News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Medium is a poor choice for blogging by coldtea on Tuesday November 13, 2018 @10:53AM (#18441860)
>It's 2018, and there are a gazillion ways to get yourself in control of your stuff.

But zero ways to get people to read it. I only read his post because it's on HN. And I read Medium stuff regularly on Medium.

The chances of most people discovering some random blog? Not so much. Whereas Medium has concentrated eyeballs and knows their preferences to serve them stuff that's close to their tastes...

Re:Medium is a poor choice for blogging by danShumway on Tuesday November 13, 2018 @12:17PM (#18442673)
> I only read his post because it's on HN. And I read Medium stuff regularly on Medium.

I totally get where you're coming from, but I'm not convinced that Medium helps at all. I mean, this article was posted to Medium. Medium didn't put it in front of you. So how is Medium helping?

I used to cross-post everything I wrote to Medium, because I thought it was a good reader acquisition strategy. But posting on Medium doesn't automatically get you readership -- you still have to go find readers and rely on them sharing stuff on traditional sites like HN/Reddit/Twitter/Facebook. And none of that sharing process requires your content to be on Medium.

For all of the effort I put into formatting articles well, and making sure that I matched popular writing styles, and adapting things, a post I put on Medium will get <20 readers over the course of a week.

In contrast, I had one good post get traction on HN, and on average my self-hosted blog now gets more visitors than that per day. So now I don't even bother cross-posting, because I don't see how Medium helps me get content picked up on other social sites.

Re:Medium is a poor choice for blogging by Alex3917 on Tuesday November 13, 2018 @12:36PM (#18442862)
> I mean, this article was posted to Medium. Medium didn't put it in front of you. So how is Medium helping?

Medium has a ton of recirc features that drive page views within the ecosystem. That is the entire reason why Ev started Medium, it wasn't about giving people better typography or whatever.

The reason the product is kind of messed up is because they made some financing decisions that may have not been correct in retrospect, so now they've had to go back and try to retroactively design the product to match their capital structure. But it's not like they wouldn't have had tons of other problems if they were bootstrapped, the reality is there just aren't any good financing options for consumer web startups right now.

Re:Medium is a poor choice for blogging by thanatropism on Tuesday November 13, 2018 @01:13PM (#18443222)
> and making sure that I matched popular writing styles

Maybe this is the problem. I'm sure as a professional writer you need to keep up with reader interests (rather than setting up to do the blog equivalent of Finnegan's Wake), but you don't want to be too interchangeable either.

It's like you had to decide each month from each cake you want to eat (there's an infinite row of cakes) and you vie for the huge ones -- together with countless other people, so you get really small crumbs. Go for a smaller cake and you may get actual slices with frosting and all.

Re:Medium is a poor choice for blogging by chrisweekly on Tuesday November 13, 2018 @02:16PM (#18443902)
+1 for the apt cake analogy
Re:Medium is a poor choice for blogging by coldtea on Tuesday November 13, 2018 @01:46PM (#18443582)
>I totally get where you're coming from, but I'm not convinced that Medium helps at all. I mean, this article was posted to Medium. Medium didn't put it in front of you. So how is Medium helping?

Medium put it in fronts of tons of other people though -- someone of which posted it here.

And I discover posts on Medium alone every day.

Plus, Medium posts don't feel like a wasteland -- they have a healthy number of comments.

Re:Medium is a poor choice for blogging by CM30 on Tuesday November 13, 2018 @06:12PM (#18445781)
Yeah, Medium isn't great if you're an up and coming writer, or don't have a following on other social media sites. If you need more proof of that, well go and look at the digest emails they send, or the articles featured on the home page.

About 80-90% are from users with a large following on Medium.com, and many of those are also 'online influencers' with decent sized Twitter/YouTube/LinkedIn/whatever fanbases as well.

Oh, and forget it if your story isn't a paid story. About 90+% of Medium's promoted stories are members only stories now, with the home page I got just now literally having every single story outside of the 'popular on Medium' column being a paid one.

If you're not charging for the story and don't have a pre existing fanbase, at best you've got the end of article suggestions and latest stories link to rely on and the latter has about twenty pages of mediocre stories for every good one.

Like on many platforms now, it seems the popular just get more popular, and the rest battle for the scraps or the off chance they'll break out.

Re:Medium is a poor choice for blogging by chaostheory on Tuesday November 13, 2018 @12:43PM (#18442921)
> Medium didn't put it in front of you.

It does through emails and their homepage, which is one major reason people publish on Medium despite the downsides

Re:Medium is a poor choice for blogging by danShumway on Tuesday November 13, 2018 @01:04PM (#18443141)
Again, I get it, and you're not wrong. In theory.

But in practice, is Medium currently helping people build audiences in a significant way? My experience suggests no. It was easier for me to do that with a self-hosted site.

I'm not sure exactly why this is -- maybe it's that Medium's discovery algorithms take into account correlations between existing readers, so if you don't already have a bunch of readers you'll never get picked up. Maybe Medium is just super crowded, so the odds of you getting recommended over someone who's already popular are low.

All I know is that my readers are return viewers (which self hosting helps a lot with) and people coming from Hackernews, Reddit, Facebook, or curated link aggregators. I don't personally see any data that suggests Medium is driving any traffic to my content. And at this point, universally across the board, my self hosted blog performs better than my Medium blog.

I'm sure that varies from publisher to publisher, but I think it's simplistic to say that Medium by default drives traffic. I suspect that for small sites it's a lot more complicated.

Re:Medium is a poor choice for blogging by chipotle_coyote on Tuesday November 13, 2018 @01:16PM (#18443266)
> But in practice, is Medium currently helping people build audiences in a significant way?

I actually don't think Medium ever helped people build audiences in a significant way, with relatively few exceptions: Medium has always been structured to build an audience first for Medium and second for "publications" hosted on Medium. But it's never been particularly good at building audiences for individual authors.

While I'm aware this is anecdotal, there appears to be very little correlation between the number of followers one has and the number of views any given article gets: you can have several hundred followers and have some articles that get thousands of views (usually because they were included in someone else's publication or linked from somewhere else on the web), and others that get maybe a couple dozen views.

> I don't personally see any data that suggests Medium is driving any traffic to my content.

It is not. Readers that start on Medium by and large stay on Medium.

Re:Medium is a poor choice for blogging by chaostheory on Tuesday November 13, 2018 @03:08PM (#18444419)
> maybe it's that Medium's discovery algorithms take into account correlations between existing readers,

Yes, Medium takes into account who you follow and what subjects you've liked, which is one reason Medium article collections like HackerNoon exist.

I feel Medium is for writers who don't take the time and effort necessary to self market their own content, which is not easy for many people. The platform is just like everything else in life. Are you willing to make concessions for its benefits? I don't see anything wrong with it as long as people are aware of the price of the Faustian deals they make in exchange for a little magic. The same applies to Alexa, Facebook, Waze, etc...

Re:Medium is a poor choice for blogging by smacktoward on Tuesday November 13, 2018 @01:00PM (#18443108)
> I only read his post because it's on HN.

Well, yeah, but a post on a self-hosted blog can be posted to HN just as easily as a post on Medium can. And it's not like having "(medium.com)" next to the submission is going to drive upvotes any more than having "(yourdomain.xyz)" would. (For me it actually has the opposite effect; there's so much empty "thought-leader" drivel posted at Medium that seeing that domain next to an HN submission makes me less likely to click through.)

So I guess the question becomes: does Medium function well enough as an aggregator of its own content to make posting there worth the tradeoffs? Does it drive enough traffic from other Medium readers to your own Medium posts to justify giving up everything you have to give up to use the platform? (That's the theory behind Medium, of course, but what I'm wondering is how well it actually works in practice.)

Re:Medium is a poor choice for blogging by sh87 on Tuesday November 13, 2018 @05:51PM (#18445658)
> there's so much empty "thought-leader" drivel posted at Medium

I observe, Medium posts are now the equivalent of most TED talks.

Most are useless but the rare good ones make it hard to write the platform off as a self-promotional junk delivery mechanism.

Re:Medium is a poor choice for blogging by logifail on Wednesday November 14, 2018 @12:25AM (#18447719)
>> Most are useless but the rare good ones make it hard to write the platform off

Exactly, the platform isn't an indicator of quality. In the long term, how could such a platform be?

Re:Medium is a poor choice for blogging by wlesieutre on Tuesday November 13, 2018 @11:09AM (#18442012)
Do many people browse Medium like this? I read a decent number of posts there, but only because someone sends me a link or shared it on another platform.
Re:Medium is a poor choice for blogging by nine_k on Tuesday November 13, 2018 @11:29AM (#18442193)
The "See also" links at the end of Medium posts, and the weekly "interesting for you" mail list were rather relevant to me, that is, often had links I was willing to click, and under those, sometimes were articles I was willing to read.

I stopped doing both, though: you can't read too much for free, but more than half of the content was not worth reading (for me), except maybe for quick skimming. There definitely are articles on Medium that are gems (again, from my POV), but I hope them to be brought to me by social networks anyway.

For authors, though, Medium must be pretty valuable, bringing relevant readers, and maybe some ad revenue. It does have a discovery feature which may be not brilliantly great, but is still quite OK, especially if you have time to spend on lighter reading.

Re:Medium is a poor choice for blogging by komon on Tuesday November 13, 2018 @11:53AM (#18442455)
What is the limit for free reading? I've heard this a few times now from a few different sources, but I've never run into it myself.
Re:Medium is a poor choice for blogging by nine_k on Tuesday November 13, 2018 @12:11PM (#18442618)
Three or four articles a day, I can't remember.

Not very high if you browse, but adequate if you get a link or two from other sources.

I wish they adopted the bandcamp model: quite a number of tracks for free per day, but you can instantly pay for the one you liked, the amount you like (above a certain minimum). This way, the articles I personally find valuable would be both easier for me to find, and paid by me higher than the slice of the common subscription funds they receive now.

Re:Medium is a poor choice for blogging by komon on Thursday November 15, 2018 @05:51PM (#18464228)
Fairly late, but I must read eight or more Medium articles on a heavy day. The only thing I ever get is a modal prompting me to "make it official" and create an account.
Re:Medium is a poor choice for blogging by Confiks on Tuesday November 13, 2018 @11:28AM (#18442188)
I think the main avenue for exploration in Medium are the article recommendations at the bottom of the page, above the comments.

I personally rarely click on them, but I can imagine some titles can be hard to resist. That make interaction-driven recommendations, which are becoming the dominant way of content exploration, a bit of a dark pattern.

Perhaps we're only an inch away from 'article autoplay'.

Re:Medium is a poor choice for blogging by TeMPOraL on Tuesday November 13, 2018 @12:43PM (#18442925)
> Perhaps we're only an inch away from 'article autoplay'.

Have you ever seen news sites that let you seamlessly scroll to the next article, by dynamically appending it at the bottom of the one you're reading, and updating your URL as you enter it? The ones where it's ridiculously easy to get lost, because scroll space keeps expanding (sometimes both ways) and the URL keeps changing?

Someone's gonna figure out soon that the code for loading those articles could use a recommendation engine.

Re:Medium is a poor choice for blogging by indogooner on Tuesday November 13, 2018 @11:23AM (#18442143)
Yeah but maybe (cannot be sure on this) other people are sharing the links because they browse Medium
Re:Medium is a poor choice for blogging by wlesieutre on Tuesday November 13, 2018 @11:29AM (#18442195)
Good point, that would be tough to measure.
Re:Medium is a poor choice for blogging by spurgu on Wednesday November 14, 2018 @05:18PM (#18454670)
All publicity is good publicity, I just typed in "medium.com" in my browser.
Re:Medium is a poor choice for blogging by fabrixxm on Tuesday November 13, 2018 @11:33AM (#18442238)
tbh, often when I get interrupted by the "sorry to interrupt you" I just close the tab. and if I'm on mobile and link says "medium" I don't even bother to click. but that's me.
Re:Medium is a poor choice for blogging by mayankkaizen on Tuesday November 13, 2018 @12:03PM (#18442554)
You are not alone. I read Medium articles only when they are posted on HN or someone I follow closely shares a link.

Otherwise I just ignore Medium articles. Maybe it is me but most of the Medium articles I stumble upon are pure garbage.

Re:Medium is a poor choice for blogging by FridgeSeal on Tuesday November 13, 2018 @10:23PM (#18447198)
> Maybe it is me but most of the Medium articles I stumble upon are pure garbage.

It's not just you, a lot of them are.

Look at how many are just "python deep learning tutorial" recycled for the millionth time, but with some fundamental misunderstanding or shortcut, or they're just lifted almost verbatim from the starter example or the documentation with nothing actually meaningful added. Often there's lots of "here's how to do x in y" that somehow manages to not understand good practices at all.

Re:Medium is a poor choice for blogging by nomadicnotes on Tuesday November 20, 2018 @09:39PM (#18499793)
If I'm on my mobile and it's something I want to read I save it to my Pocket account, where articles are formatted for a clean reading experience.
Re:Medium is a poor choice for blogging by entelechy on Tuesday November 13, 2018 @11:04AM (#18441964)
Our data doesn't support that.

Most of our traffic comes from hackernews, reddit and similar. However because our blog is too niche?

https://medium.com/@buckaroo.pm

Re:Medium is a poor choice for blogging by keiferski on Tuesday November 13, 2018 @11:07AM (#18441999)
You’re discounting the security/authority that “medium.com” brings over a random domain name. You might get less traffic from HN and Reddit if you weren’t on Medium.

Edit: just because a few people (myself included) have a negative reaction to a Medium link doesn’t change the fact that many Medium links are upvoted on HN.

Re:Medium is a poor choice for blogging by detaro on Tuesday November 13, 2018 @11:21AM (#18442113)
At least for me and some other people, medium.com is a negative signal of quality. Medium is full of low-quality and marketing articles, I'll associate your links with that, and me only seeing "medium.com" on e.g. HN means you don't have a chance of establishing a "brand" I trust by recognizing your domain as "good" after a few articles.

EDIT: adressing your edit, do you have any evidence they wouldn't be if they weren't on medium.com?

Re:Medium is a poor choice for blogging by eksemplar on Tuesday November 13, 2018 @11:36AM (#18442274)
I think it goes for any topic. I’ll use food as an example. I’ve been on a lot of food blogs, I end there from DuckDuckGo or google, mostly google.

I only remember a handful of them, one in particular that is now a regular bookmark of mine (it’s https://www.valdemarsro.dk and in Danish so likely uninteresting to most), and the one thing that the ones I remember have in common is that they are their own things.

I don’t think there is anything beneficial to being a medium blog for this exact reason. I may read your article, I may even really like it, but it takes more than one article to get me to stick around, and because every medium article looks the same I can easily end up reading more than one without noticing it.

Having a unique domain helps as much as having a unique look.

Re:Medium is a poor choice for blogging by Majora320 on Tuesday November 13, 2018 @11:20AM (#18442112)
Doubtful. I for one am less likely to click medium links because I know they'll be more bloated on average than the average person's self-hosted blog.
Re:Medium is a poor choice for blogging by alanh on Tuesday November 13, 2018 @11:30AM (#18442211)
For real? For me, the Medium domain signals a high likelihood that the piece is poorly written and entirely unedited.
Re:Medium is a poor choice for blogging by munificent on Tuesday November 13, 2018 @02:05PM (#18443794)
Don't forget that it also prominently features a large distracting photo that was just ripped from a royalty-free photo site and has nothing to do with the content.
Re:Medium is a poor choice for blogging by Kye on Tuesday November 13, 2018 @04:25PM (#18445047)
It worked. Then someone wrote about it, and everyone did it. Then it became a negative signal. There seems to be a 5-10 year trend lag time on stuff like that where the least self-aware self-promoters don't realize it doesn't work. Eventually a new trend falls to their level, and the cycle begins anew.
Re:Medium is a poor choice for blogging by alanh on Tuesday November 13, 2018 @08:22PM (#18446559)
A big reason everyone has the big, irrelevant image on top is that medium was designed to work best with that assumption. If you actually blog there, your index won't look good unless you have a header photo for each post.
Re:Medium is a poor choice for blogging by Pxtl on Tuesday November 13, 2018 @11:45AM (#18442377)
Yes, but I'm happy to see a ".github.io" domain which hosts a static blog site just fine and tells me the site is fully static.
Re:Medium is a poor choice for blogging by guelo on Tuesday November 13, 2018 @11:21AM (#18442120)
I doubt that has any value. People blindly click things mostly based on the headline and the fact that it has been upvoted.
Re:Medium is a poor choice for blogging by entelechy on Tuesday November 13, 2018 @11:09AM (#18442013)
good point!
Re:Medium is a poor choice for blogging by ymolodtsov on Tuesday November 13, 2018 @10:56AM (#18441893)
That’s actually a great question — does Medium truly gives you that many readers that it makes sense to live in the closed ecosystem? I have its app installed and subscribed to a bunch of people but I still only go there via the links on the web and I feel like a lot of people do just like me.
Re:Medium is a poor choice for blogging by djmashko2 on Tuesday November 13, 2018 @11:24AM (#18442153)
As some anecdotal evidence, I get about half of my Medium views from people browsing the Medium app/feed. That's definitely been the number one reason I've stayed on the platform.

Perhaps someone should develop a platform that creates the same discoverability, but while allowing people to retain control of the content?

Re:Medium is a poor choice for blogging by munificent on Tuesday November 13, 2018 @02:05PM (#18443798)
Everything old is new again: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Webring
Re:Medium is a poor choice for blogging by 3pt14159 on Tuesday November 13, 2018 @03:07PM (#18444415)
No. I started my own site around this time last year with a CSS / HTML template I modified and I did everything myself. I even wrote the static site compiler. This is really not hard.

I have somewhere between seven and nine[0] articles out and my work has been translated into French, Portuguese (twice), Russian, and Uzbek.

Medium isn't a source of traffic unless you're one of the very few writers they intentionally push. People share high quality work or new ideas, and audience engagement helps too, so link to your Twitter and share your email.

[0] Since starting the site I've started writing for other publications and the audience flows back and forth between the sites, so it depends on what you think counts as an article.

Re:Medium is a poor choice for blogging by QML on Tuesday November 13, 2018 @01:31PM (#18443402)
Two years ago, I used to spend a lot of my free time browsing Medium, reading articles I otherwise would’ve never discovered. Now? Not so much the case—maybe it’s the degradation in quality or the number of badly written articles.

Maybe what we need for blogs isn’t a platform, where authors come on and content is hosted centrally; but an aggregator, where each author self hosts but content is still discoverable by a wider audience.

A good example of this would be Apple news.

Re:Medium is a poor choice for blogging by Insanity on Tuesday November 13, 2018 @10:57AM (#18441912)
Yeah I'd say the main thing medium offers is easier exposure.

You could always post on medium and on your own blog though, and post your own blog here, for example.

Re:Medium is a poor choice for blogging by enz on Tuesday November 13, 2018 @11:45AM (#18442382)
If you write about tech, you can cross-post your article on dev.to and set a canonical link for SEO. I don't know if Medium offers this kind of option. So you have people reading your content while you keep your personal blog.
Re:Medium is a poor choice for blogging by deyan on Tuesday November 13, 2018 @11:59AM (#18442512)
Medium has this option as well.
Re:Medium is a poor choice for blogging by jonahx on Tuesday November 13, 2018 @11:39AM (#18442300)
You can post self-hosted articles on HN, reddit, etc. I doubt that "You might like this..." clicks on Medium would add significant eyeballs to an independent author's articles.
Re:Medium is a poor choice for blogging by TeMPOraL on Tuesday November 13, 2018 @12:37PM (#18442867)
HN, Reddit, social media. You read this post because someone posted it here.

Getting other people to read your post is as difficult as getting other people to read other people's content - you post it where you frequent, and if people like it, they'll reshare it. Building a larger audience requires work, and any attempt at cheating that is unsustainable at scale.

Re:Medium is a poor choice for blogging by jamesjyu on Tuesday November 13, 2018 @01:27PM (#18443363)
It's easy to fall into the trap of seeking scale, because we're surrounded by it: best selling authors, viral content, etc. But I'd rather have a small number of readers who really appreciate my writing versus a large number of randoms gathered from feed promotions who won't even finish reading.
Re:Medium is a poor choice for blogging by alsetmusic on Tuesday November 13, 2018 @12:13PM (#18442630)
> But zero ways to get people to read it. I only read his post because it's on HN. And I read Medium stuff regularly on Medium.

I actively avoid links to Medium, even on HN.

Re:Medium is a poor choice for blogging by arkh on Tuesday November 13, 2018 @11:15AM (#18442060)
Nothing prevents you from hosting your content on your domain and publish it also on medium, blogger and all other kind of platforms.
Re:Medium is a poor choice for blogging by s17n on Tuesday November 13, 2018 @12:40PM (#18442892)
No they don't. If you want your Medium post to get read you have to promote it on HN, reddit, facebook, twitter, etc exactly as you would with a self-hosted post.
Re:Medium is a poor choice for blogging by j2kun on Tuesday November 13, 2018 @06:57PM (#18446037)
Isn't that what search engines used to be for?
Re:Medium is a poor choice for blogging by sarthakjain on Tuesday November 13, 2018 @11:41AM (#18442324)
Medium also gets you really good seo
Re:Medium is a poor choice for blogging by nadezhda18 on Tuesday November 13, 2018 @12:27PM (#18442761)
through what features?