Cult of the Obvious

Yeah, that. Or maybe some writers don't underestimate their readers and prefer to let them think, draw their own conclusions.

Also, I see more long posts with no substance rather than the writer's experience (which exposes its subjectivity), than short ones.

If you're right, you don't need many words to say it. People get it.

True. I'd like to think that readers in general love to think and come away with some intrinsic meaning about a grander point in life. However, that's not reality. The blogosphere exists within a vacuum. This isn't the way the world normally works. Thus you need to structure your content accordingly.

Sometimes 2 paragraphs is enough, or sometimes you need 5 posts to explain an entire situation.

Post are short because often people do not have new information to add, but realize they should post on a topic because of its relevance in the space. The PR BCC email fiasco comes to mind. Hundreds of people were appalled at the email fiasco, but all the posts read the same.

When you post brand new fresh content and ideas, then it doesn't matter. If I know I have nothing to say, I'm keeping it as short as possible.

Then why post anything at all if you don't have anything to say?

So I think that in many cases, you are actually right about this. In other cases, you're not. (problem with blanket statements). I have read short blog posts that I have really triggered my thought process and lead me to develop the concepts further in my head, and I've read short blog posts that made me want my 15 seconds back.

I can say the same for long posts though. I've read some amazing ones, and some I get to the second paragraph and already want to frisbee my laptop through the wall.

Point is, I think there is room for both long form and short form posts. Look at twitter...it doesn't get more vague/obvious than most of the content people post on there...but once in a while a simple tweet can go a long way.

@DavidSpinks

What do you get more out of on a consistent basis? Twitter or blogs?

I'd say Twitter's an intro. A blog is where you find out what the person is really made of.

Like it Stuart, but an area of disagreement, what is obvious to you, or obvious to me, might not be so to 5 others in the room or the other way around.

Example it is obvious to me that paid search advertising works as a method of driving communication, interaction and ultimately business. But surprisingly even when shown facts an how paid search is intrinsically driven to success by integrated marketing people will still dismiss it. So what next? Unfortunately at times we are driven back to making the case for the obvious.

Sometimes though you need to be extremely obvious. Think outdoor billboards, you have a mere few seconds to make a point. I think the thing to ask is if you are being obvious what is the goal, there should be more motivation behind than being painfully blunt just because you can. Some folks will certainly be better at this than others.

True. But I'm talking about the simplest of obvious things. For instance: Social Media Guru posts, Facebook is kind of a big deal, People use social networks. (Those would seem to be obvious to me...and have been covered to a sickening point.)

I totally understand but on the opposite end of the gurus you have newer enthusiasts. Take a look at what is funneling through #ims09, most of it would fall on the obvious range, but people are still just getting their feet in the water. I won't disagree with you righting about Facebook or Twitter in a very broad sense declaring it important, cool or neat is a bit of head to brick wall moment.

I see quite the opposite. I see long, rambling posts that have no substance, no point, and use hundreds of words to say very little.

Which is why I choose to write the exact type of post you're referring to. Short posts that use only the amount of words necessary to convey the point. No fluff needed.

But regardless, length means nothing. The content of the post does. Your blanket statement saying all short posts are "about nothing" is not true in the least. There are short posts that are awesome, there are short posts that are crap. There are long posts that rock, there are long posts that suck.

I'm completely in agreement with you about posts needing substance and to actually say something. I suppose I just take slight offense because I love Seth Godin posts and he's a huge inspiration for my own posts.

Blanket statements kind of bit me in the ass on this one. I stay by most of my words though. Long rambling posts can be just as obvious as short succinct posts. (The long ones are recognized as universally bad though.)

I just think readers need to have a bit more direction then vague philosophy. Make them learn something. Question you on something. Incite SOMETHING. Don't leave it at just quiet reflection.

I agree that learning and questioning is essential. But as Patrick said above, what's obvious to you or me may not be obvious to three other people. What we think is a stupid post to learn nothing from might be an eye opening moment for somebody else.

Sometimes quiet reflection is all one needs to change their entire way of thinking...

One of your best short posts yet. I hardly even open my Seth Godin emails anymore. He's mailing them in half the time. Perhaps that's all his readers want or need. Same is true of a few other big name folks out here. And I'm probably guilty of it myself sometimes. Though I'm committed not to be. Perhaps it's harder than it seems. Doing some work, developing a point of view, taking a stand. But this is a good call to action. I'm on it.

Amen! I loathe those cryptic, swami-like posts that dispense knowledge from "up high." I'm just happy to see I'm not the only one, who sees them that way (I was beginning to think I was alone).

Great read.

Like they say, "media" is the plural of mediocre.

Who can disagree with you, Stuart? Here's an obvious statement: social media is a good thing. Sure, and so is civilization. I like it that no competing tribe members invaded my territory this morning and beat my breakfast out of me.

But at the same time there's something unnatural at work in both civilization and social media. They're great in concept, but there's this intrinsic impulse to make them spread like cancer.

In the case of social media - specifically blogging, although this also applies to Twitter and Facebook followers - there's a tendency to believe that MORE equals VALID. More followers, more content, more frequently posted content... whatever. The unconscious assumption is that all it takes to be a thought leader is to put more skin in the game. But by this logic, the lead steer in a stampede qualifies as a thought leader, or the first lemming off the cliff.

This impulse to post something - anything - as frequently as possible goes against everything I know about writing - particularly writing about ideas as opposed to, say, news. Ideas take time to gestate, particularly new ideas that we haven't heard a million times. Writing can actually accelerate the gestation process, but very few bloggers dare to think out loud. Most are in a hurry to bring us the WISDOM. For every 100 blogs about self-promotion (or self-absorption) maybe one will actually aim for engagement.

My favorite blogs (and blog posts), however, are the ones that show some reflection. They' may be a reaction to ideas posted elsewhere, but they're not simply contradictory. Rather than simply agree or disagree, they advance the conversation, apply a personal perspective or raise new lines of inquiry. Those are the blogs (and blog posts) worth waiting for.

Some posts suck, some posts don't.

How's that for blanket statements?

Short/long philosophical/realistic doesn't quite matter as much as the delivery. If it's coherent and informative to someone, it's a W, if not, it'll get ignored and eventually that writer will figure out to tweak the content.

Why do you blame this on Seth Godin? Because he writes obvious things and makes books like "Quit stuff that isn't going anywere"?

Length does not equal substance. I've read quite a few blog posts that were short and sweet, but kept me thinking for a portion of the day. I've also read mega-posts that didn't have a single thing to say of substance.

You're right, don't state the obvious. You'll drive away readers rather than draw them in. Stating the obvious can also make your readers feel like you're talking down to them (which you may be doing, even if unintentionally). At the same time though, using big words and jargon and 400 paragraphs doesn't always get your point across either. Keep it simple. Besides, simplicity can often open the floodgates for dialogue and isn't that what you're trying to create anyway?

Tessa Carroll
VBP OutSourcing
www.blogs.vbpoutsourcing.com

Hi Stuart.

First, a great quote:

"I have made this letter longer than usual,
because I lack the time to make it short"
-- Blaise Pascal, 'Letters Provinciales' (1657)

"Give us more than a dream. Give us actionable and salient points. Theory doesn't mean anything unless it is backed up by measurements and facts. But most of all? Don't defend the obvious."

You just took 300 words for another, to use your phrase "shot across the bow of obvious."

Now, another quote:

"Be the change you want to see in the world." ~ Mahatma Gandhi

Instead of pontificating about how bloggers need to change, why not actually write something substantial yourself? Why not show us what to do and lead us in a positive direction instead of simply talking about how we should all do things differently?

I think you'd do well to take a lesson from Godin and practice using fewer words when you're really not saying much.

"Now lets take it a step further and stop writing about patently obvious things."

I agree. I'm excited to see what you post here as you usher in a new era of clever relevance.