Search

A couple of days ago I was interviewed by Omar Gallaga from the Austin American-Statesman for a story he was doing on the state of Austin political blogging as part of the Statesman’s coverage of Netroots Nation.

The story appeared today as the lead story on the main page (yeah, another slow news day here in the state capitol).

Here’s the headline:

Political bloggers gaining more clout — but it’s no way to make a living

I’m quoted down near the bottom of the story (four paragraphs devoted to Undergrounds.com Urbangrounds.com):

Conservative bloggers such as Robbie Cooper, who writes Undergrounds.com, say they admire the strides liberal bloggers have made.

“They definitely outpace the conservative movement on online mobilization,” Cooper said. “I think the conservatives can learn a lot from it.”

Cooper, whose site gets about 1,200 page views a day, jokes that he’s the most prominent conservative blogger in Austin; “I think there’s three of us.”

Advertising pays for his domain registration and hosting fees, and “a few dollars left over for a beer here and there.”

It’s a good and fair article — just wish he would have at least got the name of my site correct. Oh well.

Oh, and I also told him I get about 1200 unique visitors/day. My page views is a bit over 2000/day. Small difference, I know — but just wanted to throw that out there for the sake of accuracy.

Thankfully, the online version of the story allows comments, so I was able to make a note about the correction there.

_______

As to the content of the article — while I’d love to be able to blog full time as a career, there’s just no way I’m willing to take that kind of pay cut from my current full-time paid career as a writer.

Not even close.

Although, I probably understated my ad revenue (mostly from text-based link ads) — in addition to paying for my hosting and domain registration (and a few beers), I’m also able to pay the notes on both of my motorcycles from my blog revenue.

So, while there is some money to be made blogging (even as a conservative in Austin), it wouldn’t be enough to live on.

_______

UPDATE

I received really nice emails from both reporters who worked on this story (Omar Gallaga and Lilly Rockwell) apologizing for the name mix up.

I’ve been a professional writer for far too long to realize that editorial blunders occur from time-to-time. Not for one moment did I ever consider that it was done intentionally.

As Omar wrote in his email:

I’m particularly annoyed that the mistake happened to the one conservative blogger in the story. I can’t tell you how frustrated that makes me for what that makes us look like.

As I responded, “No worries.”

Omar said that they’re working on getting the online version corrected, and would print a correction in tomorrow’s paper.

10 Responses to “Blogging Article in the Austin American-Statesman Today”

while I’d love to be able to blog full time as a career, there’s just no way I’m willing to take that kind of pay cut from my current full-time paid career as a writer.

Tell Larry, Moe, & Curley, that it’s time for them to pull their own weight and to go out and get jobs. No more free kibble.

“I think there’s three of us.”

Who’s the third?

And it seems rather disingenuous of the Statesman to mention Netroots Nation without mentioning the Defending the American Dream Summit.

Hey! I’m one and Will Franklin at Willisms is another.

It doesn’t surprise me that the error in your site’s name was very, very close to a famous far left site.

To be fair, AAS had an article about Defending the Dream Summit last Saturday. Saturday, not on the front page and mentioning no blogs at all. There! That was fair.

I’m sure they believe that, Barbara…that’s the problem. (This is one of the reasons I dropped them a few months ago.)

It’s nice to know there are a few of us in Austin…all I ever see linked are the ones from the other side. And I’d subscribe to your blog, Barbara, but you don’t seem to have an RSS feed…

According to our state editor, Debra Davis, a story on conservative blogging is planned for Friday A1.

Thanks for your comments and again, I apologize for the URL mistake — it’s been fixed in the online version of the story.

Well, I’m just starting and out of practice writing. And. Trying to figure out all the different blogger thingies. But, it’ll come along eventually…

Robbie,

Congrats on piece in the Statesman. One of 3 in Austin huh? Nice nitch.

“I’ve been a professional writer for far too long to realize that editorial blunders occur from time-to-time.”

not realize? Or should you entirely reconstruct that sentence.

Freudian slip? Are you actually downplaying your anger?

Funny that should happen in a sentence that begins and ends as that one does.

Murphy’s law on writing & proofreading:

Muphry’s Law dictates that (a) if you write anything criticizing editing or proofreading, there will be a fault of some kind in what you have written; (b) if an author thanks you in a book for your editing or proofreading, there will be mistakes in the book; (c) the stronger the sentiment expressed in (a) and (b), the greater the fault; (d) any book devoted to editing or style will be internally inconsistent.

John Bangsund, The Society of Editors Newsletter, March 1992

Nice, at least they followed up with another email.

Got something you want to say?

Quicktags:


Notes:

You have 10 minutes after you submit your comment to edit it. Simply click the E(dit) link above the countdown-counter at the bottom of your comment. You can only edit a comment from the same IP address from where the original comment was submitted.

If your comment does not appear immediately, it has been sent to the moderation queue for approval.

Your comment either contained more than 2 hyperlinks, or it used a word(s) that are on my Spam blacklist. Comments awaiting moderation will usually be approved within a day.

And, being that it's my blog and all...I reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time.