I recently experienced a sharp increase in the number of views of my blog and went from 628 to 4723 views in a single week. One of my posts has had an amazing 3235 views to date. What happened? Have I learned a secret to boosting my viewer statistics?
As you might have guessed from the photos that I have reprised below, the post in question is my 4 November posting Rescue of an Injured Bald Eagle. Within my WordPress world, the post was reasonably successful and sixty viewers “liked” it, but that’s not enough to account for the boost.
The most important key to getting more viewers, I think, is finding viewers from outside of WordPress. I sometimes cross-post on Facebook account and in a few Facebook groups to which I belong and will get some additional views, but generally only a few.
I’ve looked back at all that transpired and here is the “formula” that led to my “success.” First, take photos of an event that is newsworthy, has broad appeal, and preferably has police involvement. The police departments, it seems, are always looking for good news stories, and I sent copies of my photos to the officer who made the rescue. The Fairfax County Police Department posted my photos (with attribution) on their blog on 5 November and included a link to my blog posting. This got the ball rolling, it seems.
The next step is to enlist the aid of the mass media in publicizing your blog and keep them updated. I suspect that news outlets troll the police sites for stories and suddenly I started receiving requests from reporters to use the photos in the on-line versions of their television or radio stations—I don’t think the photos appeared in print. I gave approval each time that I was asked, but requested attribution by name and, if possible, a link back to my blog.
The local Fox station and the local NBC station were the most cooperative and did articles that used my photos, excerpts from the text of my blog, and included links to my blog. The Fox article brought in more than 750 viewers and the NBC article brought in over 100 viewers. WTOP, a local news radio station, was similarly cooperative. I made sure to keep these reporters in the loop when I first received information that the eagle was euthanized and all they did updates on the story.
What about the others? Several news outlets, most notably The Washington Post, used my photos with attribution, though they did not request permission or link back to my blog in any way. It was really cool to see the Post use one of my photos in articles on 5 November and 6 November, but it had no effect on my blog statistics. The local ABC station WJLA also gave attribution when they used my photo in an article. I ran across a couple of instances in which my photos were used and they were attributed to “a park visitor” or to the police department.
I came across the photos, with attribution, in several local community news sites and in a couple of other Fox site as well. The euthanization decision was carried by the Associated Press, but, alas, they did not use a photo.
I think I understand better now how I had such an increase in viewers, but I realize that the experience is not easily replicable and the results were short-lived. After the temporary spike in views, I have returned to more normal levels. I enjoyed the brief moment in the spotlight and learned a lot about how stories enter into the news cycle, but I am content to return to my smaller world of walking the trails, in search of new photographic adventure.
© Michael Q. Powell. All rights reserved.
Mike Powell 
Hey mike
As someone who used to work in the news business, I would strongly recommend you give the post a call and demand payment.
They basically stole your work and there is absolutely no reason the post could not have contacted you before using it and even if they could not reach you that does not mean it’s ok to use your work.
Your photos were great and were images they were never going to get (thus increasing the value)
Frankly, I am astounded the post did that without your permission.
It is also possible the post story was picked up by AP and the photos could have been seen by a much wider audience than post readers.
It would be easy to say it’s a one time thing and not to worry about it, but chances are with the quality of your work and considering the fact that newspapers love animal stories, you will probably post similar work again and unless you ask for payment now, they will assume you are ok with them stealing your work.
I would have a chat with the other news sites that used your work to without your permission too. Credits are nice but they they also should have asked you first.
I know stealing is a strong word, but that is what they are doing and believe me they know it
Please let me know if I can help.
keep up the great work.
Rob
Sent from my iPad
>
That is quite the formula 🙂 All it takes is a few outlets and things spiderweb from there exponentially. Congrats on the exposure and traffic.
Thanks, Dan. I’ve tried to retrospectively track how this took off and which sites got info from which sources. It’s fascinating as I realized that multiple local news outlets were chasing after the same story for which I had the only photos. One of the ways to follow the webs was to see if I was referred to as Mike or Michael.
Congrats! We all want to be seen and heard, good suggestions!
I like your sleuth work. I agree with Rob in that you should have been asked for permission. I wrote a blog post last year about a visit to Old Sturbridge Village and they wanted to publish a section in their quarterly magazine. I did notice an increase from that, and then a bump when they linked to it from their Facebook page. They did ask for my permission. It’s fun to chart the affect of these things. I like the part about using the way they refer to you as a key.
I agree that at the very least they should have asked for your permission and I think they should have paid you as well. I’ve sold several photos from having posted them on the blog so I know that it’s regularly done. I also had a textbook publisher tell me that they find a lot of their photos that way.
What a fun adventure for you! But how rude of the Post. They certainly know better.
Congratulations but you should have been paid.
I think it’s great that you got such a photographic scoop and I’m glad you received recognition for your wonderful photos.
I look at my site stats for amusement some times. I had a weird spike a few weeks ago and it turned out to be hundreds of views of my blog from Peru. I had not even published anything and the views were of all different posts. Weird. I also like to look at the search engine terms that have brought people to my blogs. Those are often bonkers.
It is interesting how people come to be reading but it annoys me that people feel they can take photos without permission. I have a note on my blog about stealing photos but I’m always happy to give permission if I’m asked and given a mention. Taking without permission is not only rude, it is stealing and they’d prosecute you pretty quickly if you did the same.
I get most of my traffic from outside of WordPress. This year I have been averaging about 8,000 views per week. I post images in photo forums with a link back to the post. Also, I have my site URL in a signature at the bottom of the posts I make in an automotive forum with a catchy photo used for my avatar. One thing that was similar to what you do is I left a note on the blog of the public information officer of a national park. He shared my post on the park’s Facebook page. The photo of the officer with an eagle is excellent, and great content produces traffic.
Reblogged this on Ann Novek–With the Sky as the Ceiling and the Heart Outdoors.
Nice for you to get the exposure & credit but next time ask for money. They’re commercial operations making money from your hard work.
That’s a great experience for you (except the final outcome for the eagle of course). Fascinating post to get the back story. So what would you do different next time?
You ask a tough question, Lyle. In hindsight, the only thing I suppose that I could have done differently is to request that the police department, to which I initially released the photos, have anyone interested in using the photos contact me for specific authorization. I am not sure if the police tacitly or explicitly gave permission to others to use the images. I don’t think that I was in a permission to seek payment (nor was I really looking for it). I am, however, concerned enough about the lack of permission that I will probably be sending an e-mail to The Washington Post seeking an explanation of their policy about using the photos of non-Post photographers.
The “code” in the evolving world of digital photos and social media is sometimes difficult to understand. You did well to navigate it. I certainly share your concern with The Washington Post. They, of all organizations, should do better.
As for questions, I’m usually far better at those than answers.
Mike I did not realize that was the case when I made my earlier comments as that did not appear to be part of the story on your blog.
In all fairness to the post, if the police sent them the photos with no credits or no source on them, it would be plausible for a photo editor at the post or with any other news operation to assume that they were Police photos for which they would not have to credit or have to pay for as typically Police and government photos are in public domain because the person who took the photos is being paid by taxpayers. There are exceptions to that from time to time so a thorough photo editor always checks.
It really depends what the police told the news outlets. When I was on the receiving end of handout photos as a wire service photo editor, I always dug a little deeper to make sure that that a government employee took the photo and that the govt (police in this case) did not pick the photo up from someone else.
I always wanted to make sure the photographer got the credit he or she deserves and wanted to double check we were not picking up a supposedly “free photo” that we would have to pay for later on.
My advice would be to others in this situation to never give your photos to anyone without any specific restrictions. Once you have done that is becomes hard to backtrack. As they say, the horse is out of the barn at that point.
It is not just a financial issue. One you give your photos out , you lose control over where and when your photos are used. Today it might be a bird lovers site, tomorrow it could a used by an organization that uses the photos in a way that you did not intend them to be used for and that could be a real problem if your name is on the photos.
If a governmental agency asks a photographer for a photo because news organizations are asking for it, I would simply suggest saying thank you so much, and saying that is great, please let me know who is asking for it and I will contact them independently so you do not have to deal with it.
That way the photographer has total control over the image, the government does not have to be the middleman and the papers or web sites know exactly who took the photo and how to handle it oh, and the photographer would be paid for his or her work. Honestly, one cannot expect the police or any other govt. agency to handle the rights for photographers, that is not what they are charged to do.
With all the above being said, if it were me, I agree with Mike, I would nicely ask the post and anyone else using this photo to please give me and my web site credit on the photo or stop using it. I would also make it clear that it is your photo and ask that restrictions be placed on the photo, including no sales and no further distribution.
Mike I am so sorry you ran into such an ugly incident. Your work is really special, it deserves t be treated as such.
Thanks, Charlie. It really wasn’t ugly. I enjoyed getting the exposure, but I think I need to be a bit more careful in the future about how my photos are used.