Is the SA Blog Survey null and void?
Justin received an exciting slide from the SA Blog Survey and decided to share it on his blog for everyone to see – good on you mate.
Taking a quick look at the figures below, it’s clear that NO bloggers earn more than R3000.00 a month, in South Africa..
.. I completed the survey and I most certainly said that I earned more than R3000 a month (proof) from blogging. Not only that, but in the comments on Justin’s blog, a few people stated (Tertia, Tracy) that they did earn more than that and that they did complete the survey. I have since spoken to around 10 people who all earned more than R3000 a month and did complete the survey.
The Survey was completed by 1000 people (said by Alistair, the mind behind the survey), meaning that if only 10 of us stated that we earn more than R3000/month, that would account for 1% of the participants and therefore should appear on the graph?
I worry about something like this, did the results software miss this question? If so, does that not make the entire survey null and void – How can we believe the other facts?
Christopher is the founder of iMod - Most of his time is spent building websites and pushing the limits with Search Engine Optimization. You can follow him on Twitter @ChristopherM
Chris M has written: 4145 posts.
Nov 30th, 2008 at 9:04 pm
Seems a little gunjumpish to wonder if the whole thing is null and void, don’t you think? :)
Maybe those last few rows of the spreadsheet didn’t reach the number crunchers. Or they were rolled up in the 1001-3000 category.
Either way, maybe we can demand some answers, maybe a recount? And weren’t they supposed to release this whole thing early November? :|
~ Wogan
Nov 30th, 2008 at 9:52 pm
I earn more than R3000 per month too and I completed their survey.
Nov 30th, 2008 at 11:00 pm
@Wogan – I hear what you’re saying mate, however, think of it this way – As South African bloggers, we’re slowly learning just how important all our ‘work’ is in terms of facing up against International bloggers and the likes. That being said, if we’re getting local initiatives incorrect, then what will ever happen when we compete on a even bigger level. Alistair did a fantastic job with the survey, but something like this does really worry me. I know a huge number of bloggers who completed the survey, who do earn well over R3000 a month, if this question was incorrectly surveyed, what about the others? Which leads me to the next thing, these stats are very very useful, it’s basically a complete breakdown as to which bloggers are doing what and why. Based on these stats, it’s possible to target certain advertisers, International ones for that matter. Not only advertisers, who foreign investors. If NO bloggers are earning more than R3000, which is $300, it’s going to look like an absolute joke to foreign investors. I know that if I knew that stat as a foreigner, I would laugh at South African bloggers per say.
I don’t know mate, I just worry about this.
Richard – Yup, another one to the list, that’s 14 now!
Nov 30th, 2008 at 11:27 pm
My blog costs me money! How come they didn’t account for me in the survey?
Nov 30th, 2008 at 11:29 pm
That’s not a bad point actually. I’m sure a huuuge number of people that don’t make money off their blog incur costs for the hosting and domain thereof!
DChetty, what are your thoughts on this matter though?
Nov 30th, 2008 at 11:59 pm
I’m not entirely surprised. These things have always been questionable. Much like Amatomu and the SA Blog Awards.
The problem is that projects like this have been run in the past without anyone questioning it. Now, we have an educated group of power users who understand the building blocks of these technologies, services, etc that have begun to voice their opinions.
There are many incidences of rigging, favouritism and generally corrupt cases within the blogging/social media space in SA. Blame bad management and lack of accountability through the ranks.
Dec 1st, 2008 at 12:02 am
That’s a good point, in the past users have not been nearly as aware and experienced as they are now, ‘power users’ is the perfect description.
I don’t think this was deliberate at all, not that you said it was, I’m sure it was a mistake, I just feel that because one question is not correct, there’s a good chance that there’s another one which isn’t correct and so the list goes on, which is a great shame!
Dec 1st, 2008 at 12:17 am
Whether it was deliberate or not, this is still wrong and should not be treated lightly. The manager of this project should be held accountable. It reeks of poor management across the line. For a person/team/company to allow false statements like this to be made public is a blatant disregard for quality of service.
Like you said, this sets a bad precedence for the South African blog world as a whole.
A simple philosophy, “If you are going to do it, do it right!” needs to be adapted by people in the industry in South Africa. This brings me to a peeve with Beta projects.
The idea of Beta has been shifted toward being an excuse for releasing sub quality products to create a first-to-market hype.
The South African web landscape has fast become an entrepreneurial hub with innovation at every corner. But the reputation of those who make an effort to launch good quality projects are losing credibility to people and companies who release projects with the most half-assed attitude!
Dec 1st, 2008 at 12:20 am
When you mentioned Beta, 10 or so local website initiatives popped into my mind, it seems as though no website is ever released outside Beta these days as though it’s the safe way to do things these days, which is nonsense.
There is a over crowded collection of self proclaimed entrepreneurs in Cape Town at the moment and it’s getting harder and harder to look through the haze and spot those people who are actually doing things really well, so I concur with you on your thoughts.
I’m really curious to hear what someone involved in the survey has to say about all of this, I’d just like to know whether there was a problem or something, just because I’m dying to know the real stats on this question specifically :)
Dec 1st, 2008 at 9:28 pm
Let me add my name into the hat – I too earn more than R3000 per month from my blog, and yes, I completed the survey as well!
I’m calling the entire survey bullshit. Someone obviously doesn’t know how to use Excel properly. :-)
Sad really – I was looking forward to analyzing the stats, but they not worth the PDF document they printed in.
Dec 1st, 2008 at 11:57 pm
Jason, I have to admit, I was really excited to see the results, I’ve been blogging for over 10 years, before most of the bloggers in the scene and finally being able to see where things have progressed would have made my day.
However, after seeing this slide, which is obviously incorrect, I couldn’t help but doubt a number of the other ones. How about the average salaries slide, R50,000+ ROFL, I somehow doubt that – I could have believed it if the average blogger was making an extra R10,000/month from their blog and not declaring it with tax ;)
Dec 2nd, 2008 at 9:46 am
@Chris Coming back to your comment about how this looks to foreign investors – I have to agree. Being able to make serious money off your blog not only proves that you have an audience, but that you know what you’re doing.
I suppose the only thing that’s sort of half-bugging me about this is that there were approx 800 people who responded. Given this graph, that means we’re up to 0.02% blogging penetration in the broadband user market.
We’ve still got a long, long way to go.
Dec 2nd, 2008 at 9:54 am
I’m not a guru with regards to the marketing of blogs and the likes, nor a guru with the monetizing side of things, but based on the results and what I’ve heard, earning a 5 digit value each month shows that I have some kind of idea and based on that, that is where I’ve fueled my opinion on this matter of the survey being null and void.
International companies and investors look into aggregators such as amatomu and afrigator, they find the top blogs, then they stumble across the survey and boom, they see that the top guys make $300 a month, now that’s not a good sign if you ask me!
Dec 2nd, 2008 at 9:54 am
Yep, my name goes in to the hat too, i make more than the R3000 p/m and completed the survey.
Dec 2nd, 2008 at 9:56 am
Chris,
It looks like an error in the Analysis to me. All people who earn over 3000 were not counted.
Dec 2nd, 2008 at 9:59 am
@Nic – Thanks for commenting, the list of earners seems to just gets longer and longer.
@ismail – I agree, it would see that that column in excel was missed!
Dec 2nd, 2008 at 10:30 am
Amanda here from imagineNATION Alliance, we ran the survey on 24.com’s behalf. We are an established research and strategy business that is a member of SAMRA.
We were tasked with getting a baseline of understanding of the SA blogosphere so that we could look at trends. There was in fact a minute percentage (2.9%) of people that answered that they were earning in excess of R3000+ a month on their blogs, that is a really small proportion of the total sample and as such is not in research terms on a sample this size, significant.
The main point of this slide was to reflect that 88.4% of SA bloggers earn nothing, it is only the real power-users and very few of them that are making any money.
With hindsight, we should probably have reflected this even though it is minute, it is something that will probably grow over time and it would be nice to be able to track it. We will re-issue this slide for your interest.
I think that you should consider the results of this survey in its entirety and the value that this adds to bloggers here and around the world.
If you have any other questions about the survey, please feel free to contact me.
Amanda Reekie imagineNATION Alliance
Dec 2nd, 2008 at 10:37 am
Hi Amanda,
Thank you for commenting. In my article I wrote this: “The Survey was completed by 1000 people (said by Alistair, the mind behind the survey), meaning that if only 10 of us stated that we earn more than R3000/month, that would account for 1% of the participants and therefore should appear on the graph?”.
The amount might have been minute, but it still would have accounted for at least 1% or 2% – That being said, the BIG PURPLE EMPHASIS HERE button states that NO ONE is making over R3000/month from blogging – Come on, showing that bloggers don’t make money is only one side of the coin.
The problem with “consider the results of this survey in its entirety and the value that this adds to bloggers here and around the world.” is that it’s probably best not to consider it in its entirety. Building a house with one weak foundation could result in the whole house collapsing and that’s exactly how I see this survey.
Don’t get me wrong, I thought the survey was the most fantastic idea ever, it was put together brilliantly and conducted really well, however, it’s a big shame that it was decided to just negate a certain statistic, how many other slides had information negated?
Dec 2nd, 2008 at 10:50 am
Hi Chris, we have not negated any statistic and I said that with hindsight we should have reflected this even though it was a very small percentage.
What emerged from the survey overall across all of the questions is that by and large people are not (yet) blogging for money. They blog for reasons of expression and self-actualisation – hopefully the number of users that are making money will grow but at the moment the large majority earn nothing.
Happy to answer any queries about the study that you would like answering.
Dec 2nd, 2008 at 10:56 am
Chris, let’s be honest. The complaints are more about bruised egos and publicly chest puffing than one data point. I suppose you’re entitled to speculate, but the survey was comprehensive (about 20% of SA’s active bloggers) and thorough so let’s not throw the baby out with the bath water. It sounds like the slide will be amended (including the purple enphasis balloon) so that it includes a figure for >R3K monthly income from blogging (a glaring blank currently). Your house with a weak foundation is a poor analogy. Rather, think window with a crack…;-)
Dec 2nd, 2008 at 10:57 am
“really small proportion of the total sample and as such is not in research terms on a sample this size, significant.”
- I disagree, wether it was 0.5% or 2.5%, it was an important statistic, clearly. The upper bound of most survey categories is going to have a tiny percentage reflection. Imagine looking at the top 10 biggest companies in the world and deciding to leave off no1 and no2 because they were so much bigger, that would mean company no3 would become company no1, which is false.
I don’t blog for money, I blog for self satisfaction and the ability to learn and share, the fact that my blog brings in a 5 digit figure a month is a bonus. Based on the survey, it would appear that I’m the only blogger in the whole of South Africa making more than R3000,00 a month ;)
Amanda, my aim here is not to argue, I just feel that it’s time that things like this get escalated and people become aware, this is all my opinion, whether that means anything or not, I don’t mind :)
Dec 2nd, 2008 at 11:03 am
Fletcher, if you think I have nothing better to do with my time but sit online and moan about a silly statistic, then that is your opinion. But perhaps, just perhaps it means more to me than a damaged ego, which I think is almost as poor as my analogy, because I don’t see how this simple statistic could damage my ego.
Actually, explain how that statistic could damage my ego? Those people who are bloggers know very well how much I earn online, this is more about having the rest of the world realise that there are South Africans who know what they are doing online in terms of online marketing and monetization.
I have spoken to 40 local bloggers, most of which are the top, well known bloggers who run successful companies or lead powerful jobs, and of the 40, only 3 don’t think it’s a problem. So, that’s 92.5% of bloggers who think that this is a good point that has been raised. That said, it’s not just me sitting here with nothing better to do but complain or think of “poor analogies”.
Dec 2nd, 2008 at 11:16 am
“Let’s just disregarding some of these figures”
“Wait, why would you do that!?”
“It’ll get our point across better”
“Oh ok, great idea”
Dec 2nd, 2008 at 11:18 am
I still don’t buy it. This is 1 slide that imagineNATION Alliance decided NOT to put all the stats into… What about the other slides?
Also, the percentages of people earning, came in total to 100% – so they REMOVED the stats on people earning over R3000 – once again, removing stats makes them inaccurate.
So from what you are saying Amanda, that when a there are numbers that are too few, you guys decide to chop it off here and there?
Well you know what they say about stats. 75% of all stats are made-up of which 25% of those stats people don’t understand and another 15.75% of those, are not even stats at all. And this is the truth. It says so on the internet.
Dec 2nd, 2008 at 11:20 am
Your thoughts are on the money Chris (excuse the pun) and you express them very well. I fail to understand how some don’t get this.
Many of us now regard those results as not worth the web space they occupy.
Dec 2nd, 2008 at 11:21 am
@Amanda I think you guys did a great job, and it is a huge pity that you chose not to include the 2.9% category in your results, because it called into question the validity of the rest of the survey.
However, having said that, I appreciate your answer above. 2,9% might be statistically insignificant, but I think the problem came in with the ‘interpretation’ of the results – the ‘comments’ that went with each slide summarizing the main points. On this particular slide the point was raised that no one was making more than R3000. Perhaps you could look at how you, or who ever summarized the results, puts the points across in future.
I look forward to you reissuing the slide and perhaps offering a more in depth analysis of the results.
It doesn’t matter to me whether people know that I make more than R3,000 a month on my blog. In fact, I prefer some people, specifically the tax man, NOT to know how much money I make, but I would hate it that one slide could call into the question the validity of the entire survey, which I think has huge validity and relevance for everyone involved in this space.
In closing, well done for doing the survey and lets keep learning and refining as we go forward so that next year’s effort is even better.
Tertia
Dec 2nd, 2008 at 11:24 am
@Neil – My point exactly!
@JBagley – Ye bud, that’s my concern as well, if they negate information from one, why not negate from the others so that the information being portrayed to the public is how they feel will be most interesting.
This topic is getting really interesting, Fletcher mentioned that the slide would be changed accordingly.
@Justin – Thanks Justin, I appreciate your agreement on this matter, which is far more important than people are taking it to be.
Dec 2nd, 2008 at 11:25 am
@Tertia – Fantastic summary!
Dec 2nd, 2008 at 11:29 am
OK Chris. There are two points here: 1) statistical relevance and 2) Egos. The question in question (if you will) was one of more than 40 (say about 2% of the questionnaire). It does not underpin the total findings, it is one point among many and truly, the main message of the slide was that making money on a blog is an exception rather than the rule in SA (so good for you and the 20 others who are making some decent buck by spending more time online than most expressing yourself, responding to comments etc.). Your point about the slide needing to be fix is not in dispute. In terms of egos, there are two aspects: firstly, those who feel slighted for seemingly not having had their vote count (sort of like some Americans in the 2000+2004 elections). Secondly, the point about damaged egos was not directly at you, but to all those who responded who (quite rightly) indicating that they are finanancially successful with their blog – heck, I would too.
Dec 2nd, 2008 at 11:30 am
Thanks for all the comments and debate – it is clearly a passionate community.
I think that many of you are making very valid points and in some ways the 2.9% who are pumping are the most important as they are the thought leaders who will continue to grow the blogosphere.
I have re-done the slide and have removed the erroneous bubble (battling to get it into the post) but will mail to Chris so that he can post it.
Thanks for all the feedback (both positive and negative)…..at least it has been read!
Dec 2nd, 2008 at 11:36 am
@Fletcher – Thank you for the comment, I do see your side of the discussion.
@Amanda – We’re extremely passionate aren’t we :) Thank you for taking this seriously, it shows that the people behind a SA blog survey do in fact care about what the bloggers have to say and that’s exactly what I wanted to hear – fantastic :)
Dec 2nd, 2008 at 11:42 am
Reposting the comment I made on Justin’s blog: how does 610 out of at least 1000 respondents = 88.4%? Am I missing something?
Dec 2nd, 2008 at 11:43 am
I have to agree with Chris, if the figure was in excess of 10(1%) it should have been reflected. Also the results clearly stated “No Bloggers Earn Above 3000″, This is factually incorrect.
It seems the results were deliberately skewed, Even if they were insignificant, why was this stated:”No Bloggers Earn Above 3000″ When some people did respond that they earn more then that?
The question i asked myself, what was the reason behind skewing of the results?
I am guessing if you plotted the number of respondents on a graph vs the amount earned, you would get a power law graph(long tail) … point being the survey excluded/ignored the the top tier and reported something that was incorrect.
Dec 2nd, 2008 at 11:51 am
The stats show results to one decimal place. Surely, 2.9% is big enough to matter if decimal values have been accounted for as well.
Again, bad management and lack of accountability. Fixing the slide is a weak attempt at saving face. Reworking the entire result set would be the legitimate fix. Ignoring value here and there twists the true value of the entire survey.
It was a great idea when it started, but a lack of understanding of the value that it holds has tainted the validity and credibility of the entire thing.
I’m sorry, but I remain disappointed.
Dec 2nd, 2008 at 12:01 pm
I so wanted to say “Ag, get over it! It was probably an honest mistake! People make mistakes, FFS!!!!”. Now I can’t, unfortunately.
I can understand that it is almost an insignificant statistical figure, so small is it. Point is, (as Tertia said) you blasted it in a pink circle that you found that NOBODY makes more than R3000, which is evidently not true. You should rather have said “88% makes no money” and people might not even have noticed.
So far, Neil is the only one speculating why you chose to omit this small insignificant number. You said that it is statistically insignificant. I’m thinking “Hmmm, there must be more to this…”
Fletcher, if 2.9% is an insignificant percentage, how many other 2.9% figures were dropped due to insignificance? Was it even 2.9%? Could it not have been more? Do we know? Do YOU know? We don’t. Therefore, it is not entirely absurd to question it.
I do share Tertia’s sentiments. Fix it, apologise and move on. It is an interesting exercise which is why about a thousand people took part!
Dec 2nd, 2008 at 12:03 pm
Okay, shit, ignore my comment. took to damn long to respond and I see you’ve done so already :P
Dec 2nd, 2008 at 12:19 pm
We have sent the slide through to Chris, who will post it. We made an error in the comment box but the data is correct. We have fixed it and we apologise.
Amanda
Dec 2nd, 2008 at 12:21 pm
Amanda, Please forward me the updated slide as i have a post on startup africa with the results.
Email: 24com@ismail.otherinbox.com
Dec 2nd, 2008 at 12:23 pm
@ismail – http://imod.co.za/index.php/2008/12/02/sa-blog-survey-correct-slide-released/
Will forward you the email too.
Dec 2nd, 2008 at 12:54 pm
@Coda – please see my latest comment on my blog. I think I’ve worked out the 88.4%… Sorry for the hijack Chris :)
Dec 2nd, 2008 at 1:22 pm
Haha, classic Justin, guess I deserved that one ;)
Dec 2nd, 2008 at 5:53 pm
I earn less than R50 per month on my blog I don’t find the results very surprising.
Dec 2nd, 2008 at 5:58 pm
@AQUILOGY – I think you’ve missed the point a bit, we’re not surprised by the results, however, the matter in concern here was the negation of certain statistics.
Dec 3rd, 2008 at 5:58 am
I have another thought. I would love to see comparative slides for two sets of results, one with .24 bloggers, and one excluding their vote. I will tell you why. I am guessing that the .24 bloggers made up a comparatively larger proportion of the survey than is true of the larger blogging population as the survey was heavily punted on the .24 platform, and I would like to see how the results look if we remove them from the sample. For no other reason, than for academic interest.
I have a hunch that .24 bloggers are a different ‘type’ of blogger, and I would like to see if I am right. My guess is that they are:
- less tech savy
- more likely to be parents
- less likely to earn anything from their blogs
- older
- more equal balance between male and female
etc
@Amanda – is there any chance you can do this? I think it would be a very interesting exercise. Plus I get to see whether I am right or not ;-)
Dec 3rd, 2008 at 9:52 am
Hi Chris (forgive the repost)
Thanks for posting this. I would have responded earlier, but I chose to take the day off for my 30th yesterday. Not the best idea in hindsight, but hey. I appreciate how even handed you’ve been about this, but I have to say it annoys me how many people call an entire survey into question because of one mistake. Yes, we shouldn’t have made it in the first place, but these things do happen. Amanda is many things – professional, brilliant, passionate – but she is not (and has never been) sloppy. I can guarantee you this is the only mistake in the survey. I’m actually glad you helped us find it – however painful the experience has been. This kind of thing, in fact, is what makes blogging such a powerful medium. So, thanks, and I hope you can forgive us our slip.
Dec 3rd, 2008 at 10:14 am
@Alistair: any response to my question posted above? Belated Happy 30th!
Dec 3rd, 2008 at 11:50 am
@coda – Many of the questions weren’t mandatory because we didn’t want to force people to reveal sensitive stuff like income unless they were willing. In this case only 721 out of the 1027 answered this question – so 610 is 88% of 721 not 1027. Hope that clears it up for you.
Dec 3rd, 2008 at 12:14 pm
@Alistair: 610/721 is 84.6%, but ok. So I’m right in assuming that only 4 of the questions were mandatory because their numbers exceed 1000? In which case the full survey was only completed by about 720 respondents?
Dec 5th, 2008 at 12:08 pm
@Coda – that is about right, yes. A significant number of people completed only the bare minimum of questions. However, their responses are no more or less valid than those who completed the entire thing. We ensured that we only counted those who gave us a URL to their blog (and we removed duplicates) – so all of them are “valid” bloggers.