Jean Dublog

2005-12-30T20:05:00.000-08:00

Wine Blog

I've got a new blog up and running. That's where my real energy and passion lies. Check it out!

2005-12-07T18:16:00.000-08:00

Blogged Survey Results
Just a few weeks ago, I posted a plea here for bloggers to let me know what they thought about ethics in blogging. Twenty of you were kind enough to share your thoughts with me. Another heartfelt thanks to all of you. You really rock. And, as promised, here are the results. This is not my whole paper, too long to make for good blogging; just the results.

Results
Is there a widely embraced code of ethics among bloggers?
• 70 percent No
• 20 percent Yes
• 10 percent Don’t Know

Most of the bloggers who responded elaborated by citing one or two basic tenets that they follow (to be explored at some length in Question #3), but few saw little evidence of uniform ethics at work in the blogosphere. One Connecticut blogger said the lack of a set of rules is part of the appeal of blogging.

“Part of the allure of the blogosphere is the ‘wild wild west’ mentality that seems to permeate it. Some blogs hold themselves to ethical standards, others do not. I try very hard to keep my blog focused on published reports and the facts. I do, of course, inject my own biased opinion because I can,” said the blogger.

Another Connecticut blogger said blogging is “as close to pamphleteering as you can get. The ‘ethos’ of blogging is as varied as the bloggers.” Others remarked similarly that bloggers are an extremely diverse bunch from different backgrounds, ages and points of view who cannot possibly be held to one set of standards. One even stated that blogging is the result of “an individual’s obsession, done without consultation.” Several were adamant that the “blogger owns the site and sets his/her own rules.”

A couple of bloggers do see some minimal ethical standards at work, though one of them said these tepid standards “don’t go much past the etiquette stage at this time.” Several said, however, that they hoped ethical standards would become more widely embraced over time.

How are ethics among bloggers evolving?
The answers to this question were quite varied. If there was any consensus at all it could be seen chiefly among four bloggers who said that over time a code of ethics will emerge for blogging that is inspired by ethical standards applied to journalism.

“As some independently produced blogs gain more and more attention, I do see some ethics standards emerging that are similar to those that journalists follow. Ultimately, it comes down to visitors, and I do believe serious blogs have serious readers who want an information source that is accurate and ethical in its practices,” stated one blogger.

Other comments included:
• “It is becoming more important to those who want to remain credible to double check their info before posting. It is also becoming less ethical not to provide links to sources.”
• “I don’t think bloggers will ever seek independent confirmation or keep a stable of confidential sources.”
• “I’ve seen no meaningful discussion of ethics amongst bloggers, nor do I think there is a coherent community of bloggers. I think a discussion of ethics in blogging is a waste of time.”
• “As new bloggers come forward and as issues are discussed I think there is an evolution – not of the ethics but of the bloggers themselves. They are coming to realize the need for decency, truth, standards.”
• “Locally. People try to live up to the standards they see manifest in the blogs they read and respect. And, people call others out (especially those they otherwise respect) for lapses of judgment on blogs.”
• “I would postulate that there’s going to be a drift to the two extremes on this issue, at least in terms of popularly read blogs…I wouldn’t be terribly surprised to see either a normal or a bimodal distribution develop among the blogging community regarding ethics.”
• “Ethical standards can be on a case by case basis, depending on the subject matter. The standards will change depending on the topic.”

Do blogethics vary by region?
• 5 percent Yes
• 40 percent No
• 55 percent No answer or unclear

Do blogethics vary by blog topic?
• 45 percent Yes
• 10 percent No
• 45 percent No answer or unclear

Clearly, there is little support for the idea that blogging ethics currently vary depending on the geographic location of the blogger. Roughly half of the bloggers surveyed, however, do believe that different ethical standards come into play depending on the topic of the blog.

“Since blogs exist for just about every interest and field, generally the code of ethics that govern a particular field will follow into the blogosphere. It’s all about credibility and visitors will leave in droves if they feel the information source is not conducting itself in a manner that leads to the reliable dissemination of information,” said one blogger.

Other comments include:
• “I’ll be cynical and say that as a blog gets more sophisticated, so do its attempts to hide any ethical transgressions.”
• “Based on the type of blog (topic), the adoption of ethical behavior does vary. I think that personal blogs may not be as interested in ethics as a blog that is being written with a public voice.”
• “The science folks and academics seem more hard core about honesty than some of the political folks and the Intelligent Design crowd.”
• “Political/news/current events blogs are much more permissive of foul language and strongly worded sentiments than any other kind (e.g., personal journals, expert blogs, science blogs, tech-nerd blogs, etc). Bashing is a natural aspect of political campaigning, but it is not a natural part of kitchen table chat, or scientific discourse.”
• I do agree with the comment above that political blogs tend to be loud, angry, rude and partisan, but I think that as ethical standards (i.e., in regards to plagiarism, openness, etc.) go, political blogs are developing some of the strictest.”

What are the core ethical standards you subscribe to in blogging?
The standards that were mentioned most often in response to this question were “truth” and “accuracy.” Other standards mentioned by several bloggers included not deleting comments that were not SPAM, crediting sources and linking whenever possible to sources or for more information, and correct errors in a timely fashion.

A couple of bloggers also spoke passionately about the need for a blogosphere ethic to help protect the identity of anonymous bloggers. One said that everyone has the right to blog anonymously if they so choose, and that no one has the right to reveal their identities or “out” them.

Here are some of the bloggers’ concerns in their own words:
• “Before you speak, ask yourself, is it kind, is it necessary, is it true, does it improve on the silence?”
• “No full names of friends or family. No deleting/changing the content of posts after, say, 1 hour.”
• “I do vent my frustrations by using some colorful invective at times, but I never attack another blogger, unless he’s a troll.”
• “Honesty, non-plagiarism, keeping it ‘clean’ for every reader.”
• “I very rarely personally insult people, not even Bush.”
• “I am happy to participate and support your project, yet in the spirit of fully participating in it I’ll say that I think this whole discussion is wrong-headed, frankly. The thing about blogging, as with the Internet in general, is that it is completely open…Many to many (sic), self-selecting communities that define themselves and come and go at virtually no marginal cost to the participants. Attempting to bound that space with a set of rules of engagement is irreconcilable with the nature of it.”

Should general blogethics include the following?
All of the following questions were culled from various lists of proposed blogging ethics found on Internet sites. I asked for “yes” or “no” responses to determine what bloggers think of such lists, while minimizing fears about the time required to complete the survey.

Identify and link to sources whenever possible?
• 85 percent Yes
• 5 percent No
• 10 percent No Response or unclear

Never distort content of photos?
• 55 percent Yes
• 30 percent No
• 15 percent No response or unclear

Never publish information you know is inaccurate?
• 80 percent Yes
• 10 percent No
• 10 percent No response or unclear

Show compassion toward those adversely affected by your blog content?
• 55 percent Yes
• 25 percent No
• 20 percent No response or unclear

Show good taste?
• 60 percent Yes
• 15 percent No
• 25 percent No response or unclear

Admit mistakes and correct them promptly?
• 85 percent Yes
• 5 percent No
• 10 percent No response or unclear

Expose unethical practices of other bloggers?
• 50 percent Yes
• 35 percent No
• 15 percent No response or unclear

Never ban a person or delete a comment simply because you disagree?
• 70 percent Yes
• 15 percent No
• 15 percent No response or unclear

Be transparent in all you blog?
• 60 percent Yes
• 20 percent No
• 20 percent No response or unclear

It is clear that this group of bloggers overwhelming supports some basic ethical standards, including identifying and linking to sources, admitting mistakes and correcting them, and never publishing information they know is inaccurate. But it is not clear there is support for anything more than voluntary compliance. And, support for other ethical standards is far from solid. Despite my request for one-word answers, a number of respondents felt the need to elaborate or explain their answers. Some of these comments help shed light on the issues they feel are most important.

For example, 55 percent reported that they believe photo content should not be distorted, but 30 percent opposed such a restriction. Some of those who want the freedom to alter photos do believe in limits of some kind, but they view doctoring photos as akin to satirical writing. As one blogger explained, “I often deal in comedy so distortion is a must. But I make no secret that the distortion is parody and not truth.” Another said, “photoshopping is fun, but it should be either very obvious, or it should be stated that it was retouched.”

Another proposed standard that bloggers were uncomfortable with was the idea of exposing unethical practices of other bloggers. Half said they would, but many others expressed strong reservations. Several said they simply did not have time to “worry” about what other bloggers were doing. “No. I usually leave that to the ‘experts.’ I pick my fights carefully.”

Showing compassion toward those adversely affected by a blog post was another idea that produced mixed reactions. Fifty-five percent were in favor of such a standard, but those who were opposed – those who specifically mentioned that they do political or issues-oriented blogging – objected strongly. “Show compassion to BushCo? I don’t think that’s necessary,” said one blogger. Another said, “Mine is a political blog. Enemies are to be made fun of, destroyed. That is a part of the game. They are free to do the same to me on their blogs.”

2005-11-30T17:58:00.000-08:00

How Sybilized

I really like the following exchange on a blog called Writing as Jo(e), which is a link off of A Delicate Boy, a Brett blog-find. It's a little long and very serious (they're academics, what do you expect?), but check this out.

Jo(e):
"It seems to me that it's only been in the last few years that composition teachers and literature teachers have recognized blogging as a legitimate activity for their students. I think many resisted at first. But more and more, panels on blogging have crept into conferences. Often now, faculty will refer to their course blogs.

"Yes, of course, blogs are different than books. The nature of blogging is interactive and instantaneous. When I write a poem for a literary journal, it gets published more than a year after I wrote it. Blog posts are published within seconds of when they are written. I like the way a blog written by one person can be a text with multiple voices - sometimes personal, sometimes academic, sometimes political. And of course, anyone can post to a blog. You don't have to wait to get noticed by a publisher. I wonder, as publishers increasingly get taken over and ruled by big corporate interests, as small independent presses go out of business just as many independent bookstores have, if blogging is replacing the free exchange of ideas that writers could once do in books."

Dr. K responds:
"I had a discussion recently in a nature & culture class about what technology does to communication and to information, and we all agreed that it two effects: it broadens them and makes them more superficial. It's easy to see that face-to-face communication, where you have gestures, facial expressions, tone of voice, volume, body language, the smell of a person's hair and breath, the sparkle in their eyes, etc., to communicate with, is richer than text messaging. Text messaging on the other hand is efficient and can reach lots of targets quickly--immediately. It's broader and it's trivial. There's a place for that. I think blogs do the same for written communication--it's instantaneous and ephemeral, and archived or not, we rarely go back to it. It can have an effect on us through memory, and that's something for sure. The Internet, in my opinion, has done the same thing to knowledge--it's astonishing what's out there, but the information gets trivialized and made superficial by its instant, easy access."

Couple of ideas here I'd like to chew on. As a class, we've blogged quite a bit about what constitutes a personal blog and the importance of an authentic voice. But Jo(e) really goes for solo blogs that exhibit multiple voices. Impossybil? I have to say, no, yes, maybe (slap). To the extent that we are complex creatures with varied interests and moods, I think our blogs can reflect this and still demonstrate authenticity. Perhaps nothing exhibits better who we are. Brett does this with his literary and personal blogging. Aldon, too. But they walk a fine line. It's blogging with multiple voices that troubles me about Jo(e)'s comments. You can cross all kinds of subject lines, but I think a single, complex, authentic voice needs to shine through as readers are taken from one subject to another. Otherwise, there's no thread. Such a thread makes the blog identifiable and helps us decide if we feel a connection and want to come back. As for Jo(e) and his obnoxious parens, have you noticed in this context that he's Writing as Jo(e)? Is he really Joe? For the moment, presumably. I think I saw a movie about him/her.

That brings me to Dr. K's view of the blogosphere as ephemeral. I largely agree. While some blogs have extensive archives, I seldom use them unless I'm visiting a blog for the first time and want to learn more about the blogger. With millions of blogs posting almost daily, how many will have far-reaching effect and remain memorable? I also agree, no-brainer, with K that there's a place for blogging -- a substantial and very accessible place. I think Dr. K may not quite recognize, or at least address, just how powerful an impact blogs are having, how they are helping to satisfy a widespread hunger for self expression and for connection to new online communities.

Joe, on the other hand, worries that blogs are so powerful they may even replace books. What he doesn't get is that books do not necesarily represent the free exchange of ideas, except among elites and academics. Colonial era pamphleting had far wider impact than the works of John Locke. But what's really important, I think, is to recognize there's room and need for both media. Would Common Sense have happened without Locke? Blogging does not mean social cataclysm, just new forms of social and intellectual interaction for an age populated by overworked, distracted people who need an easier, faster way to freely exchange ideas and connect. The blogosphere is not replacing books so much as the village green. The added benefit is that the blogosphere can accommodate so many more people than a square piece of grass.

2005-11-28T16:49:00.000-08:00

Personal Business

I'm of the opinion that the nuances of the word "personal" may be undergoing changes as a result of blogging. My ancient American Heritage dictionary says "personal" means "of or pertaining to a particular person; private." OK on the importance of the individual here, but, private? To some people, especially older, personal will always mean private, but increasingly, it seems, the label of "personal" is meant to indicate a kind of stamp of authenticity.

I'm sure most of us have checked out Brett's Nonsense blog. This Nov. 28 blog entry seems incredibly personal -- I admire his candor and style here and in other posts. But is it private? Obviously not, since it's laid bare in the blogosphere. Are we intrigued and entertained then, almost salaciously, because he has chosen to make public details that should be private? Perhaps some are. But I think Nonsense is personal because it looks and feels authentic, a true expression of the soul. The same details buried in an overly written, rationalized account wouldn't feel nearly as personal, or as authentically bloggy. The personal detail of so many personal blogs may obscure the greater importance of authenticity, but it is there.

It's easier to separate the importance of personal detail and an authentic personal voice in other types of blogs, such as Colin's Courant blog. I don't think I need to go into a lot of detail about this, since I agree with nearly everything Dr. Papoulis said on the subject. In fact, I was on the same track myself (I know it's hard to believe) when I painted myself into a corner while trying to be brief and amusing in a response to this Colin post. I do believe that when you promise certain detail ("I'll post them on my blog") you have to deliver. But this kind of detail is generally of little importance, in the end, when blogging about community issues or about esoteric topics or about interesting odds and ends.

So, effective, resonating blogging does not require the airing out of anyone's personal business, but it is without a doubt a matter of executing personal business. As we've stated before in class, bloggers are in the business of self expression and making connections. I maintain the less personal, or authentic, the blogging voice, the more tenuous and fragile are these connections. We all know what corporations, thanks to their advertising dollars, have to say. With their political and media connections, government policymakers' points of view are well known. What we yearn for in the blogosphere is genuine interaction with people who think and feel. It's not a matter of four-letter words, though they may add to certain discussions, or online shouting, but it is a matter of uncensored, from the gut thought and feeling.

The reasons vary, of course. Some may seek validation; others the spirited interactivity of a verbal joust. But if we seek self expression and connection, the more likely we are to fail if we are met with the bland or the impersonal.

So, I'm going to look at the word "personal" a little bit differently from now on. After all, bloggers take it "personally."

2005-11-19T12:27:00.000-08:00

Connecticut Blogger Survey

Of course, you know Colin McEnroe's class has been studying blogs this semester. Many of you stop by now and then. And, you may have guessed it's term-paper time. For my shot at the beast, I want to talk to as many of you as possible. I want to know what you think about blogging ethics. What blogethics do you subscribe to? How are blogethics evolving across the blogosphere?

For my unscientific survey, I've got several open-ended queries and a short list of questions meant to evoke a yes or no response. I would very much appreciate hearing from you -- just leave your responses in the comment field or e-mail me! No anonymous comments, please. I just need to make sure it's one to a customer.

QUESTIONS:
1. Is there a widely embraced code of ethics among bloggers?

2. How are ethics among bloggers evolving?

3. Do blogethics vary by region? By blog topic?

4. What are the core ethical standards you subscribe to in blogging?

Please answer the following with yes or no.

Should general blogethics include the following:
A. Identify and link to sources whenever possible.
B. Never distort content of photos.
C. Never publish information you know is inaccurate.
D. Show compassion toward those adversely affected by your blog content.
E. Show good taste.
F. Admit mistakes and correct them promptly.
G. Expose unethical practices of other bloggers.
H. Never ban a person or delete a comment simply because you disagree with that person.
I. Be transparent in all you blog.

Thanks for your thoughts on the matter. I pledge to let you know what kind of results I find when I wrap up my project.

John

2005-11-13T13:30:00.000-08:00

Is Video Better?

Just a reminder, CM, that I'll be traveling on business and unable to blog the rest of the week. Glad it wasn't last week, or I would have missed all the fun in the church of blog. But, while I feel bad about the time away, I was able to take in a few vlogs before I go.

I'm struggling with my thoughts about some of them, so let me start with the easier to digest. Rocketboom is pretty cool, an entertaining and slick video blog. It's regular as clockwork, five days a week, which almost makes it more of a professional production, but certainly less so than Wonkette. If it is slick, the folks at Rocketboom nonetheless seem proud of the fact that they're doing their thing on the cheap, not the work of dozens. Instead, it is the voice of basically two people, Andrew Baron and Amanda Congdon.

They describe their product as a mix of "information and commentary from top news stories to quirky Internet culture," a description I'd agree with. Sometimes video oddities already on the web seem to inspire a particular vlog; sometimes they do original video of interesting local color like the Brooklyn Brewery. Other times they offer up a creatively written, but flat video work, on an issue like the environment in Sept. 9th's "young republican" piece. In most cases, however, the video seems like the impetus for the piece and the end product is very entertaining. There is a political message behind some pieces, but the messges seem to be delivered with more artistry than we've seen in text-based political blogs.

The other vlogs I visited all seem to be more personal. In fact, I could find little of the polemic stuff that we've read in so many other blogs -- though admittedly I'm pressed for time in this search. It does make me wonder, however, if the availability, or lack thereof, of video around subjects like politics and religion limit the ability of vloggers to overtly tackle some subjects. Exits and Entrances, for example, seems to be consumed by this young woman's quest for a job -- except, jarringly, when a friend has video available from Sudan. Or, perhaps it's just that the quest for an interesting, artistic visual product in many cases takes priority over message development.

In any event, so many other vlogs seem to be the result of the artistic expression of young people consumed by the issues they face in their daily lives. Carl Weaver, for example, seems hellbent on examining the banal. I was tempted at first to describe him as dreadfully dull, but a very dry wit does emerge from time to time.

One mildly interesting piece I found was in Annieisms, specifically Annie's April "video conversation" about why she vlogs. Apparently vlogs are perfect for young people with short attention spans, that's certainly appealing to her. She also is really revved by comments and by the sense of community she enjoys with other vloggers. But, while immediacy seems important to vloggers, as it is to bloggers, it seems as though many have trouble producing enough video to vlog extremely often. So it seems the limits of time and technology trumps ideals in the vlogosphere.

2005-11-09T18:46:00.000-08:00

Faithfully

I really like Brett's pick, A Big Jewish Blog. This guy's got a great sense of humor. I was afraid from his tagline that I might be subjected to a little too much poetry when what I wanted was engaging blogspeak, but not so. In fact, the use of poems was nicely done. The poem for Yom Kippur was great.

I'm not able to rave about Renegade Rebbetzin, though I understand why Colin is enchanted -- read Colin's tagline. Nuff said. She's one loud and brash meshugeneh. Great blogging voice, though a little too insular, and at the same time, over the top, for me. But that blog voice works with many, doesn't it? She's got 10 times the number of commenters, and probably readers, as Big Jewish Blog.

My question, however, is, are these really faith, religious blogs? They seem more like cultural blogs to me. Perhaps that's being overly restrictive. They don't really delve into issues at the heart of their faith. But they sure do paint a colorful picture of life among those who closely identify with their faith.

And, for something completely different, I really liked Christian Alliance For Progress. I don't think they are necessarily doing any revolutionary blogging here, but this blog represents a valiant attempt to separate religious identity from right-wing politics. Compelling, rational stuff offering another view on how faith can translate into political action.

2005-11-07T17:25:00.000-08:00

Life of Ben

I was thinking of penning a post about how religious subject matter may not be the best fodder for blogging -- it seems like most get weighted down and drown in their own slowly gelling sermons before they quite get going. And then I dived into They Will Know Us By Our T-Shirts. My faith has been restored -- virtually anything can be made interesting and fun in the hands of a good blogger.

Ben, a seminarian from Minneapolis, has a pretty entertaining and often insightful blog that lampoons many religious traditions without mocking core beliefs. His probing, playful eye is perfect for making religious matters appealing to the blogosphere. Check out How May I Serve You," or "It's All In My Mind." His posts offer both the appeal of humorous personal musings while working in a Christian bookstore and a probing of some troublesome issues for a 21st Century Christian.

Like any truly conversational blog, T-Shirts also proves interesting by finding a network of similarly provocative blogs and websites that lampoon the serious-minded and smug. Some might call them blasphemous or even sick, but I marveled at the boldness of sites like J2K-five. Man, it's irreverent -- "who cut the jeeze?" The Jesus pictures of the week have been lambasted by many readers, but they say it loud and clear in the blogosphere, lampooning the sanctimonious and the blatantly commercial tendencies among many Christians.

These sites appeal primarily, it seems to me, not to those who dismiss religion but to those who see their faith shackled by ridiculously outdated traditions and even corruption. These sites poke serious fun at religious conventions and the conventional while leaving room for faith a whole lot more accommodating to the cynnical unwilling to drink the Kool-aid. It seems like a humorous, perhaps ribald, way of convincing others in the blogosphere that there are plenty of others out there who don't buy it all but remain connected by a tether of faith.

2005-11-06T11:49:00.000-08:00

Church of Blog

Thinking about religious blogging really takes some focus to prevent going down side roads that can easily get one lost in sprawling issues. I'm also taking a pledge to avoid using certain phrases I've probably relied on too often, i.e., "preaching to the choir," because I don't want to "punnish" anyone reading about this particular blogging environment.

The question of audience and blogging assumptions, discussed in our last class, is very much in play here, especially in John Rush's fervent Anvil & Fire blog. The blogosphere, of course, does not belong solely to those who are skilled in edgy and tight blogspeak, but most of us seem to agree that adherence to this blogging aesthetic is more likely than not to increase the blogger's sphere of influence by making the blog more eye and ear-catching. Anvil & Fire has plenty of passion, of a kind, but this Tennessean of faith seems more fond of sermons than conversations.

There are some appeals to readers for reactions. And, some posts raise questions that seem intended to provoke discission, such as what an "unenlightened, black powder muzzle-loading, hick-on-the-mountain" is to make of a Buddhist Peace Pergoda as a neighbor. But most of these posts are sermon-like explorations of religious issues that are liberally sprinkled with Bible passages.

Rush seems sometimes uncertain of whether blogging really syncs up with his mission. In his October 18 post, Rush wonders openly whether blogging really helps or whether he's just "preaching to the choir." Is blogging noble? While blogging is a perfectly legitimate forum for addressing the spiritual needs of small communities as well as large, I think the evidence shows that this style and manner of blogging is unlikely to spread Rush's message beyond this particular small sphere. If you look at the comments, they are relatively few and they tend, for the most part, to be from the same individuals.

In expanding on an earlier post about religious fundamentalism, Rush's October 6 post speaks directly to the issues of assumptions and audience expectations. That he is addressing those who practice the same manner of faith is evident in his explanation that a discussion of fundamentalism "assumes an audience really understands the issues. It does not assume the understanding of the population at large."

In contrast, Bad Christian Blog uses a more irony-laden voice sometimes spouting naughty words, frequently expressed in a more conversational style. The result is often many, many more comments. Brandon sometimes takes a playful approach to his posting, even the title "Bad Christian" is meant to turn a rebuke into a badge of honor by demonstrating how being liberal more naturally fulfills the Christian life. He even has an amusing defense of the use of "swear words," which he deems appropriate as long as they are honest and the best words available to express a strong emotion.

But, just as much as his particular take on Christian life, I think Brandon's got so many interesting conversations going on in his blog because he understands the nature of the beast and he does desire to speak to a wide audience of people who also ponder how to be a religious person not in the mold of the Christian right. There's a substantial linking network here, and the comments seem to come from a wide-ranging group. Brandon does sometimes get quite serious in his arguments and goes on a bit, but he is able to engage other bloggers. Anvil does not seem to have the same goals in mind, and his smaller world seems to reflect his own assumptions about what is noble and worthwhile, however small the choir.

2005-11-01T16:46:00.000-08:00

Deepening the Debate or Simple Pandering?

Thank god, I thought it was just me. So many of these political blogs have stylistic differences but little to truly make them stand out for originality or insight. As noted, many of these political blogs do use more vivid language, fast research and quick takes on the topics du jour. But I'm not seeing a richer debate; it's all about satisfying the ravenous hunger of an increasingly polarized and venomous political culture. Blogs with the sharpest arrows and deadliest aim are most likely to fit into the linking network of like-minded partisan pundits.

Just as Watergate spawned a new generation of journalist wanna-be's, Rathergate and a handful of smaller blog-exposes have bred poison-pen blogs focused on picking the bones clean of the most trivial political news; they are legion, and they are largely uninteresting -- unless you want to have your anger validated and confirmed. The political climate is thunderous enough to stir the emotions of even the mildest political apprentice. These linking networks offer a way to feel like a part of the fracas, blogeeks in gang colors.

More interesting, in some ways, is the Flu Wiki, which may seem at a glance like a jumble of information but which really shows a cyber-community coming together to truly broaden a discussion. There is no need to do focus groups or surveys to determine what content is most meaningful to users because the users are in the driver's seat. The content here is so rich and multi-dimensional, from discussion forums and brainstorming hubs to expert predictions and factual charts.

What's going on, it seems to me, is an attempt to exert influence, if not control, over the flow of information and on a potential crisis itself. Ever distrustful of official sources, certainly since the armed feds tried to hunt down ET, we can share information and resources as a community of similarly focused verminophobes. The need to share and tap into conventional wisdom is as old as folk or home remedies themselves. Here it satisfies the yearnings of vast communities more connected by Internet networks than by shared property lines. The experts are here, too, but this collaborative project has produced an amazingly diverse resource.

2005-10-31T16:25:00.000-08:00

Open and Closed Source

While impressed with many aspects of Daou Report yesterday, I wanted to explore more of Salon to help gain insight into the role such sites are playing in the shaping of public debate. What I observed in other site features, especially the blog box, leads me to more firmly believe that this type of blogging is having a profound impact on public debate by allowing many of the previously voiceless to exert significant pressure on the agenda-setting process and bring immediacy to the vetting of information. But to anyone who thinks that by "open sourcing" blogging is bringing greater transparency to the process, I would suggest that transparency can be an illusion and critical thinking is as necessary as ever.

Even Daou, who invites submissions, warns he cannot use everything. So, what criteria is applied -- besides the 12-hour rule? Could he choose the more ludicrous right-wing posts for the purpose of favorable comparisons? I don't really see evidence of that, but I certainly like to proceed with caution. Even most blogs with their frequent and undisguised links to other sources appear to be completely above board in making their points, but often there is little attempt to track a meme to its original source -- if known. So, I see transparency to a point but we all still need to focus to see to the core.

So, by helping to drive the political agenda and by driving immediacy like it's never been driven before, blogs have changed the process for good. But I don't think blogs will become as dominant a source of information as many postulate. Right now, many political/public policy blogs are really singing to their own choirs. Yes, the mainstream media is just outside listening closely, but I doubt the congregation is going to draw from any other sects. To a certain extent, this type of blogging is a direct outgrowth of the political extremism that has grown so dramatically in the last 15 years, as a result of gerrymandering, etc. To these constituents, a medium that wholeheartedly supports their agendas is, oh, so gratifying. Those blogs that appear to evenly offer up a real conversation and debate of the issues are, in my view, either veiling their true agendas or never going to be as popular as the more openly partisan.

2005-10-30T11:41:00.000-08:00

Well And Daoued

One of the most interesting things over at Salon is without a doubt the Daou Report, probably one of the most well-thought-out blogs devoted to influencing policy and politics. No bones about it, this is a blog that craves influence and prestige.

Just look at the expressed purpose of the blog. 1) Offer a diverse, unfiltered sample of online political discourse; 2) probe ideas and perspectives behind the current political divide; 3) examine the relationship between blogs, media and political establishments. You don't have to get too far into Daou Report to see these objectives at work, though with uneven results, from my perspective. But what struck me most was that the third objective seems to be the real fire in Daou's belly.

Not only does he spend quite a bit of time in his essay writing talking about the "triangle" of influence between blogs, media and political establishments, overall this blog just has all the earmarks of a site meant not just for the politically minded but for the movers and shakers, serious political junkies and those committed to moving progressive politics forward. We're not talking here about a few clever witticisms or terse-but-sharp blog rants about the issue of the day; this is a well constructed and lengthy chain of information designed to further educate and fortify the faithful.

Daou, of course, devotes a good deal of space to the right and left points of view in side-by-side fashion. You can get a quick overview of what liberal and conservative bloggers are saying about the issues of the day and/or read them at greater length. It can be interesting and fun to compare the competing points of view on issues such as the indictment of Libby. Many of the conservative bloggers seem to be doing their best imitation of Monty Python, "it's only a flesh wound," because Rove was not indicted, while others claim the indictment is next to meaningless because its grounds are confusing and not pointedly about illegally releasing information. The liberals claim it's larger than it appears because it shows an administration hellbent on getting its enemies, and it shows Republicans in general are the anti-ethics party.

Most of these reflect the quick-thrust style and snarky tone of the blogosphere. But Daou's essays do not. They are more thoughtful and well reasoned. "Sliming the Quakers," for example, is a carefully crafted deconstruction of recently posted right-wing rants about the Quakers and their observances for the 2,000 dead American soldiers in Iraq. Daou manages to build a very well-reasoned argument against the bloggers' tactics, decrying the "strange interesection of hostility and rationality" found in these blogs. From the nature and length of this essay, the way it picks apart conservative tactics, I get the sense he's trying to help other progressives arm themselves for the battles going on in their own local blog trenches.

In his trinity essays, Daou goes on at length about the influence of blogs today and how what the Democrats need is not their own brand of rants modeled on Republican behavior but rather a heartfelt blog voice in policy and politics to replace the dry "press release voice" all too present in Democratic speeches. It's an interesting point of view that really underscores the likelihood that blogs will continue to influence politics. But it is also interesting to me that these lengthy arguments speaking to the direction and heart of progressive politics are aiming high -- at those who are most involved in the future of the Democratic party.

While the liberal vs. conservative blogs could help influence and educate the public at large, I think the variety and volume of material here is clearly meant for true liberal audiences. To help steer the direction of the cause and to help others be armed for the fight ahead.

2005-10-23T16:59:00.000-07:00

A Dog's Life

I can't for the life of me remember the "very germane thing" Colin mentioned Thursday, but as Republic of Dogs was the link behind this reference I took it out for a test drive and kicked the tires. It was interesting not only for its oddly compelling blend of personal and political blogging but for the long and involved threads he manages to inspire.

Res P. followed up an incredibly honest and personal post on Monday the 18th with a very insightful (a trait he denies having, wink-wink) political post that disassembles a shallow Kos piece postulating that contested policies among the Ds are really a result of "generational differences." Res P. builds a very convincing argument for why this position is laughable. But it's the comments thread I find worth digging into.

First, I think it's interesting that this political piece is quite a bit longer than we all seem to agree is advisable for posting in the blogosphere. But, nonetheless, he managed to inspire 124 comments, so obviously he's connecting. Could be his personal posts have struck a chord and he's got a big following. Could be also that this piece is just that compelling -- it certainly reinforces the antipathy many in our class felt toward Kos and its obnoxious rants and exclusionary policies.

But, with the help of an engaging blog voice peppered with a smattering of self-deprecation, he seems to have his readers identifying with him and sympathizing with his point of view. He claims no special insights and beats himself up for misspellings and snarking. Very reasonable and likeable guy, so much so that readers rise to his defense. Check this out.

"In the blogosphere, snark is the grease that oils the gears, and you are permited to attack others for the very sins you have just committed yourself," said one reader. This advice is undoubtedly heartfelt and consistent with past practice, but I suspect it will mean less and less as the blogosphere gets more and more mainstream. Less on the cutting edge.

I also got a chuckle out of the readers who are looking for a source so that they can learn how badly they are "getting shredded in class." Amazing how much concern our little class has generated. While everyone indulges in a certain amount of criticism, bloggers should know we're only trying to learn. But I suspect they know as well as we that blogging in the presence of review and scrutiny is bound to change. And, we're the least of the catalysts.

2005-10-19T17:29:00.000-07:00

A Lot of Bull

OK. After cruising around with the Three Bulls, I'm convinced they're not talking to me. So what is their purpose? How are they using language to ensnare, or at least influence? Very colorfully and cleverly.

What I think they have done is create a fun clubhouse with their blog, decorated with a colorful design, lots of photos and words that are just as clubby. They're self-deprecating, "don't now what we're talking about either." "Trash Like 3 Bulls." They even post as a tag team of cool guys, a club, a cool clique. So they use a lot of young, hip language without ever getting long-winded, definitely understanding how to connect with other blog-minded youth. The mish-mash of topics underscores the idea of a bunch of crazy guys who have a unique, fun view of the world.

So, if they're crazy and they don't know what they're talking about, at least they're cool and honest about their limitations. And, if the political blogs that pop up between the random celebrity and culture commentaries have a distinct anti-administration point of view, readers who like to feel like they're members of the club, too, in spirit, are likely to agree. It's not like they're trying to sign anyone up for a campaign, it's just fun sniping at a lame administration.

The persuasion here does not stem from detailed, well-reasoned arguments, but rather from the reaction you are meant to "feel" as you encounter the ludicrous amidst the cool colors all around you.

Now, Sadly, No! is more interesting to a middle-aged word guy. You're not exactly going to get long-winded arguments here either, but his use of words is feisty and fun. Employing brief, pithy posts, Brad R. uses a lot of links to get those who really want to think about these things more information. As for the rest, he uses the right's excesses and mistakes to illustrate the "truth" and insight behind his cutting, mocking headers, such as "Wingnutting" and "Completely Delusional."

His use of sarcasm and scorn is meant, I think, to create a bad smell around the political figures he targets, creating a miasma of inaccuracy and ineptitude that these figures can't escape wherever they go. And, it's done with sarcasm and humor, protecting the blogger to some extent from the angry-young-man syndrome, to some extent. The playful questions under their title make them sound pretty benign. There's no gentle, or even clever, persuasion here. The scorn is meant to rob the subjects of even a chance of credibility -- often effectively.

RumbleLizard is much different yet. Her posts are about anything and everything, from bad concert experiences to her wish lists in life -- all described in the hip vernacular of a somewhat rebellious, even once-troubled (Have you ever hurt yourself on purpose?) young woman. These posts show a resilient young person surviving the insanity around her, and the in-your-face descriptions make it a vivid, and tangible experience. The political stuff she points to seems like more craziness to be overcome. This writing can be very effective with those who can't help but empathize because some of it feels so familiar.

Are all of these devices in the blogosphere having an effect in the mainstream media? I think it's underway, but I think it's very slow in coming to the print world but much faster in the world of television reporting. Just look at Fox, the network real journalists love to hate. You've got more in your face, trash-talking pundit programs than you do news -- a style perfectly suited for the blogosphere. And, you've got programs like Fox Report that offer super brief tidbits of news. As for print, they seem suspicious of the blogosphere and are approaching it in baby steps. Just look at all the writers in Huffington Post, they're irregular and wordy, for the most part. This will change eventually. The blogosphere's influence can only grow.

2005-10-18T17:16:00.000-07:00

Literary Blogging?

That headline just might get Neddie's attention. Neddie Jingo sure did get all self-conscious and reflective once he learned that we actually were going to study him this week. Neddie's nervous witticisms aside, I'm not sure I'd know what to make of "attempting literature," either.

I hate to flatter, but Neddie has a pretty cool cultural blog. He's got an appealing blog voice, despite the fact that he relies on irony and word play to entertain and delight his readers. As we've seen from accomplished writers' blogs, it can be tough to pull off some of this stuff without becoming an anti-blogger -- or a long-winded "literary" scrivener. Neddie seems to get it for the most part -- I feel like he's addressing other bloggers. He stays away from the soft writer's voice, most often speaking with purpose and volume.

I'd better qualify what I just said a bit. He does seem to get what the blogosphere demands, being current and using bold language -- yikes, even calling Anne Coulter a "stupid bitch." But his posts are full of baby-boomer cultural references -- I think this is an appealing blog meant for literary-minded yuppies. Judging by the comments, there's a few out there. I sure loved references to one of my favorite visual movies, Fanny and Alexander, and Trekisms galore. The Bush-Miers love notes post is wonderfully sardonic, not meant for those allergic to complete sentences.

So, here's a writer I think is definitely influenced by the blogosphere with its appetite for quick, rapier-like jabs. But the sense of irony and keen satirical voice were definitely developed elsewhere. It definitelty has appeal to this borderline baby-boomer.

But, for a keen study in contrasts, try staying down for long with Xiaxue. I couldn't. It's most definitely a blogging voice, annoying, over-the-top, incessantly self-indulgent. But the problem with this blogging voice is that it's so loud and consistently snarky that it looks like a performance on overdrive. I get so much a sense of playing to an audience, that I'm left out in the cold because I can't find anything real behind the blog.

OK, the legs are definitely real. But the terse, punchy writing, used so effectively by some bloggers, seems empty to me here. The sporadic use of profanity seems staged. The photos are so overly narcissistic that even fashion geeks have to get bored. I felt like I was watching a cyber teeny-bopper on stage.

It definitely exemplifies a style of writing that's pretty common today, but the rhetoric is oh so dull.

2005-10-17T17:38:00.000-07:00

Lance A Little

I can see why Lance would be described as a strong writer. He's a great storyteller whose writing is often witty and absorbing. But has the freedom of the blogosphere shaped the ideas and writing style of this pundit? Hmmm. I think not, though Lance Mannion has to be a name made up for the blogosphere. Or maybe he's overly influenced by the Hollywood movies he loves to write about from time to time (Rock Hudson with a mighty pen?).

He's at his best, I think, when he's able to make a point around a telling anecdote, like the Charlie Meets Bill story. And, he's capable of writing a short, pithy blog that sings to the blogosphere. But when he gets wound up on matters that are close to his liberal heart he can succumb to long-windedness and a strained attempt at humor. And, the Polanski movie review does not gain enough momentum to keep the typical blogger aboard for some of the humorous swipes he takes at actors and directors along the way.

A number of the so-called strong writers I've seen blogging overly like the style they are used to, to the detriment of their blogging personas. I still think the blogosphere is a terrific place to nurture experimentation and innovation stylistically. But the odds of innovation have to go down the better known the writer is before blogging. I really liked many of Lance's posts, like reading Bob Greene's Cheeseburgers except they're more political. A lot of commenters seem to like him and read regularly. But I'm not in awe of where these thoughts came from, nor do I feel like I'm looking at next year's model.

2005-10-16T09:13:00.000-07:00

Strong Coffee

A longer, more careful look at Coffee Rhetoric confirms what most of us already thought, damn good blogger. And, read in the context of Colin's questions of the week, she still stands up as a very compelling blogger and writer.

I'm a little uncertain of how I feel about the suggestion that in blogging there's a freedom from having to worry about readers. Certainly, there's a freedom from having to worry about getting published, and writing to satisfy the tastes of a book-buying public. But I doubt bloggers really don't worry about readers at all. In the case of Coffee Rhetoric, you can certainly see readers are on her mind when she explains her goals for the blog and some of the things that compell her to write. Only a pure diarist thinks nothing at all of readers.

What the blogosphere does provide, for now, is a freedom from conventionality. Coffee Rehetoric has many strengths -- vivid, detailed writing; edgy social experiences; a combative but contemplative voice; and a directness that today's consumers like (isn't that why a Dr. Laura and a Dr. Phil thrive?). Self absorption, which she confesses to, is OK as long as you're direct and humorous about it. In addition, the blogosphere, at least currently, allows for creative expression and experimentation, and Coffee Rhetoric uses it to great effect.

She can tell a compelling story, laced with rich detail, bold language and generational touchstones. Or, explain her inner motivations and idiosyncracies free of tedium. For example, her tastes and interests are defended with a few f-bombs and a lot of attitude on one occasion -- a successful play, it seems to me, to other angry young souls disenfranchised from popularity. Or, she can get across ideas using just a few words to go along with interesting photos. Or, she can use verse to make a statement in an interesting way, though it sometimes puzzles her readers as Osiris Brooding and Singular Matrimony did. Clever introspective stuff, nurtured and encouraged by this new medium called the blogosphere.

The use of these multiple techniques seems perfectly suited for a new medium that only seems vibrant and alive when in the hands of creative youthful spirits such as Coffee Rehetoric. The rules are few, and by using this state of affairs to her advantage she is able to both exercise her writer's wings while connecting culturally to other like-minded souls.

Thank you, and good day.

2005-10-15T12:37:00.000-07:00

57 Varieties of Hynes

I very much enjoyed meeting Aldon Hynes and Tom Fausel Thursday night, very informative discussion. Before moving on, however, I wanted to look at Aldon's Orient Lodge one more time in light of our discussion. I like his blog and have found a number of posts there that I enjoyed reading. But I was interested in someone's suggestion that the wildness of the blogosphere may be starting to decline, and I wonder what that means not only for obviously way-out-there blogs but also multi-dimensional, hard-to define blogs.

I asked Aldon offline why he bills his blog as a "literary outpost" when it seems more like a political blog. It seems political because 171 of his posts are about politics, according to the self-generated categorization on the left side of his blog. But you can see that other posts are about all kinds of things. Fiction (literature?), however, only one entry.

Aldon said that when he started out, literary concerns were at the forefront of his blogging thoughts. Over time, however, he has found himself more and more concerned with political matters, a natural evolution considering his involvement in the Dean campaign and now DeStefano's. Believing that "persona is a function of context," Aldon celebrates his relentless metamorphasis with a bio section containing no less than nine different bio sketches. This contributes to the quirky, sometimes random seeming nature of the blog itself.

While quirky and spontaneous are indeed likeable in the blogosphere, I wonder if a lack of sharp focus or a kind of generalism can last. Others have postulated that bloggers can reinvent themselves in the blogosphere -- they certainly can adopt strong authorial voices that may be nothing like the voices they use in everyday life. But can one continually reinvent oneself in the blogosphere? Will future bloggers be able to straddle topics? Can you be considered compelling and interesting if you don't specialize? Many do it now, but we live in a world of specialists, and conventionalization and categorization are coming to the blogosphere. I suspect we'll see fewer generalized blogs getting much notice unless they belong to celebrities or opinion leaders. Enjoy the wild wild blog-west right now because I totally believe it's going to be changing fast. Aldon may have the right idea when he talked about long-range goals-- and now for something completely different.

2005-10-12T17:06:00.000-07:00

No Place Like Loam

I like reading about natural wonders, especially those close enough to consider for a day trip. So, when I first glanced at Connecticut Windows on the Natural World I thought, here's some dirt and rocks (not to mention a five-lined skink) I might enjoy checking out. And, I thought, here's a true Connecticut voice that speaks to what this place is all about.

Well, it does give a great sense of what Connecticut's natural resources have to offer. There's some good information in here. Trouble is, it's not really a blog with a personal, blogging voice. It's more like an instructional video. Maybe that's Connecticut's real voice, restrained and pedagogical? I like this blog the way I like certain websites -- a resource to turn to when I need information about the subject at hand. I might come here when I'm thinking about a hike. But check in regularly to hear what this blogger has to say, nah.

There are some posts that are a bit timely, about events and environmental developments. And, I have to say what a nice job this blogger does in putting together a visually appealing package. The photos are not only attractive, they truly illuminate the subject of the text. Points for truly caring enough to do many things right. Just needs to synthesize his content into pithy blogging speak. Maybe then we might find it a little easier to see the author, too.

2005-10-11T17:04:00.000-07:00

A Connecticut Yankee in King Ludwig's Court

Tonight I meandered through a number of more personal blogs to find the defining Connecticut voice. No shouting through bullhorns heard here, but there were some interesting whispers here and there. Take Grace the I-91, Exit 6 woman, for example.

I enjoyed reading her posts about life in Germany, and sympathized when her digital camera was stolen. I found her style comfortable and appealing. And, one of the things I liked were the connections to home that grounded her -- like the Red Sox and Bush's antics. The Red Sox are a frequent touchstone for her, but her earlier posts are full of celebrations of little things that say a lot about place, such as celebrating the arrival of summer vegetables at home and favorite restaurants. Not profoundly revealing but worth a look.

In other local blogs, I noted and was going to announce here the grand discovery that another class, at Quinnipiac, is looking hard at blogs. But I just saw in the Comments to Colin's Sunday post that they have discovered us and have announced themselves. I was also going to point out some interesting musings by Chrysanthemum's Culture of Communication about some bloggers attempting to set up their own identities and build their own social communities. Could have been an interesting point of view for our first couple of classes. Oh well.

Another Connecticut blog that definitely creates a real sense of place (on the water) is Connecticut Fishing. Sandy from New Britain has found an amazing amount of material to blog about related to fishing, be it the dredging of Norwalk Harbor or the health of the striped bass population. This blog definitely caters to a narrowly defined Connecticut community and shares almost everything the local angler could want to know about his aquatic backyard. Trouble is, no one is sharing in return. I could find only one comment of late, and that was SPAM. While the blog is absolutely about Connecticut, I'm not sure that it says anything revealing about life in Connecticut.

Susie's Raspberry World is a personal blog that lacks the bold young urban look and feel of Coffee Rhetoric, but has something to say about suburban life in the Nutmeg state. Interestingly, Suzie has what looks like one of the oldest blogs in the state, dating back to 1998. Among her earliest posts (Dec.'98) she notes with amazement how mean many people appear to be in their online journals. She could be more evidence of my earlier speculation that many Connecticut bloggers appear to lack the bitterness of other bloggers. She also offers some insight into what makes personal blogs interesting for others to read. She suggests that she enjoys those that reveal all sides of the writer, good and bad, so that the person seems real, like what is appealing about a good character-driven movie. Blogs that simply describe events or offer certain opinions without giving up the 3-D view of self, no good.

Suzie has a lot of ho-hum posts about this or that movie, but I really do get a sense of place from her journals as she revels in seasonal New England activities. Having lived in Germany at one time, she opines that living in New England is pretty cool, too. She also wryly observes the more out-of-control habits of many nutmeggers, such as those willing to run down their neighbors in their haste to get their morning Dunkin Donuts fix. Have to say I've seen some of that myself.

2005-10-10T13:42:00.000-07:00

The Village Blog

I'm trying to figure out how Connecticut blogs relate to one another, what they say about the state in which we live. It seems a little daunting to look at all identifiable Connecticut blogs this way, so I'm back to Connecticut's political blogs. Most of the politically oriented blogs I've read so far from Connecticut seem to fall short in important and, sometimes, multiple ways. But a few seem to be doing a blogging good job of trying to engage their readers in the local political landscape.

As Colin mentioned, Connecticut Local Politics appears to be far ranging and successful in providing facts and analysis about elections around the state -- the most recent include West Hartford and Enfield. The maps provided do a terrific job of illustrating the political lay-of-the-land. The polls about election issues, the activities of Connecticut's Congressional delegation and other updates then add some of the sizzle to encourage greater research and involvement on the part of the citizenry in their local elections.

Absent some of the more inflammatory partisan rhetoric to be found on other sites, this blog looks to me like more of an informational tool kit for those interested in community or state politics. The posts are regular and the comments fairly numerous, which shows there must be interest out there, thankfully, in local politics.

My Left Nutmeg, on the other hand, bears an imaginitive, if slightly rude, label that portends a more aggressive political message. It's a bland looking blog (looks as though it came off a teletype machine), but it is interesting for content that doesn't mince words when it comes to supporting "progressive" or liberal politics. It's not only Republican Gov. Jodi Rell who takes the heat but also Democratic Senator Joseph Lieberman, who appears to have completely alienated the left-most Democrats in the state.

A regular blogger, what Nutmeg does especially well is encourage and facilitate comment and discussion. Most recent comments are highlighted in a lefthand column, reinforcing the importance of feedback and discussion among its liberal base. Nutmeg also invites guest columns, taking on such topics as N. Branford's town council. Nutmeg says that anyone who registers can post events and diaries...as long as they're related to Connecticut progressive politics. They know what they're about, and if true dissent is discouraged, at least Nutmeg is reaching out like a true blogger to the community to which it is tethered. Only its many plugs for liberal political events are dull -- there's no real blogging content around these posts, mostly just cheerleading.

But if you look at many of the links to other Connecticut blogs that are listed by these two bloggers, you find a more spotty record for blogging. The Accidental Reporter is one such link, to a former television journalist living in Westport who likes to rant against the administration in Washington and an anemic press. Posting infrequently, however, she never gets any momentum going to warrant serious attention.

Interestingly, Caffeinated Geek Girl is one of Nutmeg's recommended links. She does a better job of posting than Accidental Reporter, but she isn't really a political commentator. And, since she has only recently moved to Connecticut from Brooklyn she doesn't really shed much light on Connecticut politics. Her occasional rants against the Bush administration rated her mention, I suppose. But she really offers social commentary, as a new Connecticut resident who is trying to figure things out here on the Nutmeg social scene. But I found only her earliest posts interesting. The later posts have become more general and less about place.

Connecticut Young Democrats is trying to encourage young people to participate in the political process, but it does nothing really to appeal to the audience it claims to seek. The blog really is a bulletin board, with no real blogging voice that would grab the attention of young voters. Their posts are mostly information about events and reprints from The New York Times. Surprise, surprise, no comments to speak of from readers.

David A. Mooney offers a blend of political observations and technology info -- well I suppose there's a market for this somewhere. Unfortunately, his posts also are far too infrequent to generate return visits. Democracy for Connecticut and Left Watch 2.0 suffer from the same weakness.

Slush Guzzler looks sharp and has some interesting, if terse, posts, but it doesn't develop the strong blogging voice I expected from its tagline: "Pickles, Law, Beer and Politics." The semi-regular posts here often seem to fall back on the "open myke," which is another way of saying NOT MUCH TO SAY.

In short, a lot of Connecticut blogs don't seem to be able to keep up with the demands of blogging, and their authors may be short on things to say (perhaps it's that famous New England reserve). But some do get it and their mostly local view of politics probably plays well to the residents of Connecticut's 169 independent fiefdoms. I also think Connecticut bloggers may also be a little better behaved than many of the beltway boys and girls who blog, but perhaps I haven't seen enough of Connecticut's alternative voices yet.

2005-10-09T15:06:00.000-07:00

Citizen Journalism

Among the Connecticut blogs we've been asked to review, I found In Southington one of the most interesting because of my undying interest in journalism and its many challenges today. Too bad this very local blog has just breathed its last.

It's not that this is an especially well done blog but rather that its mission is so very interesting -- do the job that so much of the media is failing to do today. This blogger is (or was) championing the cause that has stirred many in the blogosphere, giving voice to local community residents so that the issues that affect them most can be aired out and fully debated. It appears to be "citizen journalism" right here in River City. In Southington describes its quest as a mission to "look past the headlines" to see what's going on in the community. And, the local media get zinged every so often.

"Don't believe that everything that is happening in this town can be found in the newspapers," In Southington says in its farewell message. "Mediocrity (in the media) is fine as long as the profits roll in," says another post.

The author or authors of this blog seem to have a keen interest in local politics and government, watching closely the activities of the Town Council, the Planning and Zoning Commission and the local Board of Education. They are earnest in their desire for dialogue, inviting comments and even articles from "guest commentators." They also involve their readers in frequent, informal polls on a variety of government and community life questions. "Where do you dine out most frequently?" Or, "who has the best ice cream in Southington?" Or, "rate the opening weekend of the new Apple Harvest Festival." These frequent polls are probably a good way of encouraging interactivity with their readers, but I think they'd help their credibility if they included something about their methodology and sample size.

The blog is not simply an issues forum, however, as the author(s) openly call on others to support certain candidates and not others. It could be operated by a local Democrat, since local Republicans seem to take most of the heat. But it could also be the work of a local gadfly who is simply anti-incumbent and anti-status quo. Positions are not supported with a lot of links to outside research, but there are a few links to local media coverage. Instead, the blogger(s) tends to make anything relevent part of his or her main text, which every so often gets tediously long. For example, the first post I could find back in June was a very long history of a local publication. It made some interesting points, but there was no attempt to pare down and tailor the message for the blogosphere.

In the end, I'd say it was often poorly executed by failing to keep in mind the habits of web users and bloggers. But it is a worthy attempt to plug the community into local issues through the cyberworld. Interestingly, some of the exceedingly long posts did attract comments from a number of people -- so they must have had some success at reaching others in the community. I think this distinctively town-meeting, village-green approach could be something more emblematic of New England bloggers than others. Of course, bloggers everywhere like to scrutinize issues of all kinds. But I've been surprised more than once to see how fascinated some people are in others parts of the country with our town meeting and town council forms of government. A blog devoted to scrutiny of town government and local development seems a natural extension of the town meeting tradition of strong individual involvement. The absence of strong local newspapers from this process in many communities makes such a blog more valuable and interesting. But whether this blog is or is not distinctively Connecticut or New England in its political approach, it is distinctively local in its flavor, from the issues vetted with local board and commissions to the apple festival for which Southington is so well known.

It appears, from their farewell note, that the blogger(s) over time ran into one of the most demanding aspects of blogs -- the need to post frequently to stay compelling and timely. They did not do a bad job with keeping up most days of the week, but it appears it was too much in the end. At least they had the integrity and sense to not continue in a half-ass fashion.

2005-10-08T12:50:00.000-07:00

A State of Conn-Sciousnesss

While directed to Connecticut Conservative as an alternative Connecticut voice to Colin's, I actually found Ex-Donkey Blog more interesting, though still alternative. This is a blog trying to come off as very hip and hoping, I think, to reach young adults interested in politics.

The political stuff is usually fairly brief, a quick jab or two at Dems, and some support for the administration and other conservatives. As an aside, the post trying to analyze Harry Reid's motivations in saying that he "likes" Harriet Miers is just hysterical. I can see the sweat forming on his upper lip. But, Gary seldom gets lost in his prose. And he mixes up the political with plenty of pop culture (Lord of the Rings, attractive actresses and football are among the favorites) references. The Diane Lane obsession seems to place him (has to be male) in his late 30s or 40s -- that and the fact that he supposedly fell off his donkey in rapture while in his early 30s. And, he seems bent on convincing other males in his generational vicinity that this fun-looking mixture of thoughts and tastes is where it's at.

There are plenty of photos and graphics, which makes the overall appearance of the blog kinda fun. His posts are not wordy, even his slightly longer ones, and he's not overly concerned about building complex arguments and linking to lots of supporting articles and research. In short, he seems to have the blooging thing down, understanding what is likely to connect with others like himself, interested in politics but not consumed by the detail. And, still imagining that he's hip.

Connecticut Conservative, on the other hand, does see "red" in a blue state, but he's polite and ever so straight-forward in his blogging, as though he were writing editorials for the hometown newspaper. He uses lots of quotes, like a newspaper story, but his or her voice doesn't seem very strong here. He/she also does not link from the text to articles and research, preferring instead to let the apparent sincerity of his/her analysis do the persuading. It's not amusing, it's not pithy, it's not inflaming -- all characteristics of compelling political blogs I've seen. But what it does have that may attract some readership locally are some musings about the Connecticut political scene. It just seems like such a quiet, country voice compared to the bulk of the political blogosphere.

One I like quite a bit is CT Blue. This obviously liberal blog offers up a lot of political analysis, not as briefly as Ex-Don but he's no Wolcott either. He does not get long-winded, except when quoting Al Gore speeches, and is not using lengthy arguments to slam the administration. But he does manage to lampoon Bush and the right with a little bit of sarcasm and a strong, authorial voice. The use of humorous pictures effectively gets the mesage across to young and older bloggers alike.

He also posts fairly frequently, helping to keep him current. I was a little concerned after a bit of reading that there wasn't enough here about Connecticut -- mostly national. Then I found his Simmons Watch and had to restore the points I had started to take away. Still, he should include more about Connecticut here, considering the title of his blog, and use even more photos to make his effectiveness even greater.

2005-10-06T19:06:00.000-07:00

Post Like The Pros?

After a frustrating, futile evening of trying to access Blogspot, I'm relieved to finally get this posted. Got to keep up! I wanted to compare the trio of pro bloggers I spent most of Wednesday night reading. My verdict -- greatness in one medium does offer some advantages, but it's no guarante of greatness in another medium.

Whatever one may think of Roger Ailes (note: last night I did not know he was not THE Roger Ailes and I have not changed a thing here) and his communications and political resume, the man knows how to blog. He is definitely an example of a blogger who is helped by his well-honed skills as a communicator and political strategist. He seems to understand the enormous value of briefly getting to the point in an amusing, if often caustic, way. He's also not above name-calling (Howie the Putz?), but that may be in recognition of the fact that the extremists on the left and the right seem to like that. But I can't seem to reconcile his record and what seems like a distinctly Democratic voice.

He usually manages to score his points with sharp rhetorical jabs rather than from big round-house punches in the form of well-built arguments. When his posts get lengthy, it's usually because he's busy quoting so many others, often for the purpose of sly ridicule. Does it work? I thought it was interesting that one of the posts that drew the most responses from readers was his unabridged reproduction of a couple of vulgar rants from a self-described middle-of-the-road Republican. This post contained almost no words from Ailes, but boy did it get readers worked up. He's also a faithful blogger, launching frequent posts that tackle the new and the provocative in the world of politics. So my hunch is that political blogging junkies would check out this blog at least semi-regularly.

Andrew Sullivan also does a good job blogging, doing so with frequency and timeliness. Though a polished writer, his blog is not overly verbose. He occasionally writes longer blogs than Ailes, but he manages to cull the esential info out for bloggers and deliver the goods to his readers in an unambiguous, unpretentious left-leaning fashion. I think his writing skills serve him well here, though he does not seem as clever as Ailes. He knows that the value of a good anecdote works well in print or in a blog, judging by the success of the Fishback story, about which one post received over 400 responses. One disappointment is the lack of a comment field under each post for true community dialogue. Instead, he invites e-mails on one side of the page.

I can't say I'm overly impressed by Eric Alterman. He's regular with his blog, but rather than produce multiple posts throughout the day as events warrant he dumps it all in what looks like a huge post -- though it has a few headers and such to break up the copy, unlike Wolcott. It can at times read more like a column than a blog, not really addressing anyone. He sounds a bit preachy. Like some professional writers, he doesn't seem to be doing much to engage other bloggers in dialogue. Addition after class: until pointed out tonight, I didn't realize he had any comments on his blog, so far down do they appear.

2005-10-04T17:18:00.000-07:00

Blogtresses

Spent some time with a couple of smart bloggers, but, wow, what a difference in personality. MeMo was like chatting informally over lunch with a witty, softspoken friend. Wonkette is a gossip columnist on steroids.

I like MeMo for its wry observations and its clever musings. But I really like that she understands blogging and what bloggers are looking for. Though a professional journalist, she does not appear to be doing her column here in the blogosphere. She is not neck-deep in exhaustive rhetoric, nor is she doing too much navel-gazing. She does, however, offer amusing observations on an endless supply of oddities, with just enough links for more detail. While some tidbits may be a bit too short, most are just the right length to establish an interesting point of view and stoke a discussion. The short ones, however, remind me of the Saturday Night Live talk show host ... three words, then "discuss."

That said, not all her posts are interesting to me. The occasional pieces about Houston life don't do much for me, and many of the pop culture musings just don't stick to me. Oh, occasionally the really bizarre has an impact, but I'm just not that absorbed by so much pop culture analysis. But, for those with whom she connects, say Gen Xers or young boomers, I think she has a real shot at a regular following because she writes a truly interactive blog that pounces on cultural oddities and problems with the requisite timeliness (Colorado trips aside) and with the personal voice that makes blog reading fun.

Wonkette, on the other hand, is like television commercials that are so much louder than regular TV programming despite the fact that you are no where near the volume control. Also, like some commercials, Wonkette is sometimes hysterical.

This blog comes across, quite deliberately it seems, as a long gossip column about politics and Washington insiders. It's very entertaining, at times. The Judith Miller photos of her kissing, hugging and otherwise touching men, hysterical. The Harriet Miers Dopplegangers, a riot. The links she maintains, and there are many, are highly amusing as well. The Michelle Malkin review of Ms. Wonkette is priceless in its own right.

But, as entertaining as it may be, what goes on here stretches the bounds of what blogging means to me, and it looks so much like a professional (if loud and crazy) job. First of all, there's a big-time performance persona being shown here, not a blogging voice. Also, there's so much volume of stuff here it has to be done by a staff. And there doesn't seem to be any real and obvious encouragement of interaction. What there is plenty of is ads, across the top and elsewhere.

So, I doubt bloggers come here to interact but to be amused, though they probably do that at Dooce, too. Still, this is like watching a big production, Dooce is not. Despite the entertainment to be found here, I think I'd also prefer it in small doses. I hate reaching for the volume control too often.

2005-10-03T18:04:00.000-07:00

Writing the Wolcott Way

Tasked with an examination of ever so many celebrity bloggers, I decided it might be more fun to take in each with a nonprofessional blog chaser. Like a real boilermaker, it was an eye-opener.

I made my way through countless James Wolcott blogs, and while I enjoyed many of these thoughtful, largely urbane pieces, I found myself quickly getting fatigued under the weight of so much polished prose. I went through several months of this year's blogs and a couple of months worth last year and found, I think, that he's getting more longwinded and a little less witty. Oh, he can still turn a phrase, but not with as much verve.

Wolcott's blog typically reads just like a column or essay, long as the pondering that no doubt went into each. The result I think are pieces that are often well reasoned and well said, but which reflect a nearly fatal love of his own words. The problem, I think, is that Wolcott does not seem to be writing to anyone in particular; it's more like a grand soliloquy. His site does not invite comments or discussion. Instead, readers are invited to "write to Wolcott" using the e-mail link. Adjacent is a link to Vanity Fair...the audience he really identifies with?

His blogs of a year ago sometimes demonstrated jarring transitions from their entertainment culture focus to the political. But the wry voice seemed to make the jump reasonably well. Now, the disassembling of Bush's post-911-makeover, for example, seems to get weighted down before it can get away from the dock. I'm not sure if Wolcott is gaining any ground not already won in print, though anything's possible.

In contrast, over at Last Hurrah (smart Dem blog), this person has a pretty good grasp of the issues and a clear, unambiguous voice. He also talks to his fellow bloggers, "did you know...did you know?" This straight-to-the-point style is married well with a concise approach to make a strong impression right out of the gate.

He also virtually brags of a point of view or "insight that comes from not reading the newspaper or or watching the talk shows." Despite this joe six-pack declaration, he writes unpretentiously and competently -- only occasionally does he descend into the realm of f-bombs. In short, I like the timely, impassioned yet rational approach of the blog and would be more inclined to respond with a comment than I would to Wolcott. Wolcott seems meant for slow digestion and reflection, like a cholesterol-laden meal. While Last Hurrah's stir fry has me ready to jump in and join the fun.

2005-10-02T08:38:00.000-07:00

Celebrity Blogging

It's amusing, and perhaps comforting, to see that it's not only students who are struggling a bit with the broader implications of blogging. The Nora Ephron blog of Sept. 28 strikes me as a case in point, one that speaks in particular to the tendencies and peculiarities of celebrity blogs. Ostensibly about a panel discussion taking on the weighty subject of whether blogs are democratizing journalism, Ephron's blog seems to be as much about her own wry view of intellectual circles and academic rituals, such as panel discussions, as it is about her panel's topic.

Of course, blogs can be shockingly personal or they can be stridently political. In short, they can have almost any subject and employ any approach. But I think the professional writer's blog probably stands out for its measured and controlled cadences, ironic tone and no small amount of love for one's own voice. In the case of Ephron's Sept. 28 blog, I think she is not so much trying to join a vast cyber debate, as so many bloggers long to do, as she is trying to rise above it. I think most bloggers would seldom take such an approach.

Clearly, she does not consider bloggers to be guerilla journalists, though she does not pretend to examine closely the panel's issue at hand. She notes that most blogggers are "so busy blogging that you don't have time to report." The implication is that blogging does not live by the same professional standards that journalists do and probably does not warrant more credilibility -- statements that really set off some of those who commented. She is not blind to the impact of the Internet and, in fact, opines that it has changed the culture and the way we all think. But these nuggets of insight come between various humurous observations and glib appraisals. I mean, she doesn't choose to rebut a point with which she strongly disagrees because she's afraid she might cough?

She's has an enjoyable style, but I'm not sure if this professional approach will serve her as well in the world of blogging as it does in print. Those of us who enjoy good writing usually do so while taking our time with the printed page. The world of Internet is different. Of course, people can and do read material by smart writers on the Web, but most of the research I've seen seems to show it's but a minority of Web users. I manage much of the Internet content for my company, and I also teach Web writing workshops for some of our marketing staff. The point of so much research is that very few people come to the Internet to read -- they come to complete tasks and find information quickly. Writing for these readers must very brief and to the point. Some people will take the time to read more online when they are visiting their favorite sites -- certainly true of bloggers. But I would suggest that Internet user preferences have influenced bloggers as well, and if they're very young, forget about your long blog getting read.

Bloggers are nothing if not earnest. Whether personal or political, these blogs seems to lay it all out there in unambiguous terms. This, it seems, satisfies the preferences of Internet users who want to know quickly and, preferably, entertainingly what you have to say. I think the dry, artful approach of literary writers will have a tough time breaking past the same circle who read their works in print to reach the rest of the blogosphere. That's not to say that humor won't work -- Heather Armstrong has shown that it can. But it had better be brash and original.

Ephron's writing skills have certainly served her well in publishing and in Hollywood, but I'd be surprised if anyone outside of the Huffington Post crowd would be stirred by her blog. Any use of devices such as vaguery and mockery (the literary kind) could be perceived as the kind of mainstream condescension that bloggers like to rebel against.

2005-09-28T17:40:00.000-07:00

Paper Or Plastic?

After trying the plastic experience for a while, I decided it really is a cool community blog. I like the way stuff is organized with featured main page stories and other stories on the left organized under categories. Other miscellaneous blogs are listed on the right.

It really was easy to cruise around, find something appealing to read and get involved in a full-blown discussion. Man, does this site attract comments, hundreds...and pretty constructive ones, too, among the ubiquitous clunkers. The site also is fairly attractive, which helps make it my favorite of the community sites so far to brouse. I found much more interesting stuff here than on Metafilter, for example.

I know I praised Metafilter earlier, but Plastic really does a better job in most respects. But, I still maintain that Metafilter is by far the most Democratic in its approach. Virtually anyone with $5 can post there. On Plastic, by contrast, they have a complex system of rating and moderating -- "sift out junk and pan for genius." There is a ton of editing going on here, though it seems to be done principally by contributing members rating each other rather than "management" making the tough calls. In this case, everyone really is a critic.

As a consequence, Metafilter looks sloppier and it has a sharply divergent list of reading materials. But isn't that how many town squares and town meetings work? They're simple, often unorganized forums for interaction and debate. So, I like Metafilter's mission and am glad someone is doing it. But when looking for convenience in online reading, I'm more likely to reach for plastic than good old simple paper.

2005-09-27T16:27:00.000-07:00

PR Mort Meme

I'm not 100 percent sure I've got my arms entirely around the meme theme yet, but it's got to help when lots of other people are calling it a meme, right? Is that cheating? Regardless, I found a meme that I find extemely interesting, personally, and which may interest other communicators in our midst. The meme: PR is dead.

Turns out this idea got jump-started at some PR trade conferences, but it has moved past the elite public relations circles to capture the attention of academics, consultants and communicators in the PR trenches. I found 9,610 posts for "PR is dead" in Google's blog search. The articles I read basically don't argue that PR is dead at all. Public relations is simply adapting to new forms of communications, something the industry has always done. Instead, it's the old style press release-based form of PR that may be truly dead, they argue. The industry had better learn to adapt and find ways of refining their messages and communicating them at a more fundamental grassroots level, say even the mildest critics.

However, PR is dead means different things to different people, and many people seem to hope it has much broader implications. I mean, don't a lot of people think PR is basically a slimy profession? Don't think too many tears would be shed if the business imploded. PR professionals, however, seem to think this is an idea being pushed by blog consultants to puff up their roles. Regardless, it seems the debate is being waged across blogs throughout the industry. In my opinion, too early for a funeral. Reconstructive surgery, perhaps?

2005-09-25T17:19:00.000-07:00

The Blogging Commune

Now here's a community blog I really like -- Metafilter. Yeah, it's not very attractively done and they throw an amazingly eclectic party (some might say chaotic), but it sure does live up to what impresses me as the heart and soul of blogging -- virtually anyone can have their turn and try to attract the attention of the blogosphere.

Of course, there are some ground rules. Bloggers are asked to treat each other respectfully and in a civilized way. Bloggers are asked to refrain from blatant self-interest and to seek new and interesting things to post. But to give members almost unrestricted access to the homepage (supposedly there is little editing or deleting, hence the "meta" in Metafilter) for $5 strikes me as fairly democratic way to run a community blog.

The individual posts are sometimes interesting, but seldom related to one another. Daily Kos, in the political nature of its citizenry, looks amazingly well organized compared to this one. But Metafilter's frenetic quality has appeal. While the posts seem to come from anywhere and everywhere, I know I'm going to find something interesting by scrolling down the page, something that might actually encourage my participation in a discussion. Virtually every post on this page (Sunday) drew a number of responses. One post, a press release from the NRA's website, seemed to violate the standard of something different, but it sure did get a conversation started. 79 people chimed on with comments both pro and con about a court decision supporting the NRA's opposition to the New Orleans Police Department's conviscation of guns from local citizens.

A very interesting vlog from a former Apple employee who claims he was fired for his "creative writing" also attracted the attention of 51 bloggers who wrote on the subject. Virtually everything in this off mixture of blogs and links was worthy of commentary by someone -- a link to Joan Didion's touching account of the death of her husband was occasion for many bloggers to recall similar events in their own pasts.

In short, I like the "self-policing" concept, though it's hard to know exactly how much editing and deleting does go on behind the scenes. But I think the idea of having a place to share knowledge and incite community discussion is healthy and nurturing for blogging. And, it sure is tempting to send a "spam-a-gram to a lucky corporate whore," as one post suggests.

2005-09-24T12:31:00.000-07:00

Star-Powered Blog

After being unable to open up Metafilter this afternoon (server issue?), I settled on Huffington Post for a couple of hours. While there's a lot of enjoyable and interesting content here, HufPost didn't feel like the typical blog experience. Yes, of course, it's a community of blogs, rather than a single blog. But there was something I couldn't put my finger on at first. As I scrolled down the Bloggers' Index, it hit me. These people all have great credentials.

The enormous list of blogs includes countless authors and journalists, lawyers, politicians, TV producers, playwrights, professors, psychologists, etc. In short, it seemed to me that I was looking at a gathering of elite bloggers, opining on everything from politics to social trends for the humble masses. Most of the pieces I read were at least somewhat polished and easy to read. More like reading brief newspaper columns. While I enjoyed the reading, I couldn't help but feel that HufPost was somehow violating the true spirit of blogging.

For example, blogs typically are fresh and regular, making interactions with readers -- when they occur -- more spontaneous and conversational than a letter to the editor could ever be. But HufPost's desire to celebrate elite (and celebrity) thoughts comes at a price -- most of these smart, busy people can do little better than a monthly or bimonthly post. They might as well be in, yikes, print. The most regular blogger I found was Cindy Sheehan, whose newfound celebrity status has given her a pass on the resume requirements. It seems that the immediacy of the site is to come through the front page in the form of a different few elite bloggers each day.

I was curious about the actual requirements for getting posted to the site and could find nothing explicit about the price of admission. So, I googled HufPost and found an interesting NY Times story about the launch of the site. Sure enough, Arianna Huffington intended from the beginning that the site would house "the most creative minds" in the country in a virtual non-stop talk show. Of course, the blogosphere is about as grassroots as it gets, so Huffington seems to be going against the grain a bit. As I said earlier, I like many of the pieces and enjoy the break from some of the more inflamed blogs out there. But it makes me wonder if this is a step toward the corporatization of blogs. Are blogs by cultural and political elite really more worthy of readership?

What this site does that I found interesting was its mix of news and commentary on the homepage. There are many news stories featured from sources such as AP, Reuters, the Washingon Post, etc. down the middle and right side of the page while the most recent blog postings run down the left side. But all pieces, news stories as well as blogs, invite reader comments. The story about Bill Frist's stock scandal, for example, had 113 comments, just as impassioned as any typical blog responses. There are the usual rude rants and bland musings; only occasionally does someone provide a really insightful response. But I find it interesting that readers will get just as worked up about news stories by people who may never read their comments as they do by what true bloggers have to say.

Most of what I read, by the featured bloggers and the readers who wrote comments, were distinctly liberal in nature. According to the Times, Ms. Huffington intended the site to be neither right- nor left-minded, though the Times found most of the bloggers lean left. I personally could not find any right-leaning bloggers here, though admittedly I didn't even come close to examining them all. So, it seems that Ms. Huffington's approach appeals more to the left.

There are definitely pieces to enjoy here, but I wonder if this site will really hold the interest of other bloggers.

2005-09-21T18:02:00.000-07:00

Don't Take It Too Personally

Just finished going through, at length, two of the more personal blogs brought to our attention. While seemingly different motivations fuel these two bloggers, they both seem to share an important trait in common -- both seem to be looking for a voice in the world and a little interaction. Both seem to be experiencing different, personal types of isolation, but each has figured out a different way to connect.

Sally, of My Thoughts, a seemingly mild-mannered retiree by day, turns into a pistol-packing mama when seated before a blank computer screen. It was especially interesting to read her from the bottom up, as suggested, to witness the development of a real, heartfelt voice. At first, her postings seemed little more than bland observations on the weather. Like other older people I know, she appeared to be tragically addicted to weather.com and probably the Weather Channel.

But Hurricane Katrina sparked a change. First, she waxes nostalgic for the New Orleans she remembers. Next, the sad stories lead to some cliched, homespun philosophy -- "nothing lasts forever" and "life goes on." Then, empathy for the victims mixes with fear for her own precarious position on the Texas Gulf coast. But her true voice begins to emerge as she contemplates the grim reality of a battered News Orleans in its political context. She accuses Bush of a dereliction of duty, having gone off fund raising instead of directly overseeing the disaster relief.

Soon it becomes apparent that she's one pissed off lady. In fact, by this point she seems to be tapping into a long-covered up well of anger that gives her posts purpose and intensity. She confesses to suppressing her political opinions for years, surrounded as she was by right-wing extremists in the petro-chemical company where she worked before retiring. She rebels by thoroughly lambasting the likes of Cheney, Michael Brown, Halliburton and the "evil man" Tom Delay. Rather than the voice of a lonely old woman who doesn't know quite what to do with herself, she now seems part of a genuine blogging movement that has lots to say (and influence) about a moving and telling event in this country's history.

This week, facing the prospect of a monster named Rita, Sally turns her thoughts more inward and contemplates what it will be like to have to evacuate. As she prepares to leave, she pledges that she's had enough of the Gulf and evacuations, and vows to return to her native Midwest. At this point, however, she no longer deals in the cliches of her earliest posts. She has developed a more compelling voice. Is the emotion entirely genuine? I thought it was very interesting that a commenter from England was moved enough to respond with concern, and to pledge not to judge Americans, whom she doesn't know, after reading Sally's heartfelt posts.

The Mundane Musings of a lonesome Irishman also offer up a somewhat interesting personal voice, but in an entirely different way. He seems to be a lot more sensitive and communicative than the average male beast, so that when friends fail to respond to his e-mails with the frequency and detail he would like, he turns to blogging. And he loves it.

This is a guy with low self-esteem, who can't understand why beautiful and "godly" women would be interested in him. But he obviously pines to connect with someone, and the blogosphere will more than do for now. (Young women who say they want a sensitive guy who likes to communicate, what are you waiting for?)

His blog is somewhat interesting at first for its sheer honesty, but I lost interest before too long. I didn't find the snippets of conversation and questionnaires he quotes nearly as interesting as he did. I suspect his musings and desire to connect will find more resonance in young people in more similar circumstances. Still, his blog is a sometimes interesting look inside the soul of a lonely young man. What it shows, like Sally, is that he's itching for company.

2005-09-20T16:36:00.000-07:00

Dooce Scoop

After discussing the Dooce in class, it's not easy to see it with fresh eyes. But I gave it a whirl, just now. Like many others, I enjoy her musings. They offer funny, irreverent views of the everyday experience of a young mom, who is, perhaps, just a bit more troubled and talented a writer than any mom in my neighborhood.

Has it occurred to anyone else that she sounds an awful lot like Erma Bombeck with a foul mouth, which works quite well, though lubed with a heavy-gauge pharmaceutical cocktail? The realities vs imaginings of yard prowess really drove it home for me. Not being critical. I think her point of view is ever so enjoyable. It seems that what she writes is designed both to help other young moms identify with the absurdity sometimes to be found in the everyday experience. It also has to reassure that another mom out there, saddled with emotional health problems no less, can find humor in it all. On top of that she has real writing talent.

It has to appeal to women, judging by the number of ads geared to women that line up and down the right side of the page. In fact, after a few links to information about herself, Armstrong pretty much lists nothing but ads on the rest of the page. There are no other links (perhaps I missed them?) to other sites of interest. This is all about celebrating her personal point of view, and making some money to get by in the world. In fact, she seems more like a newspaper (LifeStyle) columnist than a blogger. But, then again, everyone's a blogger now.

2005-09-19T17:33:00.000-07:00

Of KOS

Just spent a good bit of time looking at Daily KOS, and I've got to say it's nothing if not consistent. And, there's a ton of stuff to wade through, so filtering for consistency must take a lot of time and effort over there.

The Daily KOS features, and there's quite a few to scroll through each day, are very detailed, reasoned pieces with a clear left-wing agenda. Some have the reasoned approach of a good, left-leaning newspaper editorial, but they can at times comes across with intensity. The way the stories stack up right down the left side of the page almost makes it feel like a newspaper (a little extra credibility?). Of course, most people don't like to do all that scrolling and reading ad nauseum on a computer screen, but they probably figure their audience will put up with it, so hungry are they for dirt on the administration. Newspapers, of course, can more easily subject their readers to tedious design and layouts, and they do.

All one has to do is read the accompanying posts on the right to see that any resemblance to newspapers ends there. There's a lot more naked venom flowing there in the Blogroll and Recent Diaries. The tongue-in-cheek "There was no fraud in November" look at the 2004 election was actually a clever and amusing way of lampooning this debacle of an election. But the "Percentage Shift, Hypocrite Killers" was just rage on a page, albeit brief. I wonder if Markos Moulitsas holds this one up as an example of how to get listed, you know, be clever, funny, original. By the way, the substance of this post is embodied in the following,"Fuck these hypocrites all to hell."

Still, Daily Koss is quite the rallying spot for good liberals. The ads down the center of the page feature more left-wing causes than I knew existed, such as Stop the Radical Right, gay slasher flicks and anti-GOP bumper stickers.

It might seem extreme to some, but there's a strong anti-administration message here that needs to be heard. And, there's a valuable public service being rendered in at least one attempt I spotted at stopping a poisonous MEME. One of the Recent Diaries shot holes in conservative bloggers' attempts to spread the spurious claim that the Sierra Club was responsible for the New Orleans' levee breaks. Cool.

2005-09-18T08:56:00.000-07:00

Oh Boing

I've spent some more time with Boing Boing, and I have to confess I'm still not much closer to being able to categorize it. But that does not mean there are no patterns and intentions discernable in this strange e.soup of a blog, or blog-wanna-be.

If people don't read newspapers anymore -- certainly most young people -- and most are distrustful of news sources of any kind, this blog seems tailor made to grab the attention of the info-disenfranchised. Boing Boing features such an odd mix of information that it's almost startling, at first glance. But haven't weird publications like the Enquirer startled most of us into reading at least a little while standing in the supermarket checkout line?

Obviously, Boing Boing is not simply an electronic tabloid. It has a strong appeal to the techno-geeks with its listings about technological innovations, such as the "perfect power strip design" and the "better screw," though the latter item may have broader appeal because of its easily misconstrued headline. But there is a tabloid touch to the story selections, no doubt. Who can resist reading about tongue eating bugs, flying manta-rays, twitching Elvii and Nessie's flesh? By their very odd nature, these items grab the attention of those who in most circumstances would consider themselves too busy and too disinterested to stop and read a news site.

And, to make sure the male geeks (almost a redundant term) spend some time, there's a bit of titilation on the site in the form of the provocative Suicide Girls ad and the cleverly veiled link to an animal cruelty awareness site -- looks like a link to a Pamela Anderson site. The rest of the sponsors on the site include a mix of offbeat T-shirt suppliers, web outlets for art and publishing and even a connection to other exalted geeks -- the UCBerkeley College of Engineering.

This crazy mix may be a bit jolting to those of us who read traditional media to a great extent, but it strikes me that this blog's creators have figured out a way to get others (mostly young and technology oriented) to stop and browse a general interest information site. As for whether this site is actually a blog, I say, with a slight cringe, yes. It makes me think a bit (way back when) of Revolution #9. Most people hate it. Just a jumble of recorded sounds, snippets of conversation and random notes on a piano. By most measures, it can't be called a song -- it has no lyrics and no melody. But is it so totally different from things that would be recorded 20 and 30 years later? Doesn't the fact that it's on a record album with many other songs legitimize it? Could it just be a completely non-sensical, absurdist song?

Boing Boing isn't quite absurd but it is at the very least eclectic. The fact that it does not fit the traditional mode for blogs (is there such a thing?) should not rule it out. Blogs, at least at this point, cannot be firmly pinned down. It certainly meets the spontaneity requirement. The only thing that troubles me is whether there's any real self-expression or group expression going on here. But, the story selection itself and the brief comments that accompany them do say a lot, as strange as it may seem.

2005-09-17T10:29:00.000-07:00

Blogging Wal-Mart

I've been reading Always Low Prices (suggested by Colin), which bills itself as featuring the "best and worst about Wal-Mart" and characterizes itself as "not affiliated with Wal-Mart in any way." While I'm naturally suspicious of such a claim, especially after reading much of the spirited defense of Wal-Mart to be found on the site, this blog should not be taken lightly. In fact, it comes close to achieving the kind of issue-oriented dialogue and exchange that could help make blogs more than a cyber-fad.

First, I have to say it's fun to dis Wal-Mart. Whomever said that journalism should "afflict the comfortable and comfort the afflicted" had to have something like Wal-Mart in mind when conceiving of the former. The issues of Wal-Mart's wages, benefits that underinsure workers in an employer-based health care system, and predatory pricing, are all substantive and compelling issues that require analysis and debate if we as a culture are to decide the type of retailing we can support, as consumers and through our regulatory bodies. That's why I like this site. While I disagree with many of its conclusions, it takes the idea of dialogue and debate seriously.

First, the voice of Kevin, the site's administrator, is decidely pro-Wal-Mart. The numerous postings that celebrate Wal-Mart policies make this obvious. For example, postings that champion Wal-Mart for its quick response to the Hurricane Katrina disaster and its ability to simply get things done while federal and state relief were in short supply, drew a response from a Wal-Mart work in Pennsylvania that undercut the praise. The "associate " writer expressed sympathy for the victims of the disaster, but he claimed that WalMart's generosity came not entirely from the corporate coffers but from the pockets and diginity of other Wal-Mart associates who were forced to help the goliath retailer cut corners and pinch pennies by performing additional, menial work that should have been done by other additional workers. Kevin fired back with suspicion, asking what was actually said by Wal-Mart managers. He reassured that Wal-Mart executives would want to know -- referring to the PA Wal-Mart managers -- who was out there marring the good Wal-Mart name.

While Kevin often betrays an outright fondness for Wal-Mart, the site offers access to many different views on the matter. There are links in columns on both sides to various Wal-Mart related blogs, both pro Wal-Mart and con, and articles and analysis. Some are thoughtful and interesting, others biting and sardonic. Evil Smiley, for example, embodies the Wal-Mart plot "to destroy the world." Big Boxes Blow takes issue with all mega-stores.

While plenty of other sites offer more encouragement to Wal-Mart, there are no ads from obviously conservative backers that make the messages overtly right-wing. Instead, the message is conveyed mostly in a civil manner that gives the impression of polite, reasoned debate heavy on facts and figures as opposed to emotional protestations. Sometimes it comes in the form of supposed "myth" busting, sometimes it's barely concealed glee at, for example, Wal-Mart's circumventing of local size restrictions in one state by building two large stores (not mega) almost next to each other on adjacent pieces of land.

On the whole, though, this is an interesting site to read alongside some of the more adversarial blogs and websites. Together, they represent some form of dialogue that gives readers multiple points of view to consider before shopping for their next pair of jeans or household items.

2005-09-12T17:25:00.000-07:00

Music To Blogears

OK, who doesn't live in NYC and has heard of Andrew Rasiej? If you have you're probably a blogger. I was astounded to see that the most searched term of the hour, just now, on Technorati is Rasiej. And, he's a guy running for NY Public Advocate, not the usual water cooler topic.

But the man has really tapped into something. I'm not sure if he's clever because he figured out a way to truly excite the blogosphere and capture the hearts of young voters, or whether he's truly visionary, recognizing that what passes for campaign issues these days can be mind-numbing. Essentially, his idea of creating a wireless network in NYC and facilitating low-cost, high-speed Internet has created a real blog-buzz. Using Hurricane Katrina to illustrate the failure of today's communications infrastructure gets right to the heart of it. He contends that bringing the indigent online will enfranchise and empower them in ways that handouts never have, which is a good reason why this will never happen soon.

That aside, it seems an astute political move that taps into the shifting requirements of our culture. I can't wait to see if all this blog attention translates into political success. But I also am intrigued by the idea supporting this proosal, that online information and e.currency can make a practical difference in the lives of the underprivileged. Would it mean cultural inclusion or an economic leg-up? Who knows, but bloggers clearly assume so. Can't hurt.

As an only marginally related observation, however, I have to say that I really cringe when I see how sloppily written some posts are. I was uncertain, to say the least, when one blogger I read described his hobby as "righting." I figured he either was semi-literate and should be dismissed, or he's a hard right-winger...and should be dismissed. Does this stuff really not bother most other people?

2005-09-11T14:23:00.000-07:00

The Blog Cabin

Having just engaged in my first real foray into the world of bloggers, I more or less feel like I've been amazingly out of touch for quite a while. The blogging world, though I've heard quite a bit about it, seems an infinitely more vast world of public discourse that I ever imagined.

Having gone through the first several of the Technorati Top 10, I was most profoundly struck by the sense of empowerment and purpose that drive many bloggers. While many blogs seem to fall into the category of self-expression or personal reflection, other bloggers seem bent on using this forum to air concerns or give voice to missing points of view. Perhaps even to give journalists a good kick in the ass. Says one blogger, "If mainstram media can't do good, unbiased journalism, then we'll have to do it for them."

Are we witnessing the birth of a fifth estate or simple e.hubris? Time will tell, I suppose. But bloggs already have had an unbelievable impact on the Communications industry and politics, so I lean toward the former.

Back with another post after I read more Technorati favorites.