Posted by Ben Cook as Blogging
I’ve been debating the issue of changing my posting frequency for quite some time now. I’ve considered both writing shorter but more frequent posts, as well as writing longer posts less often and really hadn’t come to any conclusions. However, Darren Rowse recently published another one of his one question interview series in which he asked several bloggers the question “What one thing did you do on your blog in 2007 that improved it the most?”
Surprisingly, several bloggers mentioned posting less often as the one thing that improved their blog the most. Leon Ho from lifehack.org’s response was:
“At lifehack we’ve ditched short introductory posts so that we could focus and write long articles. It has a positive impact to our referral traffic from search engines and social bookmarking sites.”
Vitaly Friedman of Smashing Magazine weighed in with this response:
We’ve tried to improve the quality of our articles. In 2007 we’ve spent more time on research, we’ve refined our requirements and expectations from the sites we cover in our articles.
Skellie was one of them saying:
The best thing I’ve done for Skelliewag.org has been reducing my post frequency from (when I was able) 7 days a week down to 3 - 4 times a week. It’s allowed me to start freelancing, but it also doesn’t seem to have hurt the blog any. By posting less, I can pack a lot more into the content, making each post more link-worthy and more valuable for readers. It also gives the content more time to snowball on social media — and to gather comments.
Leo Babauta of Zen Habits continued the emerging theme with this advice:
Now, instead of doing 5 posts a week, I often do 4, and I write about whatever I feel like writing about. That’s really transformed my writing, because it allows me to follow my passions, to write about my current interest, and the writing is the better for it.
What I’ve done might not work for every blogger, but it’s something I recommend at least trying. If you’re doing shorter posts, try writing some longer ones, exploring the topic more, linking to other resources, giving lists of tips, making the post truly useful. If you post frequently, consider cutting your schedule back a bit — it’ll give you more time to write great posts, and your readers will probably appreciate having fewer posts to read.
Now I might not be the sharpest knife in the drawer, but when several successful bloggers list writing longer posts and writing less often as the action that improved their blogs the most, I take note. So, it is with these ideas in mind that I’ve decided to scale back the posting schedule here at least for a while. As has been my style on this site, I’m planning on testing the more relaxed schedule for about a month and report back the results I experience. Don’t get me wrong, I’ll still be writing every day. However, I’m hoping the extra time and more relaxed schedule will allow me to spend some time writing guest posts on other blogs as well as delving a bit deeper into the topics we discuss here.
Have you experimented with writing less frequent but longer more authoritative posts? Have you tried posting more often, even to the point of several times a day? Do you think changing from my schedule of a post per day during the work week will end up harming the blog? I’d love to hear about any experiences or opinions you might have on this issue in the comments below.
22 Responses
Steven Bradley
January 22nd, 2008 at 1:02 am
1Ben I’ve been thinking about this just as you. Awhile ago my thought was to post more often, but I’ve been seeing the advice you mention here for a few months now and I’ve scaled back my posting a little.
I started thinking of it as a reader of blogs and found myself not wanting to read a few because they did post so much. And it’s hard to argue with the success of those advocating more quality and less frequency.
My one thought against the idea is that some of my posts that gained the most attention wouldn’t have been written had I not been forcing myself to publish on a particular night. Still the less is more argument is swaying me. I cut back from 5 posts to 3 posts, though if I have a lot to say I’ll post more and if I don’t I’ll post less.
It makes a lot of sense to post more quality less often. It greatly increases your signal to noise ratio.
Scott Sweeney
January 22nd, 2008 at 1:59 am
2Ben;
I think, in the long run, it will help your blog. With the exception of the paid reviews and things of that nature, usually your content is well thought out and a good read. (not that the paid reviews are poor, I was just stating as far as content pertaining to blogging)
A good read is a good read, 7 days a week or 4 days week.
If you think it would enable you to concentrate on better content, then I think fewer posts will work. Plus the ability to freelance will only enhance your network and readership.
However, if you can crank out quality posts daily, well, then it is up to you if you want to continue that. I think the only thing that can HURT the blog is posting daily and running out of good things to talk about.
Cheers
Read Scott
January 22nd, 2008 at 8:26 am
3One post per day is my schedule. There are times when I know that a certain post is becoming popular, so I hold off on posting again for about one more day. If I know that a particular post is not doing well, then I usually post another short post in the evening that’s a little light-hearted and might catch more attention. It’s working well.
Ron@TheWisdomJournal
January 22nd, 2008 at 8:31 am
4I’m working on posting once per day but I’m also writing more than I post (I need the practice). I’ve got a “savings account” of posts that I can polish just a little and publish these if my schedule gets too hectic.
It’s good to have some players on the bench.
Eric Vernon
January 22nd, 2008 at 9:37 am
5Personally I feel that one post every two - three days is the way to go. Though I don’t write my own blog, as a reader it’s nice to not have new things shoved down your throat constantly. Rather than having mindless crap with no research constantly streaming, put time into the posts and make them good.
If this post, for example, had this been pushed out two days earlier, the content would have been low quality and would have reflected poorly on you. In any case, the interesting discussion carried out here would never have happened.
Caroline Middlebrook
January 22nd, 2008 at 9:58 am
6Lately I have been thinking the same thing but my experiments with it have been forced as I simply haven’t had the time to blog as much but I found that my blog levels managed to stay pretty much where they were. However, it’s only when I started writing good posts again that my numbers continued to rise. My inclination is that a good post can sustain the readers for a day or two at least.
Catherine Lawson
January 22nd, 2008 at 10:01 am
7Hi Ben - I’ve been reluctant to cut down too much on posting because I posted less in Autumn due to illness and it did have a negative impact on my blog.
However if I’m working on a longer post I don’t stress too much about missing a day or too. I’d rather provide something of value than blog about any old thing, just for the sake of it.
Badi Jones
January 22nd, 2008 at 11:28 pm
8I’ve been trying to do one post per day on seologs.com, but It’s really difficult to manage a full time job and keep up a daily blogging schedule.
I notice a definite correlation between post frequency and RSS subscribers though. Regular posting == increased subscribers. Stop posting, and subscribers stay the same or decrease.
SEO Blog
January 23rd, 2008 at 5:51 pm
9Nowadays blogs are more like forums, a blog without a subject a day is like a dead forum (kinda sorta). The blogs if frequently visit is because they frequently update their content (is it a long descriptive and informative or just a shorter but informative it doesn’t make difference to me).
I had a period on end of December when I was caught up with many things and could not post frequently, and it had a negative impact (the returning visitors was slowing down).
Eric Vernon
January 23rd, 2008 at 5:58 pm
10Well, I’m very aware of the dead forum feel. You come back after eighteen hours and two posts have been made.
So perhaps the take home message here is that unless you’ve got something really popular with a nice discussion, which is really hit and miss depending on your audience, it’s best to post daily or so. Interesting.
Ben Cook
January 23rd, 2008 at 6:35 pm
11@ SEOblog, I think it’s important to define what “frequently” is because that may mean different things for each of us.
Also, I’m sorry but I just don’t buy the argument that you need to post daily. All the people I cited in this post decreased their posting frequency and their blogs were better for it. Another good example is DoshDosh. As best I can tell there’s no rhyme or reason to the posting schedule there and yet, the site hit 10,000 subscribers this week.
Patrick
January 23rd, 2008 at 8:19 pm
12I have definitely used the less is more theory in terms of posting frequency, going from doing 4 posts a week dropping down to just one, high-quality, longer post each week and seeing my RSS subscribers nearly double after starting that pattern.
I like the idea of focusing on just one killer post each week; you can take time to craft the content and pack it full of value, making it into a linkable resource and something that might be worth bookmarking. Value over quantity turned out to be a counter-intuitive decision for me, but I’m glad I finally figure it out.
Great post!
Eric Vernon
January 23rd, 2008 at 8:27 pm
13Ben, I disagree with you here. Although you pointed to several sites who have experienced success with posting less frequently, there’s two that you have displayed on your page that feel posting less frequently hurts them.
————
Badi Jones of SEOlogs says, “Regular posting == increased subscribers. Stop posting, and subscribers stay the same or decrease.”
Catherine Lawson says on her blog that “[she] posted less… and it did have a negative impact on my blog.”
Sorry Badi or Catherine if you didn’t want to be dragged into this, you guys were easy examples
————
So although you’ve cited some higher profile blogs in your post, it can go either way, which as I said earlier, I believe is based off of (a) the quality of the content and (b) the audience / subject of the blog. E.g., if your blog audience was mainly people who read at .5 words / hour, one post per month might suffice.
SEO Blog
January 23rd, 2008 at 9:09 pm
14Ben, will the page be long enough if you cite those that declared differently ? What I told you is from my own experience, and just to define frequently (on daily basis). When I slowed down publishing a post one each 3 days at first place the organic traffic decreased and as well the returning visitors. Buy it or not, thats what happened with me.
Ben Cook
January 23rd, 2008 at 10:32 pm
15Don’t get me wrong, I’m not saying that posting more often definitely won’t be good for your blog. I’m just saying I don’t think saying you HAVE to post more often to be successful is accurate either and that’s the angle you see more often in the blogosphere.
SEO Blog
January 24th, 2008 at 7:54 am
16Oh no, i might have expressed bad. What I meant to say is not that you HAVE to, but that more frequent posts create habit to visitors to come back and check out whats the article for today (well aside me, I enjoy on discussion with comments kinda more
but love to read good articles too).
But as one of the guys you cited said, what works for him might not work for everyone.
Frank C
January 25th, 2008 at 1:26 pm
17It depends a lot on your traffic level and traffic sources.
If you’re a new blog trying to gain traction in the social blogging arena you have to post good stuff often. If not every day at least every other day. However, once you’ve developed a reader base, probably an RSS count of over 300, you can cut back to a slower schedule without a huge hit. However, going totally AWOL will still eventually kill a blog that depends heavily on referral traffic from other blogs and social networking sites.
If you’re running a niche blog that primarily focuses on obtaining Google search traffic, once it’s placing well in SERPs for its targeted keywords and long tails you can leave it alone for months and traffic will continue to grow organically.
Eight Actions for Producing Quality Over Quantity | LERNR.COM
January 27th, 2008 at 6:31 pm
18[…] thing. This has been a topic I’ve been trying to get a handle on lately. Luckily BloggingExperiment.com compiled a great list of quotes on the subject from a collection of posts from ProBlogger. I […]
Yura
January 27th, 2008 at 11:42 pm
19I think that the initial desire to post a lot is normal. You need to build a base of posts to refer to later and to have something for people to read.
Later, you can slow down writing and write 2-3 posts a week.
Afterwards, you’ll be fine with writing 1-2 well researched posts.
As for my personal experience, when I slowed down posting, I started writing more insightful, useful posts. When I spend a week on one post, it becomes so good that it spreads easily.
That being said, you may want to consider another option: post when you feel like it. This way, you leave room for investing time in well researched posts and also leave a chance just to share your minute thoughts with your readers.
I find that sharing thoughts through small, short posts, written in under 1hr, is a good way to keep people interested. Unfortunately, due to my stopping blogging, I have only started testing this system, and it worked really well to my tastes (absolutely no need to force myself to write anything, which all cutting-back in writing is about).
Rebecca Laffar-Smith
January 28th, 2008 at 5:45 am
20I think that posting less frequently is likely to increase RSS subscribers. From my personal experience I know it is a nightmare to keep up with all these fabulous blogs I want to read. When everyone decides they just HAVE to post every single day if I miss a day of reading I come back to a reader with a great many posts to catch up on.
If everyone posted a great post every other day or even three a week I’d be able to not only keep up with those I truly love but I’d have the time to do more than just skim the post in the reader, I’d have the time to click links, add comments, and truly participate as a blog reader.
The other thing to remember is that reduced posting frequency here doesn’t mean you have to reduce your posting frequency completely. If you commit to posting three, four, or five times a week here you could commit your ’spare’ days to a second or even a third blog. As you said, the time could be used for other things, like guest blogging, forum participation, reading other blogs, social media etc. all of which spreads the word about this blog.
Less is More Experiment Results | Blogging Experiment
February 15th, 2008 at 8:00 am
21[…] 3 weeks ago I decided to test the “less is more” theory in terms of my posting schedule. Previously I had been publishing new posts every day Monday […]
How a Writing Schedule Has Affected Lernr.com | LERNR.COM
February 17th, 2008 at 11:54 pm
22[…] so it’s more of a lack of a writing schedule that has affected Lernr.com. I had read a lot of buzz about a more lenient writing schedule, and, like many people who have experimented with more time between posting, have had a negative […]
RSS feed for comments on this post · TrackBack URI
Leave a reply
to top of page...