With The BiBs they accept nominations in each categories, and then the 11 with the most nominations and 5 chosen by BritMums are put through. All of those 16 then receive votes from the public, and the one with the most votes win.
With The MADs, you can nominate the blogs in each category, and those with the most nominations are put through as finalists, and then the winner is voted for by the public.
There’s a problem, right there.
You see, it’s all about the ‘most nominations’ and/or ‘the most votes’, the powers that be ensure you fit into the categories, but what about the decent blogs that have fewer readers? Are the most popular blogs the best ones?
Ultimately the way both awards work means that unless you have a large following who are willing to nominate / vote you’re screwed. Why can’t these awards work like ‘proper’ awards? Where things are nominated, and then a judging panel look at them, and actually JUDGE them? Movies, Music and the Theatre aren’t judged by how big they are, or how many people see them – why are blogs?
Surely working like that would ensure that the smaller, niche, blogs get a chance, because ultimately, no matter how good your blog is, if your audience or following isn’t big enough, you’ll never win an award.
What do you think?