Bishop Hill Funding the blog
Jan 28, 2011 Blogs As the blog grows - and we're up 25% in the last two or three months - it is occupying an increasing proportion of my time. With trying to earn a living in a very hard marketplace, supervising small children, as well as writing another book, I am stretched very thin, and I'm in danger of taking my eye off the ball.
The tip box is very helpful and readers have been very generous (thanks everyone!), but I am wondering about possibilities to make the blog pay for itself in a more reliable way.
There's advertising of course, although I like having an ad-free site, and I'm not sure how much it would actually raise.
Another idea I've wondered about is a "subscriber's club", where you make regular payments and in return get the next book serialised ahead of full publication (plus, say, a limited-edition signed hardback when it does finally appear). Maybe also access to bits of information that I don't want to put out as a full blog post for one reason or another.
Lastly I could try standing outside Exxon's offices and wait for the cheque to be dropped into my hand.
Thoughts on any of these would be welcome, particularly the subscriber's club idea. How much, if anything, might people pay?
In the meantime I've put up the tip box again.
Reader Comments (74)
We're we thinking $5 - $10 a month for the subscriber club? Or more?
Ads may be necessary. Hopefully you can find/get some quality ones.
[BH adds: That kind of thing]
You might try Flattr (flattr.com). They are new, but they seem to have been a success for Wikileaks.
Blog or give up blogging
Make yourself an amazon partner and install an amazon ad including an amazon search. People reading your blog could make their purchses they do at amazon anyway now starting with your ad. You'd become a (capped) percentage.
Ads wouldn't put me off Bish. And I suspect most folk recognise that a labour of love has limits, especially in the current economic climate.
And of course, ads seem not to have dented WUWT's inexorable rise. From recent posts, it seems that Anthony is finding things financially challenging too. Maybe a private chat with Anthony about what's best working for him would be worthwhile?
And of course, there's always the 'big picture' option that would see the creation of some form of umbrella site that would take a wide range of guest posts - a sceptical Huffington Post type-site that would still allow the regular creation and distribution of quality posts whilst sharing the burdon of hosting and moderation costs/hassle.
By having a blog you're earning money, only it's deferred until publication of your book, because the blog is marketing for the book. I find ads annoying (as at Watts). A tip jar is less obnoxious (as at SM).
Ultimately, if you want to make money from this, you're doing it for the wrong reasons.
[BH adds: I know what you mean. The financial return from Hockey Stick Illusion has been pretty pathetic considering all the work that went in to it. I'm going to self-publish next time and see if that makes a difference.]
Bought the book and just donated via Tip jar.
Don't mind ads.
I'm a regular although not major contributor to your tip jar (this time too), as I really appreciate the intelligent and relatively neutral presentation of issues under Andrew's stewardship here. In the last week the number of articles and volume of responses appear to have overwhelmed the 'moderator's' time and resources.
Perhaps changing the format into a searchable forum with like-minded but unpaid moderators might also be an idea. Of course the author's forum would be the main one :-) with other forums for sharing and discussing related issues rather than going o/t on main posts, as often happens now.
Advertisements would be fine with me too, just so long as they don't pop-up or pop-under. Pre-selling future books here won't necessarily increase total revenue it will just canibalise future sales. Books are so much more permanent and quotable than transigent 'net articles. Which reminds me our head of accounting policy still has my copy of the HSI!
Ads are fine. And we all understand that once you do that you won't have the control that some assume/expect, so we'll hopefully will not complain.
PaulH from Scotland
"And of course, there's always the 'big picture' option that would see the creation of some form of umbrella site that would take a wide range of guest posts."
That's exactly what's been on my mind for a while. I would love to see a well-designed 'shell' (think: Guardian layout), into which a select number of bloggers can post introductory paragraphs to their articles into the home page.
The bloggers would have an access key to their allotted segment on the home page and could update it with new articles whenever they like (along with whatever supporting images they might choose). A 'segment' might include (for example) a headline piece (paragraph) and two small pieces further down the page (sentences).
The home page would carry ads. Each article's 'read more' link would direct to the full article on a page within the site or (maybe preferably) directly to the bloggers own page (and own comments area).
I believe this could be very successful and, once established, compete with the MSM for visitor numbers. Of course, it would require a manager to spend a couple of hours looking after the day-to-day house-keeping and running of the site... someone with a good eye. I think it could work... and I think it is the way the 'news' web will eventually draw together and develop.
As for the Bishop's site - I think a banner ad running across the very top of the page would not be too intrusive. And perhaps a couple of narrow ads breaking up the left-hand column would work too. Of course it is possible to widen the page to make space for ads to be included without them becoming obstacles to the site content.
I do wonder if your blog has some influence among power brokers who might not want to subscribe or be noticed. It might be viewed as an indicator of public opinion. Having premium content and basic (free) content may be the way to go. It may skew your numbers/funds if it was completely a pay site. There are many examples of sites that offer basic (free) and premium content that seem to work.
It might be worth investigating how much adds would bring in.. I imagine it could be very little, and inevitably google ads would lead to climate change adds being shown at Bishop Hill!!
A subsctition would be a good idea to say a monthly newsletter or something similar.
May persuade the Guardian, to pay you for some articles or an alernative view blog ? ! !
Seriuols, The Daily Mail might be interested (Sci/tech) or even the Telegarph..
Long shots probably.
I hope the blog would say the same, with a monthly or twice monthly more in depth newsletter by subscription..
I'm sure in the early stages, there would be many guest authors volunteering in depth articles for free. Take a sample of the blog role, mosts want to be read by as wide an audience as possible, and this would benefit those blogs.
Lots of possibilities, but ads might bring in peanuts...
I'm still waiting for my Exxon cheque.
I'm in two minds whether to propose to my local university that they need a sceptical person out reach co-ordinator - or in house devils advocate on all things (man made) climate change ;)
It might be an idea to build up a pool of regular contributors, to ease the pressure of frequent posts..
Something Watts Up does well..
Ie Willis is great.
Just made a donation in the tip jar.
I urge you to add advertising space, as well.
If you do start a subscriber's club, you can likely count me in as well.
I would second the idea of getting guest contributors. That is a very good tactic,if executed well.
In general, I think the example of WUWT is a good one for how to survive and thrive in the blogosphere.
"The tip box is very helpful and readers have been very generous (thanks everyone!), but I am wondering about possibilities to make the blog pay for itself in a more reliable way."
The experience of various bloggers, webcomic authors, and so on, seems to be that the tip jar income represents something close to the maximum you can get out of your readers for the basic content. You can make more money by offering other services - for example the webcomics may offer posters or t-shirts with the cartoons on - but you can put a lot of effort into trying to charge for the basic attraction and end up with no more money and fewer readers.
One thing that's definitely worth a try is to put a statement like the following at the top of every page:
"This site is not free. Payment is via an honour system, using the tip jar. Please pay what you find the site is worth to you in relation to what you can afford.'
Might be worth talking to others in similar situations. http://www.babybarista.com/ has a very similar set-up to you (although very different content!) and seems to get the balance right; maybe contact the author and have a word?
Bish (if I may be so familiar),
I've just tried to donate a small amount but the transaction went pear shaped.
Is it possible for you to check. If it went through, fine. Don't bother to reply. If it didn't please let me know and I'll try again.
Regards,
Ed.
Also it's just occurred to me that the tip jar is almost invisible. I mean you'd have to actively be looking for it to notice it on this blog. SM's is top, left - with a splash of colour that makes it stand out. Perhaps reorganising the page to give it a little more emphasis would help.
Step 1. Trademark the word 'denier'.
Step 2.
Step 3. Profit.
Making a living out of a blog, or even a decent part of a living, is going to be difficult, even with the tip jar and ads. The suggestions about trying to earn something from the MSM are good - we'd all love to see a documentary on the climate debate edited by you rather than the nitwits at the RS. Surely some production company somewhere would be interested? The time is probably ripe for this, with the increasing disconnect between the public view and the parliamentary/MSM positions.
There's also the possibility of lessening your time managing the blog, without lessening the important bits - your posts. Anthony has volunteer moderators as does Jo Nova, I'd be surprised if you couldn't get a team of people you trust to do that for you.
It's unfortunate that being an independent scholar in any field is almost never a route to riches, no matter how good you are!
Ads I say. Needn't rule out tips of course.
(And when rejigging the site....
a v small further issue : the links/chevrons at the top for Next/Previous post.
General convention is : Next points to the right, Previous points to the left.
But here it's the other way round ).
[BH adds: Oh I know, I know. People keep telling me. One day I'll get round to it.]
In fact moderation is not a big problem, apart from when there is a chance for people to sound off at someone on the other side of the argument, like earlier this week. I've not had to do anything today at all.
Your blog has a very high standing and a certain style.
It is growing - rapidly.
I would suggest you talk to Dizzy - who seems to have trodden a similar path in terms of his presence in another sphere of debate. He seems to be getting enough money to compensate for his time.
One suggestion from me:
I greatly value the tone you set - and the way that discussion progresses. I think you set yourself too high a standard in terms of the immediacy of your response and the breadth you cover. If you can't "monetise" your traffic then you should restrict you focus and hence your time to what you can afford to give.
A well defined presence which we all know to turn to on certain topics (Investigations of Climate-gate for example) at certain times is far better than a blog that tries to do everything - and inevitably the owner burns out.
All your readers purge their reading list every so often & prioritise the importance they give to each blog. "BishopHill" has slowly but surely crept to joint second place in my AGW list
Best of luck..
'Also it's just occurred to me that the tip jar is almost invisible. I mean you'd have to actively be looking for it to notice it on this blog. SM's is top, left - with a splash of colour that makes it stand out. Perhaps reorganising the page to give it a little more emphasis would help'
Was just thinking that earlier and totally agree. For my sins I used to work in online advertising, and KNOW that a smart change here could make a significant difference Bish.
Not that you're asking for it, and I may be howled down for it, but I'd recommend a combination of words/graphic (do you have any thoughts Josh?) that fits with your 'dissentient brand' that gets folk gladly dipping into their pocket. I recall that Jo Nova used to ask for donations for chocolate as an example.
I would be happy to pay a subscription - it is a real shame that all of the hard work and dedication that you put into this quality blog is not well rewarded .............................. you are a star!
Punksta - This is a counter cultural blog, no slavish following of the accepted wisdom here! :)
Ideally one would have an ad free environment, but given the reality of things I'd be happy with ads and I'm sure the Bishop would ensure they were tastefully done, and not too intrusive. The umbrella site suggestion is interesting, though to be honest I like each of the various sites rather because of their different styles and approach. A central portal with headlines and links to blogs perhaps? (Cool Central?) Not sure what the funding model of something like that would be.
Are there any relevant businesses that would like to sponsor the site? Weather instrument suppliers?
That can be much more subtle than pure google type ads, and I'm sure there must be relevant business that would want to ake advantage of your visiting demographic.
Peter S at 12.59 . His ideas appeal to me.
Ads not a problem. Casual users need to be welcomed (subscription membership tends to put me off, though there may be a limited place for it in the way you suggest.)
Great job. Thank you.
Anthony
YEs, this is something I've thought about before. It may happen, but would need a lot of effort to get the site set up.
All
I've sounded out somebody on ads. Not a lot of money in it, I have to say!
"...I'm going to self-publish next time and see if that makes a difference."
Try this: http://www.smashwords.com/about/how_to_publish_on_smashwords
... You mean, you are not funded by Big Oil?! ...
Just asked my chief accountant to transfer some petrodollars
You should consult a good solicitor with regard to liable law and such. By taking on a payment or even adverts, you are converting a public form into a business. There are many complexities caused by that. I do not know what they are in the UK, but I am sure they are there.
You really, really want to talk this over with a solicitor before you do anything. Once you understand the pros and cons, then make your decisions.
Adverts are probably the best course, but you should be due some of that grant money being pushed to Real Climate! Or serialise through a mobile app for the smartphone market.
I like the idea of a subscription of some kind, but I think there may be no need to offer any goodies in return. I'd see it more as a 'Friends of the Bishop Hill blog' kind of thing, whereby enthusiastic visitors can chip in with something towards keeping it all going.
I also like the idea that we 'sceptics' can fund our own media initiatives, and not rely on PR agencies, nor on taxpayers' money, nor on wealthy financiers with an eye on the main chance. We still have the freedom to blog, and the freedom to choose whom we support with what's left of our own money after taxation.
Talking of taxes, the TV licence fee (possibly peculiar to the UK?) is a de facto tax each year on ownership of equipment capable of receiving the programmes. The tax is used to support a bloated corporation which is hellbent on directing public opinion in directions of its own choosing, not least with regard to the opportunities it has spotted in the politicisation centred around CO2. I refer of course to the BBC. I pay it £145.90 every year for having a tv which I am coming to switch on less and less as the years go by. I see the BBC actively doing harm with regard to climate issues, and the Bishop actively doing good.
A subscription of £12 per month would match the colour tv rate, and £4 per month the black and white. I like the idea of pay something in that range, keeping pace with the fee every year.
A more prominent tip jar, along the lines suggested by Paul H from Scotland at 2.25, seems to be the simplest expedient. If doesn't work well enough, advertising or subscription could then be considered.
A further thought. Any subscription/donation should be retrospective, i.e. in appreciation of past works, not a contribution towards current or future ones. That way you are free to choose how to spend your time, including dropping the blog, or sidelining it, or making it even bigger and better.
Publish some real science and I will donate money.
Failing this, you could always go to Nigel Lawson, or Pat Michaels. Both are loaded.
This isn't necessarily a bad thing. It's money taken out of the AGW ad fund account and put into BH fund account.
bluecloud, you are aware that your thoughtful contributions just encourage us, aren't you..
so blatnat, one might think that you are an agent provocateur for Exxon...
or maybe someone else..
last I heard EXXON direct funds towards Bob Wards - Science and Media Centre.
Amazon affiliation and Google ads are the way to go.
Second Amazon afiliation - especially if it's with amazon.co.uk. There aren't a lot of Blogs who offer that and being UK based I don't use US bloggers Amazon links.
It's doesn't cost me anything and brings a bit to you; win-win, although I don't know what the total you'd get would be.
One thing I forgot to mention previously is an interesting model that's been proposed, although I'm not sure it's ever been used.
A content creator - e.g. blog author, musician, novelist - creates whatever it is that he/she offers, posts a trailer (in this case, maybe a headline and introductory sentence), sets (and makes public) a total value that they wish to receive for the piece in question, and 'empties' the tip jar. When the tip jar reaches the value requested for the piece, it is released in full, free to everyone.
Bluecloud
You ask for some real science.
I am becoming ever-more convinced that when it comes to climatology (where meteorology meets atmospheric physics, if you like), you know next to nothing.
When we last engaged (weakly) I asked you some questions about the representation of sub-gridcell processes in GCMs, specifically about moist convective transport.
Your response, such as it was, was inadequate and confusing.
Shall we carry on? Unthreaded is fine by me.
"Publish some science"
The problem, Bluecloud, is that 99+% of the money in climate science is government money, and governments have a vested interest in CAGW being believed. So the chances of getting much funding for studies not precommitted to alarmism are slim indeed.
Opinions vary on ads. I hate them, the way they clutter and slow down the blog, and I have abandoned some ad-filled blogs. The ad-free-ness is one of the attractions of this one. If you must use ads, google ads are probably the least bad.
Without prying into your personal finances, I'm puzzled why HSI is not making a significant contribution.
If the blog is taking too much time, could you just reduce the number of posts per day?
Anyway, I look forward to the next book - what's it about?
Looks like I'm a tiny minority. I hate ads, and would rather not see them. But if the choice is between Bishop Hill with ads and no Bishop Hill then I'd put up with ads. The type on WUWT are terrible though because some are self-generated from key words in the posts, so there are lots of Pro-AGW ones, carbon trading etc. Also the Church of Scientology pops up quite frequently, again related to something in the post. If you must have ads, please ensure a tight control over the content of the ads.
Bish
Anyone who's tried to raise money for political causes (however worthy) will confirm that it's bloody hard work to get more than a few shekels, and I suspect this will also apply to the "subscription" route - look how Murdoch's flopped with his paysites
Even established political parties struggle to raise much from "civilians" and have to rely on big money or union "sugardaddies".
IMHO the way to go is advertising and expanding the site into more general politics - possibly with guest authors etc, as some have already suggested. You could also syndicate your own stuff more to other outlets.
You have a quite exceptional talent for expressing political ideas in an entertaining and convincing way (as Matt Ridley observed in his review of the book) and I think you could turn this into something quite big in internet political journalism - with a moderate libertarian touch.
Who knows - you might not need the day job eventually.
I think pretty well everyone here knows by now that you're a paid Greenpeace activists making a rather pathetic attempt at trolling here.
They also understand that you work for a multinational corporation with an income stream of several hundred million dollars, whose main business is to direct sabotage, threats and extortion at legal enterprises while refusing to reveal its own funding sources.
A few chinks in the curtain have however revealed major donations from the likes of George Soros and Ted Turner - both of whom are infinitely richer (and nastier IMHO) than Lawson or Michaels.
I'm amazed no one has suggested this yet: Sell indulgences.
I would be happy (privileged) to subscribe in order to support this (in my opinion) very precious blog. Unfortunately, i am not able to contribute to the debate because i do not possess the the technical knowledge but i recognize common sense when i read it. Hopefully there is a large contingent of readers like myself who want to do something but have limited options. For me, it would go some way to mitigate my anger and frustration with the current political agenda driven distortion of the science.
Maybe you could put up a list of options so that readers could indicate their particular preferences in order that you could more accurately decide which way to jump.
If we cannot afford to loose or dilute the content found here( and i believe that we cannot) then we must be prepared to support you.
Again, why does anyone obsess with these few tiddlers when there are perhaps hundreds of of Great White sharks in the tank - in the form of government-funded science departments at universities, with staff hand-picked to serve their paymaster's interests, which in this case means convincing us of CAGW, since that is where the vested interest of government lies.
I think if you combine Kevin at 4.02 and Scientistfortruth you get a good argument in favour of taking ads. I am not keen on "private subscription" models as although they may work for you (a friend of mine runs a very lucrative investment newsletter) they take away the open, liberal ethos of the site.
Since I am asking you to forgo revenue to satisfy my ideological wishes, the least I can do is to pop some dosh in the tip jar.