Scratching names off the dance card
Every time I run into someone I want to do a chat with, and get an 'OK', I create a folder, with a series of folders within them, to hold various files and links and such that I'm going to need. They then go into a queue based on first-come-first-serve, how much research I'll have to do, and how often they compliment me.
The above screenshot is how disgustingly backed up on the chats I am at the moment, and to make it worse it doesn't cover the other types of things I'm working on, like roundtables or interviews with more than one person -- those are in their own folder.
I'm thinking about heavily reworking how I approach the chats, and just how much research I put into them, because when someone pulls out when they see some of what I'm asking -- which just happened again -- it's just a massive amount of lost time. That's four times now, or over 80 hours of sunk effort between them, and I'm really not sure how to handle it for the way I do things.
In a normal interview, done over the phone or in person, if you ask a hard question and the person is obviously evasive, that comes across as its own sort of answer and you can move on. When it's electronic...
I pretty much try to bend around whatever issues someone might have with a specific question, but I'm not really interested in having the interviews be another form of press release or a group hug. Which isn't to say they're not about exposure, of course they are, and I'm all for that. I also try to be careful that I'm not out to 'get' them or set them up either -- I don't think you'd really get that sense if you go through them -- but if there was something I'd want to know about a company or project before laying down cash I'd want it asked in an interview.
To give you an idea, if I was interviewing Maui-X about CherryOS, and they got the questions but said they wouldn't answer on whether or not they'd 'perhaps inappropriately lifted' code from OSS projects, I'd drop the chat and move on. Perhaps a bad example, because at this point they are on the shit list, but you get the idea. Things I'd want to know if someone else did the interview.
Yeah, it would get page hits if I ran without it, but I wouldn't really be interested because I'm not really doing this for the cash. It's not like I'm doing it for the name recognition for my work, I certainly hope drunkenbatman won't be on my tombstone.
I know, saying you're not in it for the dough is easy to say. To give you an example, I made about $18 off the ads for the over 150k page views in the last few days, so I'm really not doing this for the cash. Hell, for the Collateral Damage post, I had the ads and the donate link turned off just because that's what felt right. I'm not whining about it, there are actually upsides to it.
I'll save the why I do some of what I do for another time, but suffice to say one of the upsides of putting my own paycheck into this (instead of the other way around) is that I can walk away from something even though it would generate hits, and I can spend effort on things others wouldn't.
It's just a tradeoff; I'm heavily constrained for time and can't do all I'd like to do, but I can spend that time on the Growl's and PearPC's of the community as well as the Ranchero's, or that I can try something different with the Ranchero interview and not worry about hitting a word count, breaking it up over several pages for extra advertising impressions, etc.
Still, this scratching names off the dance card bit really starting to get up my craw, and I'm going to have to figure something out if I'm going to pour this much time into them. When you get burned, especially several times, it makes you much less enthusiastic about devoting a big chunk of time and effort on the next one...
Posted by drunkenbatmanMarch 14, 2005, at 10:05 AM
Comments (8)
Posted by: anonymous coward at March 14, 2005 06:22 PM
you could probably quadruple your earnings from the advertising if you made them more prominent. as it is, you barely know they are there
Posted by: seiko at March 14, 2005 06:35 PM
Honestly I am thinking OSNews is receiving kickbacks or advertising revenue from them, because they are one of the only sites that won't carry information on what a fraud it is and only has short links about it being available
Posted by: Sam MacCutchan at March 14, 2005 06:40 PM
Do you send links from previous chats to the interviewees? It might help in retaining them. That way they can see that you are a serious, down-to-earth interviewer.
If they are answering the questions truthfully it can't do them any harm. I mean you must pick up a few more readers every time your site hits Slashdot. All the geeks I know appreciate straight answers over market speak. For any of the entrepreneurs you interview it's a good thing.
I am pretty sure that I became a loyal drunkenreader after seeing a link from Slashdot. Although I've been reading for a few months now and it's hard to remember just how I ended up here.
-Sam
Posted by: Ac0rn at March 15, 2005 02:35 AM
Been a 'drunker' for almost 4 months now, and it has been fascinating to watch the blog change just in the span. Going through the archives is even more fun.
I think the problem is that you are just hitting growing pains because of your reach. Companies are interested in giving you interviews because of the exposure, but do not want the downsides associated with it.
You are sure to find some middle ground. If it fails, OSS projects always need exposure. :-)
Posted by: ledge at March 15, 2005 11:44 AM
DB, you do it because you enjoy doing it and it feels like the "right" thing to do. Do you really have to explain yourself any further? People who are fans of your site and your writing get it, I think, and if people don't, no amount of explaining is going to make them get it.
We got yer back, LT. :)
Posted by: fezald at March 15, 2005 08:12 PM
Hell, for the Collateral Damage post, I had the ads and the donate link turned off just because that's what felt right. I'm not whining about it, there are actually upsides to it.
Can anyone verify that this is true? Not calling you a liar drunken, but I don't know that I could resist temptation and turn off ways of making money when a slashdot was coming. :-)
Posted by: justin heckmen at March 15, 2005 10:59 PM
Drunken, your false modesty always makes me laugh. At least you stopped with the 13 reader thing. I guess it is better than tooting your own horn like the man from macslash is starting to do now.
You know you are the coolest fucker with a blog right now, and doing your own unique thing. I've been following with my mouth open sometimes when I've seen what you have been able to do. So it is not surprising some will try to copy.
Just keep doing what you do and fuck the rest man.
Just wanted to applaud you for your journalistic integrity, dedication to asking the "hard questions", and awesome writing skillz. You da man.
That really sucks about losing time on people who flake out on the chats though. What about some sort of contract system? People fax or mail a signed document agreeing to do the chat. Not that you'd take them to court if they didn't but just perhaps so they can better understand that what you're doing is serious and they are making a commitment to you. I don't know, just a thought.