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.

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.

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.

~Trisha

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

I think I have an influential plan. Give away gift cards like a maniac.

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?

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.