That was interesting: something of a small scale PR and social media experiment.
I've been blogging here for five years: 702 posts attracting 1093 comments to date (or about 1.5 comments per post). If I'd followed best practice I could have doubled my comment count by studiously commenting in response to others' comments. But I'm a bit old fashioned, and tend to feel that I get enough of a say on my own blog, and should leave the comment space for others. Not best practice, I know (this form encourages conversations).
The last post was a one line entry with a link to a news story on another site. Despite the opportunity to comment on my news over at Behind the Spin, 14 of you had your say back here (a vastly higher comment count than I'm used to).
Sarah has put her finger on it. It's a rather shameless piece of attention seeking (my blog, me me me) - but it clearly works. I suppose if you're reading this, it might suggest some level of interest in who's writing this blog.
But the relative lack of comments at Behind the Spin needs some explaining too (three to date on that news story, but one of these is from me and one from another member of the magazine team). Here's my explanation. A magazine is less personal than a blog - and rather more perfect as it's edited. Leaving a comment, while technically just as easy, is psychologically much harder. After all, who is the comment aimed at - the article's author (anonymous in the case of our news pieces), or the magazine's editor. And who might respond? Is anyone reading?
So personal works best. We've always known this in public relations (it's why word of mouth recommendation works). But where does this leave corporate blogs? Personal works; just don't expect a more confessional style here. I'm not that shameless. Honest. One award; one mention in a new book on PR (PR - a persuasive industry?); and one self-indulgent announcement. Enough already.