“It’s (the elements that help establish bloggers’ identity as readers) one reason I like using enigmatic titles rather than spelling everything out. It’s like, if you’re a Kottke.org reader who’s ready to read, then read. And trust me that I’ll make it worth your while” (Carmody).
People nowadays don’t read every blog or article they see, instead they click the ones on their screens that have the catchiest title or says something in the title that spikes a specific interest. This is one of the things that Carmody touches on, but spins it in a positive way by explaining the title of her blog is catchy for the reason that it’s mysterious and enticing enough to provoke readers to click on it. He seems to explain that after the blog has grabbed the readers’ attention and the reader begins to actually read the article, it would be ‘worth it’. This makes me wonder about people who just skim the articles instead of reading in depth and fully understanding them, like Carmody encourages for them to do. Does this idea of catchy titles still apply to the ‘skimmers’? Is it the ‘structure’ of the blog that affects their ability to read it in depth and want to only skim it and not fully read it?
samshep 
Excellent question. Count it. I’m pretty sure Carmody would agree that those “skimmers” are likely drawn by the structure of a post, perhaps even *more* so than those more likely to read in-depth, because they’re subconsciously looking for ways to understand and consume each text quickly. That doesn’t necessarily help the blogger, but hopefully it helps the blogger understand her audience better as much more varied in their intentions than perhaps a traditional conceptualization of audience would do.
LikeLike