Short and Superior?

[Jaded]

I've always thought that short posts are often better than longer posts. Mainly because readers are more inclined to read short chunks of text (short attention spans etc...). So in terms of drawing people into your sight and getting them interested, are short posts the way forward? By short, I mean two or three paragraphs (of about four or five lines each).

Any downsides to shorter posts?

Obviously, different bloggers have different styles...but do shorter posts perhaps become a little frustrating/annoying?

[ChickenFreak]

It depends on the nature of the post. A short anecdote, joke, bit of trivia, brief thought, or other item that can be thoroughly presented in the short format is just fine. A short post that states a summary idea without offering anything new or interesting isn't.

So, let's say that you have a Cheese Blog. A short post talking about President Andrew Jackson and the Big Block of Cheese in the White House might be great. A short post that starts with something like "Eating properly is important to one's health and longevity. Calcium is an important part of a healthy diet. A lack of calcium can lead to weak bones. Cheese is rich in calcium and is therefore blah blah blah..." would be really really dull.

Now, a lousy writer could make the first post dull, and a fabulous writer could make the old-hat information in the second post fascinating. But you may as well go with whatever has the best odds.

[fezfrascati]

Short posts are definitely better for our short-attention-span audiences of today. Just make sure your posts aren't so short that you're starting to micro-blog.

Every now and then on my blog Yamblings I like to post a "Micro Yam" which is a very short post (sometimes just a sentence, the kind of thing you'd see in a Facebook or twitter update) of just nonsense humor.

[Jaded]

Yeh, I like being able to update something short, just put something out there without having to write the whole post. It's good if you're in a rush but you just had a funny thought or something...

[KHume]

As a blog reader I definitely prefer posts that are under 500 words. If a post is longer than that - unless it's really well written and attention grabbing - I tend to start thinking about the other stuff on my reading list .

[LloydBurrell]

If you want to establish authority, short, strong posts are better, I think. Lists tend to become obsolete; we practically have lists for anything and thousands more are created daily. People need smart guidance and, in general, smart means short.

Lloyd Burrell

[Jaded]

Thanks for all the replies. That's what I was thinking, I suppose...

[dojo]

I have been writing long posts on my Romanian blog for 3 years. I am one of the well known bloggers in my country, people respect me and my writing. posts should be long or short, depending on your topic. You cannot make a book review in2 paragraphs, that's plain wrong and superficial, just as for some topics you can surely get away with 2-3 paragraphs.

I do write AS MUCH AS I NEED TO MAKE A POINT.

As for the attention span, I am not writing for "slow" people. I can read a book in few hours, I would expect people to be able to scan a page without headaches. If they're this stupid, maybe I don't need them on my sites