Perhaps you know that I go around to a dozen or more websites each morning.
I do this over breakfast, reading advice, leaving comments on that advice.
Many times this pisses people off.
Monday, December 21, was no different.
The post was called Nominate Your Favorite Social Media Blog: 7th Annual Top 10 Social Media Blog Contest
So it’s a promo post for people to come and talk-up their blog. They can leave a link to their blog and if it’s seconded then that blog might get chosen as one of the best of the year.
Why does that matter?
Because Social Media Examiner will announce the winners on their site and in their newsletter.
That newsletter goes out to 430,000 subscribers.
That’s where things went downhill.
I do this over breakfast, reading advice, leaving comments on that advice.
Many times this pisses people off.
Monday, December 21, was no different.
The post was called Nominate Your Favorite Social Media Blog: 7th Annual Top 10 Social Media Blog Contest
So it’s a promo post for people to come and talk-up their blog. They can leave a link to their blog and if it’s seconded then that blog might get chosen as one of the best of the year.
Why does that matter?
Because Social Media Examiner will announce the winners on their site and in their newsletter.
That newsletter goes out to 430,000 subscribers.
That’s where things went downhill.
You see, I had the audacity to question that newsletter, and its effectiveness.
Boy, did people jump on me.
Here, take a look at the comments:
So you can see my comment, which I went out of my way to preface as my opinion/belief.
I did this because I’ve taken flak on this site for being too direct.
Imagine that – speaking your mind! I know, it’s something we’ve forgotten in this country.
Anyways, Michael Stelzner came and commented on my comment. He owns that site and mentions it gets 1 million visitors a day.
Much like the mailing list, I have no proof of this.
I went ahead and mentioned that Michael should share his email list numbers, specifically how effective that list is.
He said that’s proprietary information.
Now, that’s a standard response and he’s more than allowed to give it.
But we all know he’s hiding.
I’m not hiding – I’m happy for people to know where I’m at. I’m also not scared, embarrassed, or red-in-the-face about my email list.
After all, why would I have left this comment if I was?
I did this because I’ve taken flak on this site for being too direct.
Imagine that – speaking your mind! I know, it’s something we’ve forgotten in this country.
Anyways, Michael Stelzner came and commented on my comment. He owns that site and mentions it gets 1 million visitors a day.
Much like the mailing list, I have no proof of this.
I went ahead and mentioned that Michael should share his email list numbers, specifically how effective that list is.
He said that’s proprietary information.
Now, that’s a standard response and he’s more than allowed to give it.
But we all know he’s hiding.
I’m not hiding – I’m happy for people to know where I’m at. I’m also not scared, embarrassed, or red-in-the-face about my email list.
After all, why would I have left this comment if I was?
So I laid out my numbers, which let’s face it, are not that impressive.
But I’m not afraid to talk about them, unlike Michael.
You’d think people would want to know numbers, both for comparison sake and to see how well they’re doing.
That is not the case.
Because I opened up and gave my numbers, I got browbeat not only by the Social Media Examiner users but by an actual writer of that site.
From Michael I got nothing – he ignored me.
As to those comments, here are some highlights:
But I’m not afraid to talk about them, unlike Michael.
You’d think people would want to know numbers, both for comparison sake and to see how well they’re doing.
That is not the case.
Because I opened up and gave my numbers, I got browbeat not only by the Social Media Examiner users but by an actual writer of that site.
From Michael I got nothing – he ignored me.
As to those comments, here are some highlights:
I am not sure what your point is, but I gather by your comments that you are clueless about the powerhouse that Mike Stelzner and Social Media Examiner are. Together with his exceptional staff, Mike shares the latest and greatest of apps and different social media platforms.
Greg - are you seriously the expert with 43 subscribers?
That's the thing with this social media circle jerk, people always trying to use numbers as a level of so-called "expertise".
Please don't hijack posts like this one, where we have an opportunity (in my case) to thank people we don't know but who have had a positive impact in our lives. It is very noble of SME to take the time to ask us for our opinions - we're in control and it's great.
I and a lot of people I know personally, thru social sites, blogs, business sites and in person click and read their emails then go to the website! Jealous much Greg! Trying to find a way to free publicity? Or just a sad pathetic human being who is trying to find free info on how you can duplicate their success
As you can see, I really got a some blowback on that.
Peg Fitzpatrick is a writer on the site and she gave the comment about me being an expert with 43 subscribers.
Thankfully, I never claimed to be an expert.
I especially liked the comment talking about using social numbers as expertise.
Isn't that what Social Media Examiner is doing by pointing out their mailing list?
I guess we should just ignore that.
Most of the rest complain how I’m hijacking the post or not appreciating all the site does for us.
Folks, this all came about from a single comment that questioned the effectiveness of Social Media Examiner’s mailing list.
I have to say, after all that blowback, I feel Social Media Examiner’s email list is even less effective than I originally thought.
I think that because of the defensiveness.
Boy, those people got defensive, didn’t they?
The idea that Social Media Examiner might not be as effective as it claims? My God, that fills them with fear and dread!
Because of that they lash out. Some, such as Cynthia, even call me a “pathetic human being.”
Peg Fitzpatrick is a writer on the site and she gave the comment about me being an expert with 43 subscribers.
Thankfully, I never claimed to be an expert.
I especially liked the comment talking about using social numbers as expertise.
Isn't that what Social Media Examiner is doing by pointing out their mailing list?
I guess we should just ignore that.
Most of the rest complain how I’m hijacking the post or not appreciating all the site does for us.
Folks, this all came about from a single comment that questioned the effectiveness of Social Media Examiner’s mailing list.
I have to say, after all that blowback, I feel Social Media Examiner’s email list is even less effective than I originally thought.
I think that because of the defensiveness.
Boy, those people got defensive, didn’t they?
The idea that Social Media Examiner might not be as effective as it claims? My God, that fills them with fear and dread!
Because of that they lash out. Some, such as Cynthia, even call me a “pathetic human being.”
When I hear comments like that I know I hit a nerve.
Clearly, something is going on here.
- First, I feel that Social Media Examiner is not as effective as it could be, its advice not as good as it should be.
- Next, many long-time users know this, are bothered by it, and are afraid. What will happen if my favorite site goes anymore downhill?
- Finally, people are not confident. I’m the only one that felt confident enough to share my email numbers, and that includes the site that purports to have a million visitors a day and 430,000 subscribers.
Like I said – there’s no proof of that, absolutely none.
We’re supposed to trust Social Media Examiner.
That’s fine – trust ‘em.
Just don't ask for verification.
I won’t trust 'em. I won’t because I haven’t found their advice that effective, myself. In fact, I find it basic and about the same as the advice everywhere else.
God, it bothers them when I say this. It bothers their users.
Well, I doubt I’m going to stop saying it until we see some improvement on the content they're putting up.
Considering they rely on guest posters all week except Saturday, I doubt we’ll be seeing the changes that are required to get this site back where it ‘needs’ to be.
One post that would sure catapult it back toward the top would be a post explaining their email numbers.
- How many opens do you get?
- How many click-throughs?
Remember, though – that’s proprietary information.
If Michael was to share that sites like Copyblogger or Content Marketing Institute might get the beat on him.
Can’t have that.
And we certainly can’t have the extra trust, confidence, and appreciation for Social Media Examiner that such a disclosure would bring about.
Remember, they're a big site – they don’t need to show what they got.
Just trust ‘em.
RSS Feed