Why Would I Even Want To Be Popular On Social Media?
The goal is to spend more time OFF of the computer/phone
This picture that I took probably 20+ years ago reminded me of something that’s been on my mind quite a bit lately …
We all probably need to spend more time offline and outdoors.
So this begs the obvious question …
Why the heck am I even trying to build a following on social media?
(and yes, Substack is social media)
Seriously?
It seems to me that if I had thousands, or tens of thousands of subscribers and got hundreds of comments on every article I wrote, I would almost feel obligated to spend hours a day glued to my phone or computer.
That is very much NOT what I want.
Also …
Here’s the irony (especially for a publication such as mine):
The more time I spend outside doing stuff, the more interesting things I will have to write about, and share pictures of.
So I guess this leads me to another question …
Can I still attract new readers if I’m not spending hours a day being “social” online?
The “gurus” would all say NO!
Even if they’re right, I’m pretty sure I’m okay with that.
It probably helps a lot that I have no illusions about trying to make money with this endeavor.
I think I really only have two reasons for writing/sharing on Just Over That Next Hill.
It’s like a public online journal that I’ll be able to look back on in the future
I’d like to make a few new genuine connections/friendships.
Obviously that second goal is going to require some level of being “social”.
Connections and friendships have to be a two-way street.
Good News …
We probably don’t need as many friends as we might think.
Research suggests that the number of close friends we need to feel that we have enough is somewhere between three and five.
That sounds obtainable.
So what would it take to consider Just Over That Next Hill “successful”?
If by this time next year, I’m consistently spending less that 60-90 minutes a day looking at a phone or computer screen …
But when I do log on, I have regular interactions with a dozen (or maybe a couple dozen?) people whose names I not only know, but I’m familiar with where they’re from, what they do, what they enjoy, etc.,
… and vice versa, they know they know those things about me.
I will consider this to have been a fruitful investment.
How about you?
Do you have any alternate metrics (besides income and/or subscriber count) for defining your own “success” online?
Todd
p.s. after you comment, turn off your screen and go do something fun … preferably outdoors!
I am a solid "neither here nor there" with your approach.
I would like a "following" because I already had one previously with a cartoon I did. It wasn't big, internationally "Garfield" or "Mickey Mouse" kind of a thing, but the people who liked it liked it a lot. Or seemed to.
So, while trying to organize a retired life and a retiree's house, I started scanning and storing hundreds of cartoons -- actually thousands I guess. I showed a few to people, put some on Facebook and even created a new version.
That was sort of dust in the wind. Then I found out about this site and it suited what I was doing pretty well. I drop in a written piece every now and again, some of it just to explain myself and some of it to share an experience.
The money is irrelevant. Always nice to get some but I don't have to count on it. It is nice when somebody recalls seeing one of the old drawings and comments.
I am with you on the pure numbers thing. I don't see much reason to have a "following" who isn't interested. As for time investment, I try to always nod back at somebody who nods my way and will "pass a word" with those who have something to say to me.
But I don't do any of it until after I have done the stuff I want to do -- or have to do.
With that said, I'll finish my coffee and get back to yard work.