Monday, March 15, 2010

Yet Another Rant on the New York Times Mommy Blogger Thing

First I wasn't going to blog about this because I realize that the last two posts I've written have been about a similar topic. Then I remembered why I blog: because I want to, and why I don't blog for money: so I don't have to answer to anyone else about what I want to write about. Which means that if I want to write three posts in a row about the same topic I can.

Anyway, lots of dust swirling in the blogosphere over the last few days about the topic of blogging for pay--in particular, mom bloggers blogging for pay. Yesterday there was an article in the New York Times called Honey, Don't Bother Mommy. I'm Too Busy Building My Brand. Youch. Lots of responses to it followed, including my favorite kick-ass one, calling the author out for marginalizing women writers.

Then today another post in response to the Times article, this time even more condescending and marginalizing than the NYT piece. I mean, on one hand, I get his attitude towards bloggers who are all about the money, but come on--it's not like this is the first time anyone has reported that there are people out there who blog for money. Is it really that shocking that his pitch to a blogger was met with a rate quote? Seriously, it's not like it's news to anyone that there are plenty of people who blog for one reason: money. And there are plenty of companies out there who are willing to pay bloggers. So to go on a condescending rant spelling out how the "real" world works--as opposed to mommy world--was a little much for me.

Just as Jason Falls pointed out...

Sadly, there are thousands of bloggers (and social news site vote-getters) out there just like her who think (or are being taught by conferences like Bloggy Bootcamp) that being a successful blogger makes them qualified to consult with companies on marketing.

...there are probably equally many PR or marketing people out there who know nothing about social media but think that being PR or marketing people makes them qualified to consult with companies on social media. If we're going to sit around and point fingers about who's "qualified" to provide what services in this world, let's not do it based primarily on gender. Sure, he throws out there that he's not just talking about mom bloggers...but he mostly is.

As for who's to "blame" here for the whole money/blogging thing, should we be blaming bloggers--particularly mommy bloggers--for being greedy and clueless when brands are the ones targeting them because of their social influence? How about agencies dedicated to connecting brands and mom bloggers? You really can't say mom bloggers are clueless and greedy because they're only responding to what they're being told: that brands need them.

The fact remains that when a man states his time is worth $22k a day, it's called knowing his value and being confident. When a woman states that she isn't interested in doing work for free, she's laughable and pathetic and needs schooling on how the business world works.


Sorry but I just discovered a few more blog posts about this that are so good I had to come back and add them:

No comments: