Skip to main content

Build Your Own Science Blog Network

No, really, build your own science blog network.

The merits of being on a network are many (community, traffic, search ranking, etc.), but the one that matters the most is the prestige a blogger gains by association with the other bloggers in the network and through being part of a professional organization. The reason for this is straightforward--the first impressions a blogger makes are largely built on split-second judgments, and among the things that can be judged the quickest are appearances and the company you keep. If you're part of a professional looking network that includes another blogger who a reader already judges favorably, you're ahead of the game even before the reader reads word one. That doesn't mean you don't need to still be a good/great blogger to have an impact, you do, but being part of a network is a foot in the door every single day of the year. All you have left to do is raise your game to take advantage of the privileged position being part of a network grants you. It is this privileged position, this perpetual foot in the door (not traffic, pagerank or friends) that the blog network is looking for ways to monetize. It is the future prospect of guilt-by-association (there's that word again) such a compromise entails that helped to spur so many bloggers to leave SB. No matter how you cut it, #SbFail is proof that the network effect is real and that it matters.

When I first started Field of Science I was pleasantly surprised to find that science bloggers were blazing their own trail. They'd resisted, for the most part, the urge to indulge in the sensationalism and rhetorical excess that was fueling and defining the rest of the blogosphere. This intrinsic resistance to short-term gain in blogging has much to do with the scientific method and uniqueness of the people drawn to science in the first place. But I would go further still and suggest that SB deserves some of the credit as well. It gave science bloggers something to aspire to. A reason, beyond simple adherence to an unwritten ethic, to blog credibly, consistently, for the long-term. But now that SB has been, how should I put this, unmasked, does it still play that role? If you'd argue that it does, has the example it is setting changed at all as a consequence? Has the type of science blogger SB is encouraging (seeking) shifted away from those that value the science and good opinion of their peers toward those that are equally or primarily interested in making money? So long as SB remains the best option (or chief steppingstone) for science bloggers hoping to achieve success in blogging (however they define it), SB is going to have an inordinate influence on how science bloggers define science blogging.

The benefits of being on a network are not in dispute. There's also room (and arguably an imperative) for alternatives to SB to emerge. It's all that other stuff, the endemic issues inherent in the network model, and the stuff that being on a network puts out of your control that still stand in the way. If only there was a way to create your own science blog network. One where you, the science bloggers, could be in control of who was on it. One you could afford to host. One where the technology behind it was both powerful enough to compete with the big boys while simple enough for you to manage it in passing. One that was no more demanding than the blogging it is meant to augment.

If only, instead of being forced to beg and plead for fish, there was a way to learn to fish. Well, there is.

You can create your own science blog network, putting you in complete control, for under $12 a year. Your network will be hosted and powered by Google, who, at no cost to you, will employ a crack team of super talented technology professionals to not only keep your network up and running, but to bring you regular innovations. What's more, because you're partnered with Google, your SEO will be the envy of the competition by default, and you can take for granted the innate integration with Google's ever growing list of tools...

Over the next few months I will teach a course on how to create your own science blog network. The total cost to take the course will be under $12, and that will be to pay for your network's first year of hosting. Whether you want to create a science blog network to rival SB, or you have an idea for a small exclusive network for you and your colleagues, or you want to leave the door open to the possibilities, it's up to you. The goal is not to tell you what to do, it's to show you how easy it is to do it. It's to empower you, the scientist blogger, so that you don't have to compromise, or be subject to someone else's whims, shortcomings or worse.

If that sounds like time well spent to you, class is in session: Science Blog Networks 101.

Edit: 08/12/10 - Class cancelled due to lack of enrollment. However, I'd still like to explore collaborations along the above lines, so if you're late or decide later that you're interested, leave a comment or email me.


Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

If You Build It,...

Field of Science is a science blog network. FoS is so named because Field of Science is a good, practical name for a website about science, but also--thanks to a certain movie--said name evokes illusions that are, more or less, analogous to what FoS is all about . . . FoS is home to bloggers who are doing actual science and whose blogging is clearly informed by their work. If you are a science blogger and your blog is powered by Blogger (or you wouldn't mind switching over to Blogger), and you are interested in joining FoS , complete an application and I'll get back to you as soon as possible. If you want to know more about the nuts, bolts and actuals, watch this presentation .

A New Wave of Science Blogging?

One can imagine science bloggers would be a (the) primary beneficiary in a landscape where Google ranks sites based on the correctness of factual information provided by the [blog] .  What's more, it is not a stretch to conclude that science bloggers could very well be in the vanguard of a new wave of bloggers who earn Google’s trust by blogging within the confines of what is known. The news that Google is working on a system of ranking sites based on the quality of their facts should be greeted by science bloggers everywhere as a game-changer.

Are Female Science Bloggers More Likely To Blog Anonymously Than Male Science Bloggers?

Google+'s real name policy sparked a lively debate in the science blogosphere. On the side of anonymity it was observed that women risk more than men when they use their real names. We know that women experience 25 TIMES the amount of harassment online that men do. I light of this blanket disparity in risk you might expect to find--or even assume--that the percentage of women in science blogging anonymously is greater than that of their male counterparts. Sifting through the Census of Science Bloggers data I realized I had a sample with which to test this assumption. But to get there I first had to answer another burning question: I wonder what the overall gender ratio is among science bloggers?   The answer, based on the census data, is approximately 2 male science bloggers for every 1 female science blogger. Again, based on the census sample, 15% of all science bloggers post anonymously. Now does that percentage change when you divvy the sample up into male and female?