Question: Do you prefer reading A-list blogs over non-A-list blogs?
This is a very fun question to ask yourself, since it can tell a lot about the way you treat others online, and also in the offline world. This can also pinpoint a growing trend where many people are using the specific criteria of whether or not a blog is considered an A-list blog to determine its importance. Using a browser, an RSS Feed Reader, e-mail subscriptions or any other method, do you prefer reading A-list blogs over non-A-list blogs?
A-list Blogs
Many people consider any rich blogger to be a successful A-list bloggers. Any blogger who does not disclose the amount of money she or he makes, or does not appear to be making money, is not considered an A-list blogger by those same people. Similarly, a website given a very high rank through services like “Technorati Popular Blogs” list tend to be called and considered A-list bloggers. How many blogs can you find on that Technorati list that you like reading on a regular basis?
Non A-list Blogs
In contrast, take the ever-changing “The Reasoner Links” list, which is going to receive another fresh review soon. There are different reasons why a site may be listed on that list. I may find some sites interest, while other times the blogger may be trying something new with the concept of blogging. Some of the sites listed are of other bloggers from the original blogging days who helped define blogging and related, yet now they are not considered A-list bloggers by many people, because those bloggers either do not make a lot of money or they are not considered that important by services like Technorati.
Do you prefer A-list blogs over other blogs?
So, in your view, do you prefer reading A-list blogs over non-A-list blogs? Why or why not?
I would love to hear any opinion on this. Thank you for reading. 
Loading ...
( July 21st, 2007 at 11:01 pm )
I have my own Top 10 - Blogs I check every day. They are on my blogroll as well.
Then I have an “A” list of 25 other blogs that I try to watch but I don’t always have time for. I have a B, C, D and a “For Profit” blog list. This last are those blogs like John Chow who constantly preach about how to make money online.
As for the Technorati 100 - I do like Engadget but it is not even on any of my lists. Reading a bout toys is not something I do very often.
I chose the blogs I read because for what they have to say - marketing, management, and blog writing. In that order.
( July 22nd, 2007 at 1:12 am )
Definitely non A list. Basically because I never liked popularity contests.
Besides, being an A list blogger isnt supposed to be defined by how much money you make through your ads. Or at least it wasnt, I dont know how is that measured these days.
( July 22nd, 2007 at 2:38 am )
Yes, and then again, no.
The A-list usually got there for a reason. In some cases that reason is that they are interesting and engaging and in some of those cases they are interesting and engaging about things I am interested and willing to be engaged in. Those I like.
Robert Scoble is a blogger I read a lot and have a lot of respect for. With Robert you get the sense that he means what he says and is really passionate about his subject. That’s cool. Paul Boag is another.
On the flip side, many of the A-list are A-list because they are middle of the road enough to generate interest from a wide variety of people. I generally find with these A-listers that they don’t say anything deep enough to interest me. They are the ITV to my preferred BBC 2, for non-Brits perhaps an NBC to my preferred Discovery Channel would be a better comparison.
What it boils down to is that while A-listers may come to my attention more often, the number of other people that read something is absolutely not an indicator of quality or interest, often it is the reverse. The same is true of money. Earning money from a blog probably means the end product is more commercial than those who earn nothing, with many shades of grey in between. The highest earners are usually the least interesting; although, the relationship between money and interest gets more complex the less earnings there are.
Some of the best blogs I read, the ones I head for first every day, I don’t think could be called A-list. But they are well written and interesting. Is this or the Reader Appreciation Project an A-list blog? I don’t know but they are both in my A-list.
( July 22nd, 2007 at 2:42 am )
I go with whoever has interesting content, I would much rather subscribe to a blog which does one good post a week than one which does 10 ok ones a week.
Also I find that some blogs which have become popular and have frequent posting, the content starts to look repetitive, this is a definite turn off.
( July 22nd, 2007 at 5:49 am )
For me ranking doesn’t matter. I read what I find interesting, useful or funny, regardless any statistics. I don’t have blogs I read daily (except mine, of course
), and I barely use the feed reader, simply because I forget about it.
( July 22nd, 2007 at 9:08 am )
Popularity doesn’t matter, it’s the content. I read blogs because their entertaining and/or informative.
Though as far as personal blogs go, I won’t visit long if the owner doesn’t return comments. I visit those sites to make friends, and if it’s a one thing, I don’t see the point.
( July 22nd, 2007 at 1:55 pm )
Thank you so much everyone. This is very interesting and encouraging.
Roger Anderson, thanks for the comment.
That is nice, having your own Top 10 list. Wow, “B, C, D and a “For Profit” blog list“; it seems you have a great system for you going on there. Are your other categories, besides “For Profit” also decided based on their relevance on how to make money, or some other criteria?
I was checking the Technorati 100, and most of the blogs there I know of, but do not read on a regular basis.
Thanks for sharing Roger.
Vidar, thank you for the comment too.
“Popularity contests“, that is an interesting way to put it. Many A-list blog lists are created depending on the amount of incoming links to blogs, and not by the actual quality content. It is assumed that the more links a post has, the more good quality it has, no matter what.
I think many people define A-list blogs by the amount of money they make and the comments they get, and many services define A-list blogs by the amount of traffic and incoming links they get, so you’re close and on the right track when it comes to defining how A-list blogs are typically measured at the moment. In your view, do you think advertising can be a small of a bigger measuring guideline when it comes to seeing which blogs are A-lists, or advertising should not be important at all?
Andrew, thanks for the explanation. I am honored that you consider this site and RA Project to be A-list blogs!
Many A-list blogs are indeed very nice. The ones you listed are nice in your view, and similarly, I think Darren Rowse and Seth Godin do a good job at providing useful insights and opinions to others regarding some specific topics.
ITV to BBC 2 or NBC to Discovery Channel; great analogy. I think many blogs simply start talking about topics that will bring in readers, and then they continue in that direct with general and generalized posts to draw in a lot of crowds and links.
Your concept of the relation between the amount of income and the quality of content is very interesting, and nice too. I am guessing many people stop producing very interesting content since doing the minimum, or having very vague or general content also results in income, and thus they do not need to put more effort into it.
Matias, thanks for coming and for commenting too. I also usually find many blogs with many posts a day to be less important, because of what they write, than a blog that posts occasionally and has something useful to say. Sure, many blogs can have multiple authors and can be able to pump out more quality posts if they wish, though many times some people assume that the more posts a blog has, the more important it is; I think that is like a stereotype, always giving preference to quantity over quality. Do you think posting a lot useful posts in a week is better than posting 1 useful post each week, or vice versa?
Your 2nd paragraph points to a very important trend now: the more popular some blogs become, the less fresh content they produce, compared to the times when they were not so popular. They try to talk about the same topic in different perspectives repeatedly, and many people do not notice that.
Simonne, thanks for the comment. That’s a good way to look at things: not looking at any stats at all. Do you look for blogs revolving around specific topics, or is anything fine with you as long as it is interesting or useful or funny?
Yes, reading your own blog daily can be important for many things.
I have NetVibes as an rss tracker for, I think, over a year now, though I have to start logging into it more. Bookmarks, other lists, comment links, and even a few RSS subscriptions via Thunderbird help me sometimes.
Lissy, thank you for the comment. So for you, content is more important than popularity or fame. Same as above, I’m wondering if for you any blog can be entertaining/informative or if you look for blogs revolving around specific topics?
I like blogs where owners return comments, not to acknowledge but to actually communicate. I like building relations and relationships, and if the comments is enabled, it surprises me how many blogs spend a lot of money on promoting things to make their blogs more famous but do not dedicate time or even money to communicate more with readers.
Thanks again. I really appreciate it.
( July 23rd, 2007 at 2:44 am )
A-list blogs are often cool… (some of them are not… personally I really don’t like john chow.) I read some of them abitually, but somehow I find myself more involved with small blogs… maybe because there’s more direct communication with the author… and they’re less “crowded” …
and the consequence is that I find it easier to comment on smaller blogs
there are few big bloggers (like Daniel at DailyBlogTips and Maki at DoshDosh) that are able to make me feel like I can have a real communication with them…
( July 23rd, 2007 at 8:23 pm )
Bes, I dont think the amount of ads or how relevant they are to the content should really matter when considering someone to be A-list.
Take Kottke or Zeldman, for example. I’m sure they have ads in their sites, I cant see them ’cause I use ad-blockers. But even so, I’d still have to agree that they are A-list because of the stuff they write about and how they write it. Even if sometimes I disagree with their opinion.
Also
This really gets under my skin.
I’m cooking up a post about these kind of situations, hopefully will be done soon.
( July 25th, 2007 at 12:06 am )
I actually find the whole idea of an A-List to be a pretentious wank if I were to be 100% blunt and honest. The other thing that bugs me about the A-List concept is that it prompts a whole heap of copy cats. Originality flys out the window. How many John Chow copy cats have popped up in the last 6 months?
( July 25th, 2007 at 10:04 pm )
I read friends and people who care about me, so… non.
( July 26th, 2007 at 2:47 pm )
I may visit A-list blogs, but I’ll continue reading them only if I find them interesting and valuable. I do visit and read more blogs of normal regular people who are not in the top 100 or 1000 list, but as Andrew said, I consider them to be my A-list bloggers.
( July 27th, 2007 at 7:40 am )
I’ve often wondered (and blogged about) these A-Listers. I’ve linked back to you from a post I’ve written:
http://dave-lucas.blogspot.com/2007/07/around-blogosphere-27-july-07.html
( July 28th, 2007 at 1:50 am )
Francesco mapelli, thank you for your comment. I like the idea of direct communication too. I wonder though: if a blog is crowded, yet there is direct communication with the blog owner, would you still prefer it?
That is a good point, about finding it “easier” to participate on smaller blogs.
So far, DailyBlogTips and DoshDosh are indeed interesting blogs.
Vidar, thank you so much for explaining that further. I used to read Kottke a lot, and I still think that back then, Kottke treated his blog much differently than many of today’s big bloggers. Zeldman; I sometimes visit his blog. You are right: they both have at least one ad on their site.
I am glad you notice that pattern too. I am looking forward to your post regarding people not writing quality content once they start earning money.
Swollen Pickles, thanks for the comment. You bring up a good point about many people wanting to mimic the plans of the supposed A-listers.
Take John Cow as an example. Originally started to make fun of John Chow, it now also does the very thing that it started to stop; talking about making money by making readers think they are getting some value. Maybe John Cow will actually have some value? The whois information for John Cow is protected/private, so it is hard to see who really owns that site.
Valerie, thanks for sharing. That is nice to know!
Now, here’s a hard question: do you ever feel anyone you know [ahem ahem] is very boring online, and you feel obligated to read their sites?
Vivien-inspirationbit, thanks for the comment too. So for you, the standard A-list considered to be original by the masses is not applicable to you, and thus to everyone else.
I wonder if the newspapers and magazines who call such bloggers A-listers actually hear the opinions of everyone online, or most people, or if they simply assume someone is an A-lister based on the traffic and money they get, and not the quality of content and the actual purpose of the blogger to be blogging?
Dave Lucas, thanks for the comment, and thank you for linking to this writing too. You can also ping this writing if you wish, and it will show up, hopefully, as an automatic trackback.
In your view, what constitutes an A-lister?