The Blood Red Pencil recently had a good entry about editing blog posts. There's a traditional school of thought that, once the blog publishes, it lives as is - correct or riddled with errors. I completely disagree, and the reasons mentioned here are valid. Be sure to read the dozen or so comments for how other writers feel about the subject.
Now go read through your own blog posts for the past week, correct any grammatical errors, and while you're at it, check the flow of your posts from day-to-day. Bottoms up, of course.
Not sure what you mean by "flow." I'll take it to mean the length. I try to vary my posts. Some way long - these mostly when an author visits. Some short - usually a link to something else. Most about average. I try not to do too many way long ones. I know when I visit a blog, I like the posts to be relatively easy and quick to read.
'Course, you may have been referring to "flow" as it relates to errors. In which case, I try to find all mine before I publish, but if there are mistakes I see after it goes live, I edit. And if I miss a mistake, I'm thankful when someone else points it out to me.
Of course I edit my blog posts after publishing them. I even alter the content if someone seems confused by what I've said. It's the one place in publishing where do-overs are allowed.
I correct my posts if I find an error, even if it's days later. I go over my posts and even read them aloud to see how they sound. If I've written a sentence backwards, I fix it so it makes more sense.
Post a Comment