The State of Mom/Dad/Parent Blogs

Recently, because there are people who always ask if something is "dead," a PR outlet asked if mommy blogs are dead.

Mommy blogs are far from dead – but those who treat it as a hobby may not have much of a future. This has nothing to do with the quality of their content.

There are two challenges facing mom bloggers and dad bloggers, too.

• If you treat it as a hobby, it stays a hobby.

Those who treat their mommy blog as a hobby tend to start writing when their kids are newborns, and the content they provide can often be interesting, humorous and helpful. 

But then, their kids get older, and the issues facing teens and the parents of teens tends not to be as cute. (I say this as the father of three teens.)

And that's when mommy bloggers who are hobbyists tend to stop their blogs. 

At least that's what we found on behalf of a client looking to connect with local mommy bloggers. Our research found a lot of previously dynamic local mom bloggers had stopped maintaining their blogs within the past 18 months. In fact, we found that even a collective of mom bloggers (who had teamed together to create a more robust local mom blog) had pretty much shut down.

When we did some digging to figure out what had happened, it seemed that those who shut down had older kids. 

That might seem anecdotal but after that project, I came across a New York Times' blog post by Elizabeth Bastos: "Why I Decided to Stop Writing About My Children." In explaining why she wrote about her children, Bastos writes, "There is a hunger in our culture for true stories from the parenting trenches where life is lived mud-flecked and raw...We live in a break-the-internet arms race of oversharing." She initially defended a recent blog post "I had written about my son’s first signs of puberty," saying "adolescent sexuality is an emergent, fascinating topic, especially for parents who are figuring out how to address difficult questions with their children."

But, Bastos realized, "My children didn’t give me their permission to tell their stories...If I’m going to continue writing, I realize I need to find some new material, and for that I’m going to have to look more deeply within myself or entirely outside."

That's part of the problem for mom bloggers. What to write about. It’s hard to write about sleep training and other infant and toddler issues when you’re now focused on homework, screen-time addiction, etc.

So, there may be a natural life cycle for parental blogs -- I've seen the same thing occur with daddy bloggers, too.

• It can't be only about your blog.

Another challenge for parental bloggers is that blogs themselves may not be the best mechanism these days. 

If your audience is on Facebook, parental bloggers need to make sure they’re doing more than writing new blog posts. They also need to constantly update their Facebook pages, Pinterests, Instagrams and Snapchats. It’s a lot of work.

And it helps to have a strong point of view and to think about reviewing and updating content along the way. That's what magazines geared to an age group (Cricket, Seventeen, Boys Life, Redbook, etc.) do -- they write new articles covering a standard set of topics like beauty, body, life, love and shopping (the key navigation buttons on redbookmag.com). I say this with deep respect for these publications that continue to cover similar issues but find new ways to address their readers' interests and needs.

It certainly takes more work, and it may well be challenging to come up with yet another new slant back-to-school shopping tips, but that's what parenting bloggers need to do to -- if that's their goal -- to maintain their blogs after the kids become teens.

The good news is, of course, there will always be another generation of clueless parents (speaking as one) who need parenting advice and will look for it online. 

Is the Use of a Pseudonym Reason to Fire a Blogger?

The Wall St. Journal's Nick Wingfield wrote about Randall Kennedy, an InfoWorld blogger who used a pseudonym when interviewing sources for his blog. It's an interesting article, "The Second Life of a Tech Blogger."

Famous writers throughout history have used pseudonyms, including Benjamin Franklin, Walt Whitman and Samuel L. Clemens, to name a few. There's a grand tradition. Stephen King has published books using a pseudonym.

Of course, some of those named above are known for their fiction, not their reporting. But Franklin and Whiman wrote articles and reviews -- including some reviews of their own work -- using pseudonyms.

Today, they would be publicly fired for that.

Even the FTC expects bloggers to disclose tangible relationships with companies they blog about.

So, my question: should a blogger be fired for using a false name in researching and reporting opinion? Let me know what you think. (Of course, let me know if you don't want me to use your real name.)

Prediction #12: Online Credibility Will Continue To Be Important,

Online credibility will continue to be important, but new FTC rules requiring bloggers to disclose the receipt of free samples, gifts and cash payments will get confusing because many who don't blog are not required to make similar disclosures. Currently, tech reviewers at newspapers get free samples but don't need to disclose that fact (though Walt Mossberg and others do…on their websites and blogs). Theater reviewers often get free tickets while many freelance travel writers get all their travel "comped." Yet the FTC does not require these folks to disclose gifts unless they're bloggers. We actually think it makes sense to disclose any type of relationship with an organization being discussed because credibility is important for bloggers and non-bloggers. While it's good to see a government agency understand the need to keep pace with technology, we need clearer rules that ensure equal footing so that reviewers disclose relationships whether or not their work appears on a blog or in print.

Bloggers and Journalists Need to Improve Transparency/Credibility

According to surveys on the perception of different careers (journalists, car dealers, etc.), journalists often score low – and bloggers will soon face the same if they don’t increase transparency about who they are and any potential conflicts of interests (free gifts, employment, etc.)

A couple of years ago, a political blogger famously talked to Bill Clinton without disclosing that she’s a blogger, and captured him saying something he shouldn't have, something he probably wouldn't have if he had known he was talking to a blogger.

I know, these days, everyone can be a blogger or a citizen journalist. But if you're at an event to blog about it, you should tell people you talk to that that's why you're there talking to them.

Meanwhile, the FTC's new rule on mandating bloggers to disclose paid relationships (including gifts) has generated a lot of initial buzz among bloggers.

It may be that people don't care, but I continue to think it's important to maintain credibilty. The FTC rule may not be a great rule, but at least they're trying to keep up with technology.

New York Times Urges Truth in Online, Offline Advertising

Pointing out that marketing to consumer-generated (i.e., blogs) and social networking sites (Facebook, MySpace but not, as yet, Twitter) is expected to grow 20 percent in 2009, up from $1.01 billion in 2008 (which had increased 25% from 2007), the New York Times believes that "a lot of it is paid advertising masquerading as bona fide endorsements by celebrities, well-known bloggers and even ordinary people — honest comment, free from pecuniary considerations."

According to the Times, "In 1968, an F.T.C. advisory demanded that advertorials disclose that they were advertising, not editorial...The rules offline should clearly apply online. This is a matter of principle, not medium, and the new rules are not an excessive burden."

I certainly agree with that.

The Times also urges the FTC to "focus enforcement on the advertising companies," not the bloggers."

The Times also feels that "advertisers are the drivers of this new trend. The onus should be on them to ensure that blogs pitching their stuff warn readers about the commercial motivation of the endorsements."

As a blogger, I'm not sure I totally agree with that last point. I have urged clients to work with credible bloggers, who disclose potential conflicts of interest. But as a PR executive, I know we have little control over bloggers, and would not want to be held responsible for them. That said, we're just providing information or trial software for reviews. We're not engaging in some of the problem issues that the Times rightly cites (such false testimonials).

It's not clear from the Times' editorial whether its editorial board understands how bloggers work.

At the same time, we do provide trial software for product reviews to print reporters. I think there needs to be a disclosure page for tech reviewers to let everyone know their policies. The Journal has a code of conduct that's easily found, but you can check it out here. Kara Swisher, a former Journal reporter who now works for All Things D, posts her ethics policies here. And Walt Mossberg posts his ethics policy below his bio here.

I think more online and offline reporters and bloggers should post codes of conduct. Now, I don't review or endorse products here, but I have posted in my bio that if I do mention clients, I will always disclose that fact. And I do so here and on Twitter.

More Reactions to FTC Rule on Bloggers Must Disclose Free Products and/or Payment

Another day, another reaction to the new FTC rule.

This time from the Wall St. Journal: "Save Us From the Swag-Takers" by Eric Felton, who summarizes the situation this way:

"The agency declared that 'a blogger who receives cash or in-kind payment to review a product is considered an endorsement.' Sounds reasonable enough, until it becomes clear just how expansive the FTC's concept of an 'in-kind payment' is. The blogger who gets a free review copy of a book and writes up his opinion of it is now being labeled by the government a commercial endorser of the book—even if he pans it. This is not how traditional media are treated, which is what makes the new rules so significant: The government has weighed in on the contentious topic of whether bloggers are journalists—and delivered a resounding No.

What's more, Felton says"

"Even newspapers with the strictest of ethics rules accept free copies of books for review. Movie, music and theater reviewers get their tickets comped. The scribblers covering sports aren't in the habit of paying skybox rates for their privileged perches at the stadium. While newspapers make no secret of these common practices, they don't plaster warnings on every book review or description of a football game. But that's exactly what the FTC is requiring of bloggers."

Felton concludes his article with an important disclosure:

"FULL DISCLOSURE NOTICE: In preparing this column, I downloaded a free copy of the new FTC regulatory guidelines. Thanks, guys!"

I agree that this is a complicated issue, and that the FTC needs a more nuanced approach. In the meantime, we prefer to work with bloggers who do disclose their policies and potential conflicts.

Reactions to FTC Rule on Bloggers Must Disclose Free Products and/or Payment

There's been interesting reaction to the new FTC rule, starting Dec. 1, that bloggers must disclose receipt of free samples and/or payment.

Check out "Blogged and Sold" by Choire Sicha in the New York Times, saying "The F.T.C.'s misguided effort to regulate online endorsements. Choire makes some good points about the challenges bloggers will face.

Also interesting article about libel laws and Twitter, "Short Outbursts on Twitter? #Big Problem." Bottom-line: don't defame, people.

Bloggers Need to Disclose Payment or Receipt of Free Products

The FTC is mandating an important change for bloggers. Starting Dec. 1, bloggers will have to disclose if they received free products or payment or other considerations from advertisers. The FTC will also be looking at celebrities plugging products or services on talk shows and on social media platforms like Twitter.

There are some who don't like the rule change. Their arguement is that giving free product to a blogger doesn't mean you control what the blogger posts (as is the case with advertising or paying a spokesperson).

That's certainly a valid point: you can't control what bloggers will post. Just as you can't control what a reporter will say.

However, I think it's a good idea for bloggers to disclose their policies. Walt Mossberg of the Wall St. Journal does. I think it be helpful for readers to understand the nature of the relationship.

That's been a recent issue with New York Times' David Pogue, who in addition to his weekly column, also writes books and lectures on the side about some of the same topics/items he reviews.

I think companies should be able to distribute free copies to enable reporters, reviewers and bloggers to review their software. But I also think it a good idea for them to disclose that they've gotten these products for free -- and what they do afterwards. Credibility (or transparency) is important, and this will help everyone involved.

For example, Mossberg discloses that he deletes software he hasn't paid for or pays for it if he wants to keep it. Either way, at the level of a Mossberg or Pogue, free software is not going to influence how they cover a product. It shouldn't for bloggers, either. Now as consumers, we will have a better idea, too.

As marketers, we've told clients to be wary of bloggers who don't disclose the receipt of free product. Again, this shoudl enhance the credibilty of what otherwise might seem like the Wild West.