I know what you mean. I agree with you. Also there are a lot of people begging so that you vote them....not nice. They should do it like Pixiwoo that suggested we all vote but not necessarily for them. I guess maybe Cosmo will get a print of every IP address with every vote? And then in that way they will realise that the same IP address is voting for the same blog all the time every day..so it must be the blog holder? That would make sense but not sure how Cosmo is regulating the whole thing. It would be very interesting to know!! XXX
Having just looked at a couple of tweets and articles from Cosmo, I'm feeling that the competition is being biased a little bit. "Celebrating" a competition by highlighting some of the entries seems a little off - it's a little bit more like influencing votes, and is unfair to the blogs who aren't being "celebrated" via articles.
The beauty website naming their "favourite" products and linking back to their own site is very unsavoury - most e-tailer blogs are simply marketing devices and shouldn't be given the opportunity to essentially get free advertising in return for dubious content.
Thanks for informing us about this. I asked my followers to vote for me. I had no idea of the flaws in this competition. I suppose it's all about money at the end of the day. Cosmo aren't doing it for nothing. I congratulate whoever wins an award but feel much less excited about this comp now. xxx
Although i think it's great that we, the blogging community are being recognised. However, on the flipside, i think due to the recent competitiveness issues, i think i can safely say that this is just adding to the problem. Clearly Cosmo, who i must admit on paper its a great idea, but in reality they need to tighten up their t&c. Maybe they should have shortlisted 10 blogs that are already quite established and let us vote -hmmm?
Sarah x
p.s and im not going to lie, i feel slightly let down by some of my fav bloggers who have asked their readers to vote, so i'm relieved at least one of my must read bloggers is down to earth and couldnt give a toss quite frankly!
I saw the Cosmo tweets the other day about a particular highlighted blog and I thought it was a little odd. I was really stoked about these awards and thought it was a fabulous idea for a blogger to get actual recognition from their readers, which is why I initially posted about it. I never for one second ever thought that I'd win, or even come close! I think it's really unfair to highlight specific blogs over others, just because they have a larger number of readers than smaller blogs does that make them more worthy of an award? The featured top tens are dubious to say the least.
I'd like to know how the competition is being moderated. Would be nice to not only see the sites that got the highest number of votes but also the blogs that got nice comments. Maybe that last bit is just me being nosey!
I gladly voted for a few bloggers that I really like, but I do find there's something wrong about this award. It's a popularity contest, where most read bloggers will get the most vote. It could have been nice if Cosmo had given awards based on a few pre-determined criteria being evaluated by a jury. Would have been a nice occasion to see less known blogs in the spotlight. Oh well, we need to take those things with a grain of salt, I guess.
I don't think they've thought it properly to be honest. Last time I checked, there wasn't even a closing date for when nominations had to be in.
Nothing wrong with bloggers asking their readers to vote for them, it's called creating awareness, however leaving the gates open for the same vote to be cast 20+ times is a tad farcical.
Whatever. Initially I was excited for them but I've since lost enthusiasm, since spotting the 101 cracks in the voting plus the biased tweets.
I think your criticism is very fair and clear and although I have not looked at that competition for one second, what you are writing sounds right.
What you are describing looks like a big company (and their friends) "using the social media to make money". What many of them don't get is, if you want to use the social media professionally, you have to play by the same rules as anybody else, or you'll lose your credibility really fast.
Seems to me that you have a pretty good moral compass as to what to do and what not to do as a blogger (also from previous postings on your blog).
I have to say I haven't been following this competition too closely and haven't voted for any of my favorite blogs which have been nominated just because I dislike those popularity contests. They make me feel like I have to choose between friends - and if I don't have to choose because I can vote multiple times, then it really does get quite unfair. I was just talking about it with my husband yesterday night and he said (he's a software engineer) that he could easily write a program which would cast votes every second for a selected blogger. What's the point in organizing a competition if there are no rules?
Thanks for bringing this issue to our attention. xxx
I particularly take issue with the highlighting of blogs... how can that possibly be fair in any shape nor form? Its simply not. I don't wish to make any bloggers featured feel bad, good for them! But boo to Cosmo. Boo boo boo.
There are points within your posting that make sense and I agree with. Others I think are off the mark.
To me it makes complete sense to highlight the achievements of some of the blogs. Case studies give readers that are not familiar with the blogs an idea of their content and tonality. The aim is to get readers excited and engaged. I also worry of your opinion of Cosmo readers – that they are sheep and will only nominate blogs that the publication highlights. There are thousands of amazing blogs out there that readers will feel passionately about.
At this stage Cosmo are requesting nominations – not votes – which they will narrow down to a shortlist at the start of August. They are asking readers to nominate a blog and explain why they are nominating them. I don’t know about you but this makes me think that they will base a shortlist on more than the number of votes – one of your concerns. I’m sure when they post the shortlist they will list the full terms and conditions but I agree they could have posted this earlier to avoid any confusion.
As you are unsure about using purchase links, the purpose of them is two-fold 1) drives traffic for Cosmo and the sites it links to 2) provides a quick and easy route for readers to make purchases. I’ve noticed you don’t have purchase links on your blog which is your choice but many successful blogs do and agree it makes business sense. Cosmo could have avoided asking you to provide purchase links and instead added links themselves. At least this way you, the blogger can choose which e-commerce sites to support, which ultimately benefits your relationship with these sites.
Lastly, as for bloggers begging you to vote for them, you can hardly blame Cosmo for this. It’s up to the individual blogger how they promote this to their readers. If any leave you with a bad taste in your mouth, this should influence your opinion of the blog, not Cosmo.
Thanks for your post, I thought it was just me who saw the flaws in this competition.
It really is just a popularity contest and I'm not sure that Cosmo really are an authority on blogs. Why else would they get readers to do all the leg work and find their shortlists for them?
Putting the Cosmo badge on my blog is just free advertising for them and I doubt I'll get very much in return, as I haven't been shamelessly voting for myself.
It's just another case of magazines not understanding social media and thinking that bloggers will jump through hoops for the association. Not impressed!
17 comments:
Hear hear!! I agree, it should be a fair competition and should be about the people's opinion of blog content, not what could influence their opinion.
I know what you mean. I agree with you. Also there are a lot of people begging so that you vote them....not nice. They should do it like Pixiwoo that suggested we all vote but not necessarily for them.
I guess maybe Cosmo will get a print of every IP address with every vote? And then in that way they will realise that the same IP address is voting for the same blog all the time every day..so it must be the blog holder? That would make sense but not sure how Cosmo is regulating the whole thing. It would be very interesting to know!!
XXX
http://mspurplemakeup.blogspot.com/
Having just looked at a couple of tweets and articles from Cosmo, I'm feeling that the competition is being biased a little bit. "Celebrating" a competition by highlighting some of the entries seems a little off - it's a little bit more like influencing votes, and is unfair to the blogs who aren't being "celebrated" via articles.
The beauty website naming their "favourite" products and linking back to their own site is very unsavoury - most e-tailer blogs are simply marketing devices and shouldn't be given the opportunity to essentially get free advertising in return for dubious content.
brilliant post -
i had thought 'what stops people voting for themself all day ' too
Thanks for informing us about this. I asked my followers to vote for me. I had no idea of the flaws in this competition. I suppose it's all about money at the end of the day. Cosmo aren't doing it for nothing. I congratulate whoever wins an award but feel much less excited about this comp now. xxx
Very interesting post BBB.
Although i think it's great that we, the blogging community are being recognised. However, on the flipside, i think due to the recent competitiveness issues, i think i can safely say that this is just adding to the problem. Clearly Cosmo, who i must admit on paper its a great idea, but in reality they need to tighten up their t&c. Maybe they should have shortlisted 10 blogs that are already quite established and let us vote -hmmm?
Sarah x
p.s and im not going to lie, i feel slightly let down by some of my fav bloggers who have asked their readers to vote, so i'm relieved at least one of my must read bloggers is down to earth and couldnt give a toss quite frankly!
sorry for the rant!
I saw the Cosmo tweets the other day about a particular highlighted blog and I thought it was a little odd. I was really stoked about these awards and thought it was a fabulous idea for a blogger to get actual recognition from their readers, which is why I initially posted about it. I never for one second ever thought that I'd win, or even come close! I think it's really unfair to highlight specific blogs over others, just because they have a larger number of readers than smaller blogs does that make them more worthy of an award? The featured top tens are dubious to say the least.
I'd like to know how the competition is being moderated. Would be nice to not only see the sites that got the highest number of votes but also the blogs that got nice comments. Maybe that last bit is just me being nosey!
Kelly x
I gladly voted for a few bloggers that I really like, but I do find there's something wrong about this award. It's a popularity contest, where most read bloggers will get the most vote. It could have been nice if Cosmo had given awards based on a few pre-determined criteria being evaluated by a jury. Would have been a nice occasion to see less known blogs in the spotlight.
Oh well, we need to take those things with a grain of salt, I guess.
I don't think they've thought it properly to be honest. Last time I checked, there wasn't even a closing date for when nominations had to be in.
Nothing wrong with bloggers asking their readers to vote for them, it's called creating awareness, however leaving the gates open for the same vote to be cast 20+ times is a tad farcical.
Whatever. Initially I was excited for them but I've since lost enthusiasm, since spotting the 101 cracks in the voting plus the biased tweets.
*Flips on Jay-Z's 'On to the next one'*
I applaud your honesty and integrity. Most people would submit AND vote for themselves all day long for the recognition.
I think your criticism is very fair and clear and although I have not looked at that competition for one second, what you are writing sounds right.
What you are describing looks like a big company (and their friends) "using the social media to make money". What many of them don't get is, if you want to use the social media professionally, you have to play by the same rules as anybody else, or you'll lose your credibility really fast.
Seems to me that you have a pretty good moral compass as to what to do and what not to do as a blogger (also from previous postings on your blog).
Co-signed.
I have to say I haven't been following this competition too closely and haven't voted for any of my favorite blogs which have been nominated just because I dislike those popularity contests. They make me feel like I have to choose between friends - and if I don't have to choose because I can vote multiple times, then it really does get quite unfair. I was just talking about it with my husband yesterday night and he said (he's a software engineer) that he could easily write a program which would cast votes every second for a selected blogger. What's the point in organizing a competition if there are no rules?
Thanks for bringing this issue to our attention. xxx
I particularly take issue with the highlighting of blogs... how can that possibly be fair in any shape nor form? Its simply not. I don't wish to make any bloggers featured feel bad, good for them! But boo to Cosmo. Boo boo boo.
There are points within your posting that make sense and I agree with. Others I think are off the mark.
To me it makes complete sense to highlight the achievements of some of the blogs. Case studies give readers that are not familiar with the blogs an idea of their content and tonality. The aim is to get readers excited and engaged. I also worry of your opinion of Cosmo readers – that they are sheep and will only nominate blogs that the publication highlights. There are thousands of amazing blogs out there that readers will feel passionately about.
At this stage Cosmo are requesting nominations – not votes – which they will narrow down to a shortlist at the start of August. They are asking readers to nominate a blog and explain why they are nominating them. I don’t know about you but this makes me think that they will base a shortlist on more than the number of votes – one of your concerns. I’m sure when they post the shortlist they will list the full terms and conditions but I agree they could have posted this earlier to avoid any confusion.
As you are unsure about using purchase links, the purpose of them is two-fold 1) drives traffic for Cosmo and the sites it links to 2) provides a quick and easy route for readers to make purchases. I’ve noticed you don’t have purchase links on your blog which is your choice but many successful blogs do and agree it makes business sense. Cosmo could have avoided asking you to provide purchase links and instead added links themselves. At least this way you, the blogger can choose which e-commerce sites to support, which ultimately benefits your relationship with these sites.
Lastly, as for bloggers begging you to vote for them, you can hardly blame Cosmo for this. It’s up to the individual blogger how they promote this to their readers. If any leave you with a bad taste in your mouth, this should influence your opinion of the blog, not Cosmo.
Thanks for your post, I thought it was just me who saw the flaws in this competition.
It really is just a popularity contest and I'm not sure that Cosmo really are an authority on blogs. Why else would they get readers to do all the leg work and find their shortlists for them?
Putting the Cosmo badge on my blog is just free advertising for them and I doubt I'll get very much in return, as I haven't been shamelessly voting for myself.
It's just another case of magazines not understanding social media and thinking that bloggers will jump through hoops for the association. Not impressed!
Lets not be making a big deal out of nothing..
Of course its a popularity contest.
If your blog has lots of readers chances are its good..
I don't come back to Blogs that are bat-shit boring..
It's getting you guys recognition.. It doesn't have to be so political..
Post a Comment