny -- i read this post on the way home last night and nearly cheered out loud on the train!
then i read a post on another blog and nearly quoted you in the comments. then i realized that they had linked to you already.
great article.
posted by:
carlenlea |
06.08.06
seems like i am not the only one convinced that things need to change (although i agree that we need to differentiate blog by blog). i am more criticizing the general rule that you have to post every day irrespective from your audience and strategy. i encourage you to spread the word, i have already seen many of you link to my blog and this post
eric
posted by:
eric kintz |
06.08.06
focusing on post frequency is a waste of time. always has been. always will be. what matters is the quality of your content, not the frequency or lack thereof. post when you have something to say. don't post when you don't. that is what should determine frequency. that is the beauty of blogging: no artifical deadlines.
posted by:
rbl |
06.08.06
since i'm just now reorganizing my site + blogs, this is just the kind of information i need.
however, for those whose purpose is to get as many page hits as they can to puff up their ad hit count, quality isn't important: the blog text is there to hold together the ads.
i'm not one of them but it's important to know which kind of blog we're talking about.
posted by:
dave mclane |
06.09.06
depends on your blog strategy. if your posts have a very definitive "theme" and they all relate to eachother—i don't see frequency as much of an issue.
i could be wrong...
great discussion on this one. i joined it late (too busy over-posting). wonder if i'll be the last?
:)
posted by:
david armano |
06.09.06
initially i read this for fodder for justifying why i have not been blogging as i used to. i help run a company for bloggers for chrissakes! and i've been blogging less. instead of a backrub i got something much better--real facts to back up what i've been sensing. more blogging ain't always better blogging. many bloggers who are monetizing their blogs via advertising feel similar pressure, but reading yvonne's comment i think that even on days you do not post it, folks will come. and if they are chronically late blog readers like me, they'll use the opportunity to dig into older stuff if there's nothing new.
great post!
posted by:
jory des jardins |
06.09.06
hi. i just want to confess first that i am realtively new to blogging and have never posted a comment on another bloggers site. so i hope i'm doing this right.
that said, i think there are a couple of things missing from this discussion:
1. why is it so bad if pr people end up writing corporate blogs? they will figure out how to do it well because if they don't, no one will read their stuff.
2. people who give opinions on a given topic professionally -- like, that is what they do for a living -- presumably will have fewer problems being interesting every day on their blog.
penelope trunk
posted by:
penelope trunk |
06.10.06
hilarious. i was forwarded this from a colleague who gave me a "see? in your face!" comment. see, i blog everyday and he blogs infrequently.
i don't know if this is as much a discussion as it is validation for the masses not blogging everday. i think it is great information eric, but bloggers are all wired differently.
i don't blog everyday because i want more audience. i blog because i have something to say. part of the charm (in my mind) is that this is a place for me to comment on today even if the comment is that nothing is going on. that's what people can take from it, that's it's always there for consumption.
great blog by the way.
posted by:
justin |
06.12.06
i agree with you that a blog's success can't just be measured on the level of posting activity but in terms of quality and sustainability. in my case, for as long as my mailing list continues to grow, regardless whether people comment in my articles or not, i'm pretty much happy.
posted by:
janette toral |
06.13.06
this is great stuff! i especially like #4. i definitely have rss fatigue. i've gone through and deleted most of my rss feeds, especially those that update constantly.
when i really like someone's blog and they don't update constantly (like khoi vign at http://subtraction.com) i find that i'm delighted when my rss reader shows they have a new post. it's not overwhelming, it's interesting.
posted by:
chris |
06.13.06
i've always been a fan of writing less frequently. i clearly don't blog for more people; i don't make any money off of it. i just like to discuss what ever's on my mind. and do so less often than most. i have a life too! :p
posted by:
intergalactic hussy |
06.13.06
yes, it is impossible to write good all the time. my best texts come from really digging into myself. you cannot do that three or five times a day and be original. if blogging is your hobby, a means to be heard, be original and you will have your readership always waiting to hear from you.
as for the rss fatigue, it is a treal threat. i used to follow all the threads, then only some of them, then i finally discontinued all the feeds and do not use my rss reader at all any more. i got an hour of my life per day back, hooray!
all in all, thank you eric for this article.
posted by:
dusko savic |
06.13.06
nice post, but don't bloggs allow better search rankings in search engines?
posted by:
jeronimo black |
06.13.06
good points made, but frequent posting is what get a blog to rise in search results. even if the content is re-hashed it still adds value as far a search engine sees the blog. as long as bloggers want to increase their traffic, they will be trying to post on a frequent basis.
i personally try to add something different (a new angle) if the topic is old, but some posts certainly don't fit into the enlightening category. ;-)
posted by:
terry |
06.14.06
i personally post on 'serge the concierge'usually once a day, 5 to 6 times a week.
the point that jory des jardins raises of people checking older posts if there is no new content is relevant. it happens more though once a 'blog' has been existing for a while (the 'long tail' theory)and has a wealth of content.
i usually keep my posts relatively short. if i point to another 'blog' as the base for the post, i add to it or use it as a springboard.
i write about topics i feel like writing about.
you point to charlene li and others. i think some of them get traffic and readers because of their name recognition not always because of what they add to the conversation.
have a good day
serge
biz:
http://www.njconcierges.com
blog:
http://www.sergetheconcierge.com
posted by:
serge lescouarnec |
06.14.06
excellent topic to bring up, eric. thanks.
i want to point out the value of not blogging alone.
our blog (for psychiatrists) is written by 3 of us, which provides for variety of writing styles and content, while reducing that self-pressure to blog regularly.
one of the other docs wanted to like set up a schedule, etc, so that one of us was blogging every day. i pointed out, like rbl said above, that there is no need for any "artificial deadlines".
to paraphrase khan: "blog... or don't blog... but do it because you *want* to."
posted by:
roy |
06.14.06
we have growing electronic newsletter mailing list, and i'm desperate to find decent, reasonably priced software or shareware for list management and distribution. we've been using outlook and act and they're not working well. i was found bulk email software for sending newsletter. are there other good options to help save my sanity? does anyone know of any good hosting company that can handle bulk email? we need to send newsletters to about 900 customers without the hassle of restrictions. thanks!
posted by:
nail |
06.15.06
eric - great post. i wholeheartedly agree with all of your points. i too find myself overwhelmed with reading mountains of clutter in search of that gem of relevance.
posted by:
ellyssa kroski |
06.15.06
i can give you twenty reasons wh you should have a daily update.
posted by:
hemaworstje |
06.15.06
thanks to aggregators, a reader doesn't have to check in every day to know when a blog is updated. but when i check my reading service and see one blog with a dozen posts since yeterday, it makes me want to just put off tackling it. post once a week or every day, but please make it worth my time, or i will unsub.
posted by:
miss cellania |
06.16.06
i think it all depends on the aims and goals of a blogger. what is the blog about? is it a business blog, a personal journal, a collection of information that an individual finds amusing or simply a ranting blog? there are all kinds of blogs out there that are similar to few other blogs. some just like to write. others are more concerned about being indexed, ranking and traffic to their site, others enjoy the numerous replies to an article and some others could care less.
i’ve read an article about what constitute a successful blog – no ads. another article states the opposite. sometimes controversial postings and obnoxious comments make a site successful. example: dig it and reddit. i came across a blog sometime ago and saw about 10 to 20 replies in each of the authors articles only to find out that the comments were mostly spam comments. the author didn’t bother to delete the spam posts and mind you the traffic to the blog ranked 8 on google’s scale. on the other hand, one guy had written that disabling the blog comment is no blog at all. few articles indicated that posting daily is a good blogging practice. now for the first time, i am reading – “it’s no longer effective”.
whatever works for ms. barbie may not necessarily work for mr. blow joe.
posted by:
choruslinea1qms |
06.17.06
i can give you twenty reasons wh you should have a daily update.
posted by:
mumoma |
06.18.06
i'm agree with most of the part. good article!
i think no matter how often we update the blog, we have to make people's time worth. quality matters alot.
http://speakupforgood.com/blogs/blog/
posted by:
james |
06.18.06
"frequent posting keeps ... executives ... out of the blogosphere"?
how is that a bad thing?
posted by:
brendt |
06.20.06
thanks for sharing your thought about regular blogging. i agree with you in many ponits you made.
one of the blogger that influences me a lot is wangjianshuo.com. not sure you have heard of his name or not, but his blog is very popular with english blogsphere in china. one of his blog's salespoint is "daily update". but of course not every single post is meaningful and some of them just write-to-write.
i like your idea of "blogging in a web1.0 way", i am need to reconsider my frequency of updating my blog.
posted by:
richard hong |
06.22.06
great job. a lot of success in the future to your resource!!
posted by:
akk@yahoo.com |
06.27.06
excellent article with links to excellent resources! this bolsters a lot of my own ideas, which i've attempted to convey in a recent post i've authored at http://staff.valpo.edu/jsaqui/?p=9
thanks for providing a wonderful in-depth contribution to the modern school of blogging thought!
posted by:
james saqui, jr. |
06.29.06
agree, quality over quantity. few quality posts are better than hundred of low quality posts
posted by:
los |
07.03.06
as someone who consciously is committed to posting at least once per day (and usually more), i'll take each point with a grain of salt. frankly, this does read more like a justification for lazy output than for a way to hone quality out of a blog.
for me, it's worth blogging daily doses of singles and doubles (and foul balls, of course), with the payoff being an occasional home run. that's my rhythm, and i come to it via a lifetime of writing. naturally, others not as comfortable with the written word might not prefer that rigor.
coincidentally, i just repeated my maxim for successful blog traffic-building, which boils down to this:
if you’re looking to gain an audience, you have to accept that you’re no longer blogging on your schedule, but rather on your readers’ schedule.
note that that doesn't necessarily mean frequent posting, or even daily posting. but it does mean that you should decide on an update schedule, and stick to it. if you start out posting two times a week, or five time a week, or two times a day, then your audience should expect that's what's coming their way. unpredictability turns readers off.
as for rss overload: do yourself a favor and ditch your feeds. cluttered aggregators defeat the purpose.
posted by:
ct |
07.04.06
quality, quality, quality. i also have switched to a very regular, albeit less frequent, posting schedule, specifically twice a week. about 75% of my readers are not rss saavy, but have subscribed via e-mail for update notifications. without fail, every tuesday and friday morning there is a new post for them to read over coffee. it has given me high reader loyalty.
posted by:
jesse keller |
07.04.06
great post, and timely for me. ive been agonzing over just these point for the past week or so, ive decided i have enough post, i get traffic from the se's (search) now i figured it would be time to network and build community both for and within my blog. thinki'll be trackbacking this article im touch with a view of my readers and we have chatted about this topic frequent enough that this point requires passing along !!
posted by:
its_me_shaners |
07.05.06
i just wanted to respond to
andrews' (ac) comments:
"frequent blogging, like frequent writing, is a discipline and, in theory, should result in a higher quality of stuff. but we all know that isn't the case. most of the stuff posted on blogs isn't all that great or all that insightful.
but does that mean we shouldn't post frequently? should a daily newspaper go to a weekly or twice-weekly format because the bulk of its daily content is ignored by the majority of readers? should usa today quit publishing its money section because the wall street journal provides much more comprehensive coverage and is more often read by the influentials?"
every blog, every author, every intended audience is different. i personally don't like daily newspapers. i don't have the inclination to subscribe to them. i also don't like the wsj, nor usa today. but when i am on the road, and i get usa today delivered to my hotel room, i will grab it and read it while traveling. i will read daily or weekly newspapers on occasion if i happen to pick one up in the local deli or coffee shop. but in general i prefer books. (much less frequency, but ostensibly more significant content)
there is no "right way" to blog. thank goodness i never even had an inkling that some bloggers thought they ought to post daily. that's just silly to me. i know some bloggers that post only when they really have something worthwhile to say, and end up posting once a month or less. that seems like they really don't have much to say. for me, i will continue to post irregularly. when i really have something to say. which for me works out to several times a week. some weeks, i'll have nothing, other weeks i will have a lot. but for sure, i will never ever post for the sake of frequency.
posted by:
morriss partee |
07.07.06
you raise some interesting points here. i especially agree with #4, having just had to delete a few otherwise excellent feeds simply because they were taking too long to wade through each day.
posted by:
john |
07.08.06
i agree with you: quantity is not the most important thing. but i consider that regular activity is necessary too. i mean: if you are an assidous reader of a blog and after weeks there isn't any new post, do you continue visiting it? yes, i know, we have rss agregators, but i think it's important be active. perhaps not every day, but at least weekly.
posted by:
cristina |
07.10.06
great article. you have come to the same conclusions that i have: quality over quantity. there are blogs that i no longer read because i just can't keep up with the quantity of posts. some of the very best blogs are not even updated daily.
i still feel the pull of updating my blog every day, but i have a rule: unless what i have to say has not been said before, i stay away from the "me,too" posts. and i'm trying to develop regular features on my blog. it's not easy, but it sure is fun to try.
posted by:
vivian j. paige |
07.10.06
thank you, thank you, thank you...i have been laboring under the unexamined need to publish at least 3 times per week, and feeling guilty that i haven't been able to do more than one every two weeks or so.
your points make so much sense to me that my neck and shoulder muscles just relaxed! i will now feel comfortable with a once-per-week target, and not beat myself up if i slip on that one. whew!
posted by:
trish lambert |
07.11.06
as someone mentioned above, different strategy fits different blogs.
i maintain a few blogs and use different strategy for each of them with interesting result.
frequency i believe is still important for most blog.
posted by:
ken |
07.12.06
i think that the old marketing standard applies here "the customer is king" where the customer is the reader.
the point i'm trying to make is that it's important to write to what your readers want (and obviously you can provide). it is a social media -- you can ask them...
posted by:
john mims, apr |
07.13.06
interesting, i've never thought about it in those terms.
i know that since i've had dificulties with having time to post quality articles (work and all), i've been "spaming" i guess my own blog! wow i've never looked at it that way!
i've been posting mostly digg articles that catch my eye, a couple times a day. that may have to change. thanks for opening my eyes! (sort of anyways).
nice blog btw, keep up the good work!
--jon z | http://jzencovich.blogspot.com/
posted by:
jonathan zencovich |
07.14.06
well said, i only post on my blog when i feel i have something to say. great article; much obliged!
posted by:
vincent |
07.15.06
it seems i'm one of the few who should keep updating my blog, as it talks about a book i have out. i've finally realised that when there's nothing to say, it's best to say nothing.
http://e-luvbook.blogspot.com/
posted by:
dave roberts |
07.16.06
too many comments to scroll through also can make a blog less attractive :-)
i think that in the end the accumulated content quality counts and not the frequency. ten high quality articles in a year can make a website become very well reputated. posting one high quality article a week still makes a good amount of content for new visitors.
the golden rule "one post every day" is bulls...
set your own pace and decide for yourself when are the high interest periods for your subject. maybe only once a year ...
posted by:
markus merz |
07.17.06
my inner slacker is liking this, you need to keep this up.
posted by:
john |
07.20.06
according to the recent pew report on bloggers (july 19, 2006), most bloggers post infrequently (25% from the study). seven out of ten bloggers post when the inspiration strikes, not on a set schedule.
see report: http://www.pewinternet.org/ppf/r/186/report_display.asp
posted by:
carol doms |
07.21.06
i would recommend posting regularly -- whether that means once a month or once an hour. (i suspect that most blog readers don't use rss feeds yet, nor will they for some time.) using a queue of posts makes that easy: it eliminates the need to write every day. (with blogger, i save posts to the queue by saving them as drafts with a 2007 date.) right now, i've got 16 posts in my queue, so i could take a two week break from blog writing without my readers noticing a bit of difference. (of course, that's harder to do if you blog on current events.) with the queue, i no longer feel bound to the blog in the slightest: i write when and as much as i please -- and dole out posts accordingly. since i'm able to enjoy blogging more, only when i'm super-duper-busy for weeks on end does my queue become worrisomely sparse.
i wrote up a post of blogging advice with more details here:
http://www.dianahsieh.com/blog/2005/12/advice-on-blogging.html
posted by:
diana hsieh |
07.22.06
as a public relations professional who recommends paying attention to the blogosphere, i find eric's thinking about the undesirability of partnering with pr agencies to manage blogs interesting. he is absolutely right in some cases, and until executives "get" the point of blogging and reading blogs, eric's point will prove correct. however, i predict that execs that "get it" (and they will have learned it from their in-house or agency pr pros) will work with pr folks to make their blogs better. for example, pr pros can help the exec stay current on the hot issues - this is something pr people do with traditional media as well. we monitor the news and send our clients the relevant items. cuts down on the clutter you are talking about. pr folks, especially those of us who used to be journalists, do a great job of writing someone else's thoughts in an organized and coherent manner. i mean, have you read the writing of some of these execs? 98% of them need some polish to their writing. i could go on, but my point is that good strategic public relations definitely has a place in the blogosphere.
posted by:
laura l. link, apr |
07.25.06
thank you, thank you, thank you. when i started my blog sometime ago, i refused then as i do now to think that it was neccessary to write in a blog each and everyday. and you are so right when you say, people stop reading a blog that comes out of no where each day talking about a whole lot of nothing. now i know it's not jsut me that knows what over doing something is.
posted by:
sylvia mcclain |
07.26.06
i agree, the pressure to blog frequently is annoying and takes away from the quality of the entries. i am happy that i don't have to feel guilty anymore..quality over quantity!
posted by:
dominique jackson |
07.26.06
i'm in the middle of grappling with this myself. trying to determine what is most important to me and my readers. i've relegated myself to a news slave, trying to keep on top of the news cycle in a comprehensive way, ideally to draw connections between various news pieces that spark fresh insight, but the grind is wearing me down. reading this post at just the right time was very helpful. i'm hoping to settle into a more manageable groove, maybe waking up earlier to bust out the old news commentaries, then using the day to turn thoughts over in my head, perhaps composing a better post during those evenings where i have a little more time, once or twice a week. i don't know for sure if that's where it's going to go, but your post has helped me put my thinking in perspective a little bit, so thanks.
posted by:
eric |
07.26.06
i too have found some of the above to be true. traffic to our blog often increases on light posting days. getting involved in the blog community definitely drives traffic.
posted by:
skip tracer |
07.29.06
as someone who recently lost a lot of traffic due to updating less (and the focus of my blog changing), your post gives me hope. thanks!
posted by:
musing |
07.30.06
excellent points eric.
just like in real life conversations, there are too many people talking and too few people listening.
i believe failure in #1 is probably most certainly tied to the stat in #9 -
"only 55% of bloggers post after 3 months of existence"
there's something about entering the conversation through posting on other's blogs that is a barrier to being successful blogger. that something is the ability to listen.
it's very easy to get a blog up through blogger, but then their comes the skills of listening to the conversation using scouts like technorati, setting up an rss reader, managing all the data your collecting and actively seeking blogs to post to.
the process really takes having a firm grip on the tools available to you to get it done.
this scouting and listening process is critical to long-term success.
posted by:
james clark |
08.08.06
phew, that's a relief. you mean i don't have to blog ten times a day anymore?
posted by:
marketmou |
08.29.06
hi eric, thanks for thoughtful advice on building community with other bloggers. i have been blogging since may and wanted to get my feet wet by writing a few blogs before i visted other sites. what advice to you have about this for newbies?
posted by:
robyn mcmaster |
08.31.06
very good post and i agree wholeheartedly, though i do not have any authority upon which to say so.
posted by:
david mackey |
11.10.06
i actually found this post after doing a search on this topic to validate my reason for not posting daily. with my content its simply not possible if i want to maintain the quality of my posts.
regarding your comment about posting several times a day in order to become a top 50 technorati blogger, i actually found 4 blogs in the top 50 that dont post daily.
http://www.technorati.com/blogs/http://www.alistapart.com rank 39
http://www.technorati.com/blogs/http://www.zefrank.com rank 49
http://www.technorati.com/blogs/http://blog.topix.net rank 34. his last post (at the time of this comment) was in mid november
http://www.technorati.com/blogs/http://www.dooce.com rank 45
great post! thanks.
posted by:
ari |
12.05.06
your article is very informative and helped me further.
thanks, david
posted by:
davidvogt |
02.03.07
thank you very much from turkey www.sernak.com
posted by:
sernak plywood |
02.21.07
thanks for all comments, which are helpful for me.
jack - http://www.chinabboss.com
posted by:
jack |
03.06.07
thanks to aggregators, a reader doesn't have to check in every day to know when a blog is updated. but when i check my reading service and see one blog with a dozen posts since yeterday, it makes me want to just put off tackling it. post once a week or every day, but please make it worth my time, or i will unsub.
posted by:
emma |
03.21.07
very good post and i agree wholeheartedly, though i do not have any authority upon which to say so.
posted by:
Белая Церковь |
03.27.07
usefull information and all is good arranged. just want to say that i find your site enough interesting for me.
posted by:
lon kost |
03.29.07
the huffington post does have a very different strategy...
carmelo lisciotto
posted by:
carmelo lisciotto |
04.09.07
i don’t necessarily disagree with you, particularly with #6. i think that frequent posting can initially lead to better quality, since it hones skills, but at a certain point it does become difficult to continue to maintain the quality day after day. however, i’m not sure that i’m completely clear on what you’re trying to accomplish. initially you seemed to be arguing that blogging daily wasn’t necessary anymore – in other words, those of us who feel the urge to do it daily could relax just a bit. what you actually seem to be saying, at least in some spots, is that you don’t think blogging daily should be happening – in other words, you’re describing a situation you’d like to see. those are two very different arguments – i might, for instance, decide i agree with you and stop blogging every day, but that doesn’t necessarily mean i don’t need to: i may lose support -- and yet you seem to be trying to make them simultaneously. when you do you make your hopes for the internet come across as “advice.”
posted by:
music |
07.19.07
this quality post was obviously written without the pressure to post at least 1 per day... gives me a lot to think before i blog and yes, gives me a lot of excuses to post lesser in quantity but more in quality, hmmmm...
posted by:
journeyist |
07.30.07
i remember the great friendster migration like it was yesterday. a bunch of us had signed up for this nifty new service, only to find that it could be painfully slow, and dificult to use. suddenly i was getting floods of messages on my profile from friends about this new thing called myspace that worked better.
posted by:
超声波液位计 |
08.22.07
i think you are not right. sure quality is more worth than quantity, but if i post several days not, my traffic goes down... so dayly posts helps me a lot
posted by:
zoe |
08.22.07
i’m a little confused about point number two. if traffic is irrelevant to blogs then why would you be concerned about target audience? isn't it that target audience is a measure of probable traffic or the other way around?
posted by:
oil paintings from photos |
08.28.07
thanks for a great read both blog and posts, with plenty of food for thought for a beginner like me.agree totally about the clutter aspect but how can you steer a blog to a specific readership or community, come to that if community does not exist how do you go about creatin one.....???????
posted by:
dooseydog |
09.13.07
i hope my competitors read this and listen to it. truth is posting more, as long as you can keep quality up, will really boost your traffic.
the way to develop a following is to get people to return to your site each and every day. the only way to motivate them to this is by adding new content all the time. for the average blogger, posting every day might be a bad idea, but if you want to build a powerhouse site i think it can really help.
posted by:
john wesley |
10.11.07
5-star post!
i will continue to post on a daily basis as long as i can maintain the quality.
content is king. and the bloggers who make a "living" by recycling the same 'ol crap will eventually be weeded out. if not, blogging won't stand the test of time.
posted by:
andrew g.r. |
10.11.07
very interesting. as a blogger i fell into this trap and tried to create "daily" themes (web wednesdays, freebie fridays, etc) to separate the posts a bit. while i post 3-4 times per week, keeping the posts relative to the theme keeps me from burning out too quickly. but the point is well taken.
as a podcast subscriber i've fallen into this same trap where some of the daily podcasts become too much and i unsubscribe. lesson can be learned i guess.
posted by:
dave from so cal |
10.11.07
wow, very good article.
if you allow me, i'll translate it to portuguese, and put - with yours credits - on my blog, ok?
http://tradutorium.wordpress.com
posted by:
wendell raphael |
10.11.07
if you want google to give you better serps you should blog every day.
posted by:
bidding directory |
10.11.07
this article hits the nail so squarely on the head. i know myself i've posted total filler posts just because i didn't actually have anything to say. the imagined pressure of regular content can get the better of you sometimes. i find the traffic to my blog doesn't drastically fluctuate if i post every day or once a week. it all depends on how topical what you're talking about is. if it's just filler then no one really cares.
posted by:
james |
10.11.07
a quick look at technorati's top 100 blogs reveals that, most of the top blogs belong to specialized networks (such as weblogs inc.).these blogs are not written by only one person, but perhaps an entire staff of editors.
they have the needed resource (both human and financial) to maintain their pole position, generate (not always, true) quality content and so attract readers. for ex. techcrunch has more than 500.000 readers (feedburner stats).
try to compete with them.
writing zillions of post/day is useless unless the content's quality is good, and you gathered a community around your blog/site.
of course, if you intend no more than writing a few random thoughts which will be read by a small and close circle of friends, a blogger account and some spare time is enough. but to appear mainstream and to maintain this way, nowadays it's pretty hard, and definitely not cheap.
there is a time and a place for a blog/blogger to gain attention of the crowds. the ones who sawed the potential of blogging a few years ago are now on technorati top 100.not all of them, true.
ps.forget my spell & grammar, wall was written in hurry.
best regards,
catalin , axt magazine
posted by:
catalin |
10.11.07
*all was written.. ^^
posted by:
catalin |
10.11.07
great article!
i never accept very well the idea of "post everyday" and, finally i have a really good article to confirm what i think.
i'm owner of a small blog and i only post when i have something to say related with my blog's theme... in my case... about movies and audio...
it's non sense to think that i have to post everyday! like you said, the content start to decrease in quality very fast... and i'm not the type of blog what someone have blog too.
posted by:
daniel bento |
10.11.07
ok, so let's all just stop blogging. how's that?
posted by:
katrineholm review |
10.11.07
i play the role of blogging coach, and i don't agree with not posting every day. blogs are considered news by most people and search engines, and not posting every day is bad move for professional marketers.
i do agree with you about business blogging and building community. we at http://mytypes.com have been working on building community blogs, not just by adding comments. i think we have to provide better community blogging tools. i only know of one community blog tool, and it's not myspace. good idea and well written post. i wonder what people like of my blogging coach section?
posted by:
vipin |
10.11.07
hi everyone not trying to spam, there was/is a technical issue with your comment software. i was waiting for it to give me confirmation that the preview to post worked, but it never did. thought i would let someone know?
posted by:
vipin |
10.11.07
nice post, eric. this makes me feel better. now i can go drink a beer and watch some tv.
posted by:
chinh do |
10.11.07
finally i was given enlightenment. i thought blogs sucks if no post on regular schedule.
posted by:
pangit ster |
10.11.07
great insight but i still enjoy blogging daily.
posted by:
yong hwee |
10.11.07
i noticed that if i post every day that i slip off page one and 2 down to page 5, but if i do what is called a "push and pull"
in the weight lifting world, my blog goes to middle of page 2 or 1. then i'll do 3 posts in one day then 1 every day for a wekk ,then let it go for a week and it climbs!
posted by:
george |
10.12.07
#4 has struck me a lot lately, especially since my favorite feed is lifehacker's which has a tendencey to drop 7-10 posts at a time. :) i'm hooked on lh, but i think some other feeds would not be left in my reader long were they to do the same.
darn good post. two thumbs up!
posted by:
seogeek |
10.12.07
what is your explanation for blogs like techcrunch, problogger, gigaom and the like?
actually almost all of the top blogs in the world post more often than daily.
posted by:
daniel |
10.12.07
hi eric. this is a wonderful article that you have written with lots of detailed insights into blogging. i have never accepted the theory of posting "rubbish" on my website/blog. however, i must admit there are quite a few frequent bloggers who end up posting fine articles almost always on a regular basis. cheers! :-)
posted by:
bhooshan suresh pandya |
10.13.07
there is a particular comment regarding not making posts everyday. i have to disagree with this - coolestgadgets.com have been very successful with making posts every day, and it is probably one of the main thing that make the blog successful.
posted by:
keith |
10.13.07
great points. i hear you on the rss burnout. my reader is clogged from posts by the big guys who blog 10+ times a day (gizmodo, the crunch network, lifehacker). it's almost enough to make me unsubscribe...
almost.
posted by:
coop |
10.13.07
really good post - i only post on my blog once a week and for ages people have been telling me to post more often to make it more popular.
i find having good well thought out content is better than frequent junk.
posted by:
pete white |
10.15.07
thanks for posting this one..^^
posted by:
joy |
10.15.07
smiffy's corollary: quality rather than quantity.
posted by:
smiffy |
10.15.07
i have found that posting quality content as little as 4 - 5 times a month is sufficient to keep my reader loyalty and increase my subscriber base. if you have something worthwhile to say you will be read regardless of the frequency of your posts. i enjoyed your article. great work.
posted by:
grizzly |
10.16.07
smiffy's corollary: quality rather than quantity.
posted by:
燃烧器 |
10.16.07
your article is very informative and helped me further.
thanks, david
posted by:
www.lsltg.cn |
10.16.07
hey, realy nice site, thanks for very interesting articles
posted by:
programy.pl |
10.16.07
wow one of the best articles ive read in a long time.
so true and while i post weekdays i am beginning to think that maybe it could be time to post a little less and make sure my content is better quality.
some good food for thought
posted by:
jermayn parker |
10.18.07
wow one of the best articles ive read in a long time.
so true and while i post weekdays i am beginning to think that maybe it could be time to post a little less and make sure my content is better quality.
some good food for thought
posted by:
jermayn parker |
10.18.07
great article. yes i love to post daily. but the problem is sometimes posting you are searching for new exciting information to offer readers. i can see where you can lose quality. which i beleive, is as important maybe more then quantity.
fantastic article
http://www.passportmentors.com
posted by:
megan |
10.19.07
it certainly is a balance between quantity and quality but to make a high quality content post it does take a lot of time, not something that everyone can always do every single day. thanks for the post. scott
posted by:
chipseo |
10.23.07
as a new blogger, i was believing the hype of needing to post on a daily basis to develop readers. with rss feeds, this never really made much sense to me. my own reader serves me 15 to 30 articles a day. i rarely track if every blog i subscribe to is posting that day. why should anyone else?
shawn.
posted by:
shawn williamson |
10.26.07
the bavarian forrest on its best side. we stayed in bodenmais by family maier in the ferienwohnung drosselweg. bodenmais is a very good place for walking, hiking and go skiing in the winter. we stay by ferienwohnungsvermittlung maier next year once more.
posted by:
andi |
10.30.07
exactly right!
posted by:
nishanthe |
11.02.07
fantastic article
posted by:
bayerischerwald |
11.03.07
thanks eric for sharing this with us!
posted by:
yellowpages |
11.11.07
eric
thanks so much for this post :)
i was starting to panic and wanted to start posting like mad on my blog to increase traffic. but then i found that my content wasn't as good as i wanted it to be.
thanks again
eric
posted by:
eric s doms |
11.13.07
i think these blog is really useful for new comers and excellent resource list.
it´s a very interesting blog and simple answer of many questions.
keep up the good work!
thanks it helps me a lot…
posted by:
wellnesshotel bayerischer wald |
11.13.07
what's even less important is posting comments on a posting like this. i mean seriously, who's really going to get this far down the page and read what i write. this is such a waste of time...
or is it?
yes, it's a waste of time for me but if i post something profound here, you, the reader, will beenefit. if i even post one good thing, for just one person, this could make a huge difference in the future. it's so hard to tell.
so, if you don't blog everyday, do you post comments on others' blog everyday? how much time do you burn to generate content -- any content? add it up and you might be shocked.
posted by:
simple cash blog |
11.13.07
post a comment
name:
email address:
url:
remember personal info?
comments:
type the word 'knowhow' below (required):
get
your daily fix
free newsletter
most active posts
login to daily fix | contact the editor | rss/xml | advertising
copyright 2007 © marketing profs, llc | user
agreement | privacy | xml site map
Acceuil
suivante
why blog post frequency does not matter anymore | marketing profs daily fix blog FOSSwire Fix a Frozen System with the Magic SysRq Keys Windows Vista Team Blog : Partners helping fix Vista Software ... Objet Publicitaire : Magnet Magic fix - ALB01.com Indonesia's three divas fix the nation's finances International ... Rob Galbraith DPI: EOS-1D Mark III sub-mirror fix announced in USA ... KompoZer - Easy web authoring Mr. Fix It (2006) XML.com: Using XSLT to Fix Swing [Profil de fix] OverBlog - Le blog des blogs Fix Your Money Screw-Ups - Kiplinger.com frontline: the wall street fix PBS Portail Internet de la Haute Autorit de sant - H-FIX PDS Your Freebie Fix - All the latest Freebies, Coupons and Online Deals はてなブックマーク - FIX Bug Fix Weekend finished :: pnCommunity :: Support at your fingertips Windows Mobile 5.0 Fix Site - Home Tena Fix - Incontinence Google to fix blog noise problem The Register BBC/OU Open2.net - Can Gerry Robinson Fix The NHS? Two charged with hacking PeopleSoft to fix grades - Network World Bike Shop Frederick, Maryland Bike Repairs, Bike Sales --BICYCLE ... Object Fix Zip - Freeware for repairing damaged ZIP archives with ... Ajaxian IEs Memory Leak Fix Greatly Exaggerated IPython fix for Leopard - O'Reilly ONLamp Blog Fix all Ajax cross-browser problems then deploy Wiki Autrans - Fix FIX-IT - bedrijvengids - handelsgids - webdesign - Pc repair ... PC Fix Error Doctor Registry Cleaner PC Diagnostics PC Checkup SF Gate: Columnists: Mark Morford Archive PNG in Internet Explorer: How to Use serious fix 4.1 How to Fix CGI - majordojo GRC CIH Virus Recovery You receive an access violation error and the system may appear to ... FIX: Update to enable DirectX Video Acceleration (DXVA) of Windows ... Video Coldplay - Fix You - coldplay, fix, you, clip ... Free Registry Fix 3.9 for Windows Solar shield could be quick fix for global warming - earth - 05 ... adaptive path 8 quick ways to fix your search engine Fix for COM Surrogate Has Stopped Working Error in Vista :: the ... Oral Fixation Mints / Get Your Fix Nail Fungus Onychomycosis - Fix My Fungus Pierre Fix-Masseau affiches sur AllPosters.fr Fixit Guide Series - DIY Mac & iPod Repair Dura Fix Aluminum Welding Aluminum Brazing Aluminum Soldering ... The Simple Dollar 31 Days To Fix Your Finances: A Wrapup Gallery 2.2.3 Security Fix Release Gallery What To Fix VCOM: V Communications. Security, Web, OS Management, Partitioning ... Fix for securityd hogging RAM when reauthorizing apps' Keychain ... Cafe Hayek: Just Fix It DriverAgent.com Fix Your Driver Problems Instantly with Driver Agent Federal 'fix' knocks ca.gov for a loop NetworkWorld.com Community macosxhints.com - Twenty steps to help diagnose and fix system issues ca-fix program description. Fix your Expos keys - WOW Insider IndieHIG Blog Archive Fix the Leopard Folders (FTLF or FTFLF) Blogger Buzz: A Layout Solution MAC Cosmetics Studio Fix Powder Plus Foundation The Right Way To Fix Inaccurate Wikipedia Articles