When I started this blog I did not have a target in mind in terms of readership. My immediate goal was, given the way Patrick Naef announced my departure (and, I am told, subsequently refused to discuss the reasons on the grounds that “it was confidential” thus further fuelling speculation), to dispel any rumours that I had been involved in some sort of fraudulent activity. It is sad that no-one in the company saw fit to clarify the situation - this could have been done so easily - but, of course, such rumours (temporarily) helped paper over the cracks of a pretty distasteful episode. Though I had no firm target, I guess I would have been content with a couple of hundred readers of my initial blog (which was published on 31 January 2011). With 200 people across the company knowing the truth, word of mouth would have done the rest and the cracks would be visible enough for all to see.
As I revealed more information about events, it was probably natural that I would retain a core audience but I would have assumed that, after six months or so, most people would have forgotten about me. So, by mid-year had I seen a couple of dozen readers of each update I would have been more than content.
I have done nothing in terms of SEO. In fact it has been more a case of SEDO - Search Engine De-Optimisation. Initially, I only want readers from the company (and those closely associated with it) so that I can monitor relevant readership. I do not want people stumbling across the site, I want to limit it to a captive audience at the moment. This is the reason why, thus far, I have avoided using the company name and why the blog has such a bland url. Looking at the search terms that lead to my site, it is clear that the approach has been successful. I can count on one hand the number of obvious mis-directs - the overwhelming majority of search terms are very specifically targeted towards the topics and relevant individuals.
The SEDO approach will not always be the right one. For now, I want to provide more updates on the actions by specific individuals and also complete the full picture. The latter will provide more focus on the company’s role in all this. Of course, what happened to me was the direct result of Patrick Naef’s desire to get rid of me and the overwhelming support that he received from his management and HR. But, at the end of the day, it was the company that terminated my contract based on an outright lie and it needs to be accountable for that. Just as individuals should not hide behind a company, a company has no right to hide behind its individuals. So, at some stage in the future, I will be more than happy to see my readership widen. I think that everyone should have the ability to understand how large and high profile companies (particularly those who vigorously promote their qualities) behave.
So, back to the numbers, the response has been way beyond what I could have imagined. An initial 200 hits were reached in just a few hours, with over 700 in one day. After the initial interest (3,660 in February and 2,009 in March) the figures have been reasonably constant at around 1,200 per month. August was the lowest with just 725, but October was the third highest at 1,448. Daily hit rates vary quite a bit, but 40 is a typical figure, with the lowest at 8.
So, as you can see, any expectations of ‘a couple of dozen’ per update have been vastly exceeded. If I look at the last update as an example, 24 hits were seen within just two hours of it being published. Within 24 hours the figure had reached 98 and it took just over four days to reach 300.
All this is despite the fact that the site has been blocked from the corporate network of its target audience. Whilst, I expected nothing else from Patrick Naef, I would like to understand his justification for such censorship. Maybe the company IT policy has been updated but, in my experience, only obscene, offensive, etc. material was blocked, along with sites which would be so popular as to cause performance issues. The latter’s restrictions were normally limited to the working day. I hardly think that my little blog (with its circa 40 readers a day) would strain any network and certainly not compete with a Test match in terms of interest. But I suppose, for someone who seems to be most comfortable when dealing with mis-information, the truth probably seems pretty offensive.
As I publish this, the total number of hits recorded is 15,322.
No comments:
Post a Comment