BlogHer’s influence has exploded since I last attended in 2006. We went to BlogHer ‘06 in San Jose when our client Weight Watchers Online agreed to be an event sponsor. That year, there were 750 attendees and the sponsors sat at small, skirted tables under a pavilion smaller than my apartment. Other than General Motors, we were really the only major consumer brand represented. This year,  there were more than 2,400 attendees and the sponsor “expo” comprised two large rooms filled with brands like Jimmy Dean, P&G, Walmart, Pepsi, McDonalds, Stride Rite and Earth’s Best, among dozens of others.

Recent BlogHer research shows blogs are growing faster than traditional websites as online destinations. Three quarters of the population are active (once a week or more) social media users vs. half of the population in 2009. Three quarters of the population are active (once a week or more) social media users vs. half of the population in 2009. Facebook is #1 among the top then media destinations, but Twitter didn’t make the cut. Twenty seven percent rely on blogs when making a purchasing decision and 34 percent rely on social media channels. Here’s a link to the full survey.

Female bloggers are making a major impact on people’s lives and even influencing legislation. Sure there are a lot of mommy bloggers out there talking about playgroups, the carpool and kid products they love (all issues that matter to me, btw). But the blogosphere is about way more than that. I went to a panel about how to build a community for a cause. The room was filled with women who are dealing with tremendous challenges and engaging with and helping others though their blogs. The panelists included voices from www.gimpgirl.com and www.violenceunsilenced.com. A few members of the audience received applause when they introduced themselves. It’s quite moving when a previously anonymous blogger introduces herself and realizes how many fans she has – like Anita Jackson from www.momsrising.com.

The jury is out on whether bloggers should criticize products or companies. I went to a panel on fashion blogging and much of the conversation was about how to work with sponsors. Interestingly, all three bloggers talked about how they sometimes approach potential sponsors with ideas, much like a traditional publication would do with advertisers. They also encouraged sponsors to approach bloggers with an open-ended conversation (i.e. “I would love to connect with you to figure out how we might work together.”) But they weren’t in agreement about how honest they should be when they don’t like a particular brand. Two felt it was better to focus on the positive so they didn’t alienate would-be sponsors. The other clearly felt her honesty is what makes her audience keep coming back. They did all agree, though, that criticizing with a diplomatic and professional voice was the only way to go.

Bloggers will consider giving editorial exposure for free products they receive, but they want to get paid by their sponsors. If a brand “mandates” the inclusion of links or a specific number of Tweets, they’d better be ready pay for it. One audience member in a brand session I attended asked the blogger panel how she could encourage bloggers to participate in a video project she was hosting. They asked if she offered to pay them. You can imagine the reaction of the room when she answered, “It’s a journalistic opportunity.” Don’t forget journalists do get paid a salary that’s funded, in part, by advertising.

Saying I was raised on McDonald’s is an exaggeration. But when my mom was pregnant, she handled bookkeeping for a Mickey D’s franchisee and, needless to say, she chowed down on many Big Macs while I was in utero. I also have fond memories of childhood birthday parties underneath the Golden Arches and posing for photos with Ronald McDonald. So I was shocked when I read that Corporate Accountability International (CAI) was calling for clown’s resignation.

The Retire Ronald campaign argues that “for nearly 50 years no one has been better at hooking kids on unhealthy food, spurring an epidemic of diet-related disease.” The timing of this campaign, which includes a Web site, a Twitter feed, a Facebook page and grassroots outreach, couldn’t be better. The group’s press conferences in New York and San Francisco and a protest outside a Times Square McDonald’s coincide perfectly with the momentum of Michele Obama’s Let’s Move campaign. Smart.

But unless Ronald has been covertly offering cramped rides to McDonald’s in his clown car – he isn’t to blame for the obesity problem and his “retirement” isn’t likely to help matters. The problem lies with parents opting to feed fast food to their children and not teaching proper nutrition at home. While obviously not a healthy meal, eating a McDonald’s value meal once a month or even once a week won’t make you fat and this campaign probably won’t force Ronald’s retirement from position of chief happiness officer. Like it or not, McDonald’s, an iconic brand, will weather this storm – just like it did when Super Size Me was released and the “experiments” currently circulating online showing its food doesn’t rot.

The Let’s Move and Retire Ronald campaigns are very different, but both ultimately want children to make better decisions when it comes to what they eat. And they’re both garnering the attention they were intended to. As with any campaign designed to change behaviors, knowing your target audience is key. Let’s Move is addressing parents and children (and not victimizing any one source of our obesity problem) and, as such, will likely have a longer shelf life than a Happy Meal or the CAI’s efforts.