Writing Maternal Spark has been an incredible experience so far. I have come to know some fantastic people – many of them write blogs of their own. Recently there has been a lot of talk about mom blogs and what is acceptable and what isn’t and how their authors should conduct themselves.
There was this post, and this one and this one. A lot of people got upset and many more had opinions on these thoughts that mom bloggers are just here for the free stuff or that *gasp* they might accept money in exchange for promoting a product or that they might do it without flat-out telling their readers how the post was sponsored.
You see, the business of mom blogs is getting a bit serious. Companies like General Mills, Wal-Mart, Frigidaire and Ford all have their toes in the pool in an effort to tap into the marketing power of blogs. They might not all be getting it right. They might not all be doing the best for their brands, but they are aware and they are trying. So, let’s all get in the sandbox, share our cookies and have a nice afternoon.
The bloggers want to play, the brands want to play and everyone is trying to buck up and get the hang of this. We’re figuring it out as we go and we’re being open about it. Right?
Wrong.
We have Nielsen, an authoritative voice on media, publishing a “report.” I received the news release in my email from their PR company. Go have a read. They share some data about how many moms shop online, where they spend their time and what activities they partake in.
And then there is a silly list written by their online research director Jessica Hogue about the Power Mom 50.
Now I know there are people who will read this and think ‘she’s just jealous that she’s not in the top 50.’ And I want to put a stop to that right now. I know Maternal Spark isn’t in the top 50. I know that my readership is small (but I love you guys) and I’m cool with that. I’m not here to ravage the blogosphere with my voice. I am however, very interested in marketing, data and this new media economy that seems to be taking over and making traditional media companies like Nielsen act like idiots.
So if I’m not jealous then what’s my problem?
My problem is, this list appears to be based on numbers. The Nielsen BuzzMetrics. They say they measured things like posting frequency, twitter followers and comments to gauge the ‘comprehensive sphere of authority and influence.‘ But they’ve missed out on powerhouses like Kelby Carr, Kailani and Megan.
It leaves me wondering how accurate their metrics really are? I mean, any blogger worth their salt knows of these women. How is it possible that they weren’t included…or even interviewed as possibles?
Then there’s the issue of having graphs…with no numbers attached to them. Useless.
Then there’s Jessica Hogue tweeting after the report was released that the list was initial and intended to be revised. I don’t see that marked anywhere on the report. It says they are refining their methodology but what does that mean? Does that mean they just published something to sound like they know what’s going on with this subsection of the media when in reality – they have no idea what’s going on either….how could they? It’s so new and it changes on a daily basis and a blog that is new today, might be an old pro in two months time. Hell, the bloggers in the midst of it can barely keep up and they’re getting raked over the coals for it. But this is Nielsen right? They need to get on this whole social media thing right?
So why then did my email to their PR firm go unanswered? I expressed my concern to the nice rep who emailed the release to me and I told her I’d be happy to elaborate…guess I’m doing that now eh? Ya know, I mentioned my concerns on twitter too – as did several other moms. How’s that for monitoring social media?
I’m kind of getting ranty here and I want to make sure I speak to my true concern. Nielsen was an authority on media ratings. Large companies like the ones I mentioned earlier look to Nielsen for information on where to spend their advertising dollars. If they use this report for decision making they are basing their decisions on false information.
I find it sad that an authority would abuse the trust of the public in this manner just to make it seem like they’re the cool kid with the biggest marbles when in reality – they’ve lost them altogether.
Edited 05-12-09 to add – MomDot just published their list of 50 influential moms online. Go take a look
the list does seem incomplete. Another thing, how do you measure the authenticity and authority of a bloggers voice? There are several on the list who’s opinions would not influence me at all but they have comments pouring in mostly because of giveaways. I’m also not replying to be snarky. I know I dont belong in the listing, I’m far too small but like I initially stated, the list seems off..
Interesting post!
Yes, the fact that Kelby Carr, Alli Worthington and many more were not on there and some others were means to me, Nielsen certainly did not give much credence to the accuracy of their numbers this time. Disappointing! Good post
Thanks Melissa! We should be able to expect more from them right?
I totally agree. This so called ‘list’ was not researched. There was a blogger on the list (or 3 or 4) that should not have any spotlight at all because of their dishonesty. Great post! Tweeting now!
thanks for tweeting Tanya!
Any list that left out Blissfully Domestic, TypeA, SITS, and 5m4M did zero research. I agree w/ commenter above that giveaway comments are NOT real comments.
That list looked like one big list of the girls turning in their friends, not a true outreach of the very large mom blog community.
Also, to me, influence has very little to do with numbers. While the research is skewed, so was the point of the whole thing. That would take a lot more than some poorly put out media analysis but rather getting into the community and find out the voices that are the true leaders. Thats what influence is…and they failed.
Trisha
yes, giveaways skew the whole thing…did they consider this?
I actually follow your blog and I believe we’re friends on MBC.
We do sincerely appreciate the reaction and feedback on our initial work. I’ve received a lot of direct messages on Twitter that I’m responding to and I wrote directly to the inquiries our PR team received yesterday. I did not receive your email however, so please accept my apologies that you didn’t receive a timely response from us.
We’ve tried to be frank that we have created a starting place and that our work will – needs to – evolve. I’ve already assembled a few key influencers (among those, a few women who were not included within our initial research) to provide input and vet our ongoing analysis, as we create additional segments and fully integrate audience visitation metrics. I wholeheartedly agree that we have a responsibility to get this right and create something the community feels is credible, and we are working to do so.
Thanks again for expressing your concerns. Please feel free to email me directly.
Jessica
Hi Jessica,
It’s nice to hear from you. How did you feel it was ok to publish a list like this, which you clearly stated is a work in progress, without being expressly clear in the document?
And can you tell us what data you’ve collected to base this report on? Why are there no numbers included with the graphs?
When Nielsen publishes television ratings there is always some kind of data to back it up…why is this report falling short of those standards?
I tried to email Jessica and it was undeliverable for some reason.
I had the same thoughts about Island Life, 5 Minutes for Mom, and other blogs I read with higher stats than the ones on the list.
Also, what are Buzzmetrics? Is it something you have to sign up for, like Technorati?
Buzzmetrics is Nielsen’s own tool for monitoring social media. I think it’s a glorified google search in a dashboard…
Very well said Heather! I agree wholeheartedly! It does seem like some very important people were left off that list (and I don’t consider myself to be one of them) There were some people on there that deserved to be, but it does make you wonder how they came up with list.
Yes, there were some on there who deserved to be but I would have liked a bit more information behind how their decisions were made. It’s all very vague.
Very well said! When I saw that list I couldn’t believe my eyes! Some of the blogs they included, I agree with. But, most very popular blogs that I know have a huge following weren’t even mentioned. Where is My Charming Kids, 5M4M? After looking over that list, I really don’t believe they did any kind of research at all. Totally irresponsible.
@ hairstyles Yes. Irresponsible is right!
@Tara – yes, they should have known better. You’re right – would they have treated a top newspaper list this way? No. They would have researched and gathered data and shown that data with the report. Thanks so much for an insightful comment
@ Heather – you are very flattering! Thank you
Yes, we do put a lot of that on ourselves don’t we?
There is no doubt that this is a subjective business. We connect with bloggers because of their voice, their content, and their personality. I completely understand that some of us will be left out of any list, but we aren’t talking about a blog with 100 readers publishing a pseudo-factual list. We’re talking about an international media powerhouse that really should have known better. Would they publish a list of the top 50 Power Companies in this shoddy fashion? How about the top 50 tv programs or newspapers? Of course not.
I agree with what Trisha said above. The list looks like the Nielsen people contacted a couple of mom bloggers, asked them who the top influencers were, and published the results. A list this preliminary should never have been made public.
The file I downloaded from Jessica’s Tweet is called “PowerMoms_050409_FinalDraft.pdf” Her Tweet said “Are you a Power Mom?” and had a link to that file. Now it’s a work in progress? Hmmm. If this “report” is indeed a preliminary draft, it should have been clearly marked as such. It should have been been selectively distributed as a draft, and feedback should have been solicited. It should not have been published and publicized as a Power Moms report.
Regardless of whether the list is a draft or a report, it needs details. We need to know what exactly the numbers are, where the numbers came from, and why THESE bloggers were included. On what basis were others like Kelby, Allison, Kailani, and MckMama left out?
Followed Tara @ Feels Like Home’s tweet here to find your post. Cool one! I love’s me a smart woman with a brain that can’t be put on hold. Are all of your posts this good? With two small kiddos I don’t have much time so I’ve been whittling down my comment list to my very favorites, but I may have to put you on there.
I was thrilled to see Jessica Gottlieb on that list, but was shocked as you were to not see Kelby Carr, or even Julie Roads. Allison Worthington. And SO MANY others. I could go on and on. Lists like these can highlight some great blogs that we may be missing out on, but they always end up making some people feel as though their efforts go unnoticed and unappreciated. As MOM bloggers, don’t we get enough of that feeling through our daily routines?
I was a Nielsen TV viewer back pre-kids. I do expect a higher level of accuracy from a company like Nielsen. This report is not showing the company in a very good light. I wish a group like Consumer Reports would jump on this bandwagon. Everything written by CR is totally vetted and researched. Rarely are retractions printed. A Power Moms list by CR could be taken to the bank. I don’t buy anyhing without first consulting CR.
This list sounded very chummy. The fact that I did not recognize a couple of blog names makes me wonder if friends invited friends OR if people nominated themselves.
I have a question about a blogger’s voice. I love going back to a well-written voice to get a blast of the person’s personality (wouldshoulda, suburbanturmoil, rita arens). I wonder sometimes if the big named blogs are actually written by the blogger. I mean some of these bloggers are constantly travelling. How could they keep up with posting reviews and finding freebies and coupons? I don’t have anyone particular in mind just a gut feeling. Are virtual assistants/other people doing posts? I have no idea, but wonder. If you are a virtual assistant — I do not mean to offend you. I know that VAs do a super job at what they do.
@ musingsfromme no, I’m not a VA but I wish I had my own. Ha! I was a Nielsen TV viewer way back too…which is partially why I’m so interested in this.
@ Annie – I agree there are many different spheres of influence and some overlap but many don’t. I know Trisha polled her community to come up with her list which does count for something in my book. Her community is very knowledgeable about who influences them and who does not.
Any list that isn’t based on objective numbers or based on a statistically valid survey isn’t going to be anything more than a mini popularity contest. I’m not on Nielsen’s radar screen. I’m also not in MomDot’s sphere of influence (and she’s not in mine). The fact that the way to get added to her list is to get one or two friends to add something in the comments isn’t exactly a sound methodology either.
I think we just have to accept that social media, blogging, twitter, etc. is organic. There are many many spheres of influence and lots of cross pollination between them. There are some people that are pretty damn powerful in my sphere of influence, but that are never going to make a top 100 list (unless I get 2 friends to suggest them in the comments on Trisha’s post). And I think that is fine. They are influencing where they need to be influencing and doing a grand job of it.
I hated high school. I hate “top XYZ” lists that are based on popularity contests.
First of all, thank you! Second of all, I’m willing to bet that even if they did consider me, my “posting frequency” probably didn’t even register on their chart so I would have gotten the axe.
Who makes these rules, huh?
The bottom line for me is that I have never played the game that makes the numbers work for me on paper. I don’t post weekly, er, daily. I don’t do giveaways that drum up lots of comments. I write lengthy essays that are not skimmable and do not generate lots of “ditto, I hate poop, too!” comments.
Now then, does that mean that I’m not influential? Hardly. In fact, it’s worth arguing that something in the metrics must be off if I’m able to not do giveaways, post frequently, or any of the other things that inflate our numbers and yet I’m able to significantly influence. (Or so I’m told and I’m not arguing.)
What about the number that represents time spent on site? That one always makes me wonder. People spend, on average, 3-5 minutes on Velveteen Mind. As compared to less than 30 seconds on the average blog. So my question is, what exactly are these companies valuing?
Look, I’m used to being left off of these kinds of lists. Somewhere, somehow, I don’t fit the mold they create. For instance, I don’t think I would have fit into any of the categories that Nielsen created other than the power players one, and really, come on. I’m not crazy. So that leaves me off and puts others apparently “less” influential on, just because they fit a category.
But I’m not sweating it. If I sweat this stuff, I’d post more than twice a week. Or month. Look at my face: I’m matte and I’m doing just fine.
…but seriously, thank you again! I am easily flattered so this bowled me over, lady.
@ Megan Thanks so much for tweeting the link! I don’t know who makes the rules but what you’re saying is interesting. No, you aren’t a frequent poster. Yes, you blur all the ‘blogging rules’ whatever they may be and I think that’s supported your influence. It’s like noise and influence have an inverse relationship. Just because people are blogging once a day doesn’t mean they always have something to say and when you do step up with something to say people listen. Because we know it’s not just ‘noise’. I look forward to reading your blog when you post and I’m not the only one. Thanks for the thoughtful comment
This was a great post. I adore Megan, people on the list and people left off, ultimately I think lists are subjective and people who take them as law are never going to get it anyway.
I agree most lists are subjective but when it’s coming from an authority on the subject…I expect more data and less opinion thank you very much!
Ouch.
I have to admit, a lot of the comments have made me feel a little sick to my stomach. I had zero to do with that list, I don’t rub elbows with any of the people on the list, and frankly I don’t care about that type of list. At all. I actually laughed when someone told me I was on it because I pay no attention to the “popularity game” whatsoever. I don’t do contests, go to conferences, or pander to anybody. I just write about our lives for my daughter.
I agree that the list is flawed, but I would go so far as to say it’s stupid. Why care who is or is not on it at all? I measure my so-called influence by the incredible acts of the people who sometimes help me make a difference in the world, like the 30+ amazing people who worked with me to raise over $5200 for the March for Dimes the past month. That? Is FAR more important than any list anybody anywhere can put together.
@ Burgh Baby – it’s not so much that I care who is on it – I don’t pay attention to much popularity fluff either. But it’s like a major newspaper reporting “oh, we think Obama won…but we’ll update you later.” Why bother right?
I am SO glad I came across this post. You have stated everything I have felt after seeing that list. Not only was the list presented in a somewhat ridiculous format, I would love to see the actual numbers behind their so called data. I am all for a ranked list of bloggers, as with all media statistics, but I want to see the numbers and methods behind it.
Thanks Brittany! I’m all for a true list as well.
I’d like to acknowledge that a comment was received which bashed another blogger by name. I won’t be publishing it because it’s obviously meant to hurt feelings and start fights. But, if you hear that I wouldn’t let someone speak…this is why.
My other beef with this list is that it is not fair to compare the traffic that the 11 Walmart moms get compared to well the rest of us. When a major store links to posts you wrote, umm yeah you are going to have a ton more traffic than me (and I just came upon that while shopping over the weekend on Walmart’s site).
My other beef is that what are the numbers, and I too agree that I expect more from Nielsen.
I disagree Lisa – many of the 11 Moms are highly influential and it’s not just their traffic which has decided this. That’s kind of a whole other topic though…and I’m not sure I want to go there right now
Yes, Nielsen should have manned up here…interesting to see Jessica seems to have left the conversation?
Fabulous post and great comments. I think they included some great Moms but I do think the mark might have been a bit off.
I’ve really enjoyed reading this.
If they’re going for Power Moms: Not including 5minutesForMom girls, AlliWorthington, Kelby Carr, Megan (Velveteen Mind), Sarcastic Mom just to name a few, is definitely lacking.
Probably could say more but most go interject before the 2 yr old and 5 yr old do permanent damage to themselves
Thanks for you thoughts Rachel. Again, I don’t want to get into too many specifics about who should be there and who shouldn’t. I didn’t write this post to hurt feelings but I agree. When the obvious choices aren’t there it raises a flag.
No, I agree that they are influential and I like them, but if traffic is part of the comparison of making the list or not, it’s not quite fair.
I am just curious what everyone here thinks should be the criteria for being influential. They obviously had their own criteria, which is fine. I, {like many others} wish they would have included more details on what that was, though…
To me, what makes a mom influential does not necessarily coincide with numbers. To me, it is about engagement. If mom bloggers are engaging their readers with their content, they are influential.
I think influence is a hard thing to pinpoint, as it can be so ridiculously broad. I do think numbers play a part, as it defines reach, and reach is an essential part of influence. But I think that you need to be objective about the numbers, and take them for what they are, obvisouly giveaways can skew things a bit.
I think you need to judge it based on a bloggers reach, engagment, and their ability to stand out and be a leader in their niche.
That being said, like I tried to say before, I don’t care that they based their list on numbers or specific stats…BUT…it would be nice to know what those numbers/stats were exactly.
@Brittany – Agree with you on all of your great points!
Excellent post! And I just have to say I am really blown away by how many people have mentioned me. That seriously means a lot to me. That is probably more significant than any mainstream list: to have the endorsement of the mom blogging community.
That said, I think that is a KEY reason this list is flawed. You can’t just go on numbers (and honestly, even if they had just gone on numbers, I know other blogs would have surfaced instead… so clearly someone contemplated and came up with the list to start).
What they SHOULD have done is ask the community who WE would nominate first. Not last. And yes, that would be subjective. But what everyone needs to accept is that there isn’t a yardstick for bloggers, and in particular for mom bloggers. Megan truly said it. There isn’t a magic number that equals an influential, power mom. In some cases, the numbers mean very little. It is an intangible. It is also no longer about which blog gets the most traffic or is the most well-known (sorry, there, Dooce). The days of that mattering are well past. I would call that Mommy Blogging 1.0.
Today, it is about who is connecting, engaging and listening. Who is participating in the conversation, not talking AT readers. That is not something simple to measure.
One blogger might have a small number of readers, but they are fiercely loyal and they comment, retweet and stumble everything she does.
So you start by asking the people who KNOW, the community, ask on Twitter, ask the bloggers. You will notice the same names keep popping up over and over again. Like Alli and Megan and so many other amazing power moms.
That is your core measurement. Then you move on from there, and consider all other numbers secondary. This was their key mistake. They didn’t ASK first. They didn’t get the most important measurement first, the one that asks the community who they consider power moms. If they had, no way some of the moms who were missed would have stayed off that list.
Hi Kelby,
You’re right – there isn’t a yardstick for bloggers and numbers can only allude to so much. To really know what’s going on you need to be a part of the culture. Which is the sad thing. Jessica who wrote the list is on twitter and is a member of the mom bloggers club and all of that and she still came out not knowing what was going on because she didn’t reach out to start relationships. She was there but she wasn’t connecting. Which goes to show – social media isn’t special unless you really try to foster relationships….it’s just voyeurism.
And thank you and Megan for acknowledging that the people who are on that list…they aren’t just numbers but they are bloggers and the intent of my posting this isn’t to belittle them in any way shape or form. But when we are talking about these things we always say ‘well, so and so should have done their research’ and where are they supposed to do their research if a trusted source like Nielsen is falling flat on their collective faces and failing at providing information with substance? This is my main point. Nielsen stepped into the ring and offered this information as fact… But we know it has huge holes and people just need to know what they are reading as they are reading it. Don’t they?
I feel also that I should qualify my above rant a little bit. I do have MANY friends and fave bloggers who are on the list, and I sure hope none of them read this as a criticism of them. Two of my Type-A Mom editors are on the list, and absolutely deserve to be there in my mind. My criticism is less about who IS on the list and more about some of the real heavy influencers they missed.
Okay, I came back. I just want to reiterate what Kelby said and what Jessica Smith recently brought up on twitter– This is not about diminishing those that are on the list. Had Nielsen considered more than stark numbers and taken a hard look at what our community considers engagement and influence, a good number of the same names would have remained on the list. As they should.
The questions arise when we begin to see names that are foreign to us because the voice behind it is amplified through a megaphone from behind a stone wall. Or we know that the numbers lie about real engagement and are rather inflated by transient traffic that stops by for merely a second or two in order to register for a giveaway by filling up the comments. (Not that giveaways are bad, there is a place for them.)
The questions always boils back down to “What do numbers mean to us?” Unfortunately, companies are used to speaking only numbers. So how do we make their metrics more meaningful and valuable? Because companies can’t sit around reading our blogs and stroking our souls to decide who should be on their lists.
Man, this was going to be a short comment.
I find the whole thing very unprofessional and very much like an engineer that sits in his office designing expressways and ramps . Unless you’re out there driving, you have no clue what the necessary components are to a nice, safe trip.
I think I have an influential plan. Give away gift cards like a maniac.
While I would be happy to call any of the women on the list we created “friends”, I am quite sure many of them either don’t know who I am or would disagree profusely with the statement. In fact, some of the women we listed down right cant STAND me, nor I them. But I am honest and this has nothing to do with friendship.
Our list, interestingly, includes very few people that actually hang in my personal social media circle. We used a variety of resources to create a more well rounded list that represents a larger aspect of online, involved influential women and not the least of it was due to people who we are buddies with. I cant even get Meghan Calhoun to return an email to me.
I am pretty sure that heather can attest that if my list was based on friendship, she would be right on it.
Additionally, we did ask for suggestions in the comments because we note that online communities have niche markets that include leaders we may never be exposed to. I am not a frequenter of frugal blogs for example and someone pointed out Tara of Deal Seeking Mom. She is exactly right. Tara is a leader and has a massive audience. We want those suggestions because otherwise the list will continue to be flawed.
Nonetheless, our list was only blogger made. We are not a company and we don’t represent any company other than just our blog and it still had more credibility to it. Nielson made the mistake by not providing or backing up data and on top of it, leaving off some of the largest online leaders made the list look like a complete sham to anyone involved in the mom blog world.
Thankfully posts like Heathers here bring intelligent and thoughtful discussion and Neilson can read the feedback and in the future, provide a better more well rounded list based on actual blogger feedback of what influence means in the blogosphere.
~Trisha
And for the record, I just went and counted, only 7 of the listed 58 people we have up are active members of the Momdot Community.
~Trisha
I agree! Nielsen was way off the mark with that list. It should not have been published as it was if it was not gelled.
Jessica- Why was it in powerpoint? if it wasn’t done, keep it as a blog post with a large disclaimer.
I love that you mentioned Kelby. She is top on my list as a power moms. That Nielsen list was not Mom 2.0. Power moms are so much more than bloggers.
I am going to link this post in the Type-A Mom article I am writing about this topic.
I feel rather new to the community of mom bloggers. What I see, though, is not just an interesting discussion, but the idea of “influential” being explored and refined. I’ve turned to many of the women on the MomDot list when looking for direction in one arena or another. That’s influential.
Maybe I’m off, or maybe it’s just my perspective, but it seems that many of the influential women are marketers themselves or are forerunners in marketing through mom bloggers.
Here’s my issue with this list. It was published by Nielsen who is ‘supposed’ to be an authority on such things as rankings. Then when it comes to light that the person who wrote the post for them didn’t do any research comes to light, they backtrack and say “Well, it’s not a finished list.” What a cop out.
Then, you have the list itself. If the aim was to highlight the mom blogging community, then there are blogs on the list who are not what I would consider to be mom bloggers, but rather celebrity bloggers. Then you have highly influential communities that were left off the community list Like 5m4m. Then you have obscure blogs that none of the bloggers I’ve seen discussing this list have even heard of until now. I still maintain this list was put together from someone’s blog roll and friends list. There was no research done.
Yes, any list like this will be subjective. Why do bloggers care so much? The ones trying to work with companies care because those companies are not insiders to blogging and take these lists at face value. Companies will think bloggers on these lists are somehow more valuable than bloggers not on the list even though we all know that’s not necessarily true. This also holds true for advertising on blogs. Bloggers trying to sell advertising space may get overlooked because they weren’t on the list, even though they’re actually a better fit for a sponsor.
Were there blogs on this list that deserved to be there? Absolutely? Were there blogs left off? You bet. Until some proof is shown to me that there was any sort of fact gathering done before the article was written, then I’m just going to think that some blogger with too much time on their hands got Nielsen’s ear and wrote a shoddy list for them to publish.