The Limits of Blogging

[monk222]

“A blog-with-comments is a piss-poor place to debate matters like the existence of God. It’s not even a good place to debate whether Obama’s stimulus bill is likely to be successful. Blogs just don't do complexity and nuance — which, I think, is why they’re so popular. As everyone knows, the less complex and nuanced the positions on a blog are, the more comments it gets. This is an Iron-Clad Law of the Internet. Blog posts are just too short to deal with the Big Issues, and too likely to be fired off in short order, with minimal reflection and no pre-post feedback from wiser and cooler heads. Andrew Sullivan may think this is a good thing, but I’m not inclined to agree. And of course comments are usually even worse than posts in these respects. Some wonderful conversations happen in blog comment threads, but they happen in spite of the architecture, not because of it. The architecture is fighting thoughtfulness with all its might.”

-- Alan Jacobs

Yeah, yeah, yeah, but what they do is open the conversation to those of us who aren't public intellectuals or scholars. The big issues of the day aren't going to be resolved on common blogs, and we aren't even players in the real debates that shape policy and public consciousness. We represent how the debate is sifting down to the street level. A little democracy in action.

And, of course, professional bloggers like Andrew Sullivan do an even better job, bringing more academically skilled intellectualism to his blogging, and actually being a player in the ongoing national debates, helping to make the issues accessible to us, so we can throw around the ball a little among ourselves, and hence people become more informed on the issues, even if not on a truly intellectual level.

This is also in line with how I don't see blogs as a competitor against the mainstream media, but an adjunct to it, an arena in which to carry on the conversations that they start, and which they fuel with their professional reporting and their information.

I just don't see why there is so much defensiveness against blogs. Indeed, I have been under the impression that fewer people are writing or reading in the blogosphere anyway, that it is a cultural fad that has already crested and is falling, leaving in its wake the true enthusiasts.

Comments

[wordlesswriter.livejournal.com]

he could also be reading the wrong blogs. I am better informed on things via what I read on lj. sure I don't get every little thing but I get insights that with out the blogs I wouldn't have had before.
however there are a lot of blogs out there that are more boring then I claim mine to be.
but like you point out, blogs are ways for us common folks to disscuss things in our own ways. I would not discredit it as a media however. if anything it is a great way of seeing the thoughts of those effected by events.
sure I'm not intelectulaly qualified to go into full detailed debate over a stimulus package, by in the end my life will be effected by it, so perhaps by viewing how little I and others know would inspire some other media source to explain things in laymen terms..

I hope this made sense as I still don't feel good and am have some diffaculty orginizing my thoughs.

[hardblue.livejournal.com]

Yes, that is an excellent point. It's not like the New York Times can have a reporter or star columnist on every street corner, so that sometimes bloggers do bring something more to the media. Moreover, there are even times when bloggers can catch stuff that journalists miss, as I think, for instance, of the news about how some military-related document was forged, perhaps having to do with Bush, which was an incident that I think ended up sinking Dan Rather's career. There are more eyes on the game.

Limits of an online journal

[poovanna.livejournal.com]

I partly agree with Jacobs that the architecture of online journals present problems for discussion of complex issues. This is because:

• there are few hurdles in presenting such issues in one's entries; however
• there are significant hurdles in discussing such issues via comments.

Comments are not very friendly because:

• of the time lag when one does get a reply to one's comments;
• of the lack of visual cues when one does not get a reply to one's comments.

Those times when you do get a reply, it is often delayed - perhaps a few days late. In order to prepare a counter, you will have to devote some time re-familiarizing yourself with the conversation thread. While this is not a problem for simple issues, it is hard for complex, technical ones.

And for those times when you do not get a reply, you do not know whether the person agrees with you or is rolling their eyes.

However, discussion via comments must not be entirely discounted - its indirect nature allows a friendlier way for (offline) introverted folks to express themselves.

Re: Limits of an online journal

[hardblue.livejournal.com]

Now that you make me think about it, I don't think Jacobs has these LJ-type blogs in mind, which actually are relatively better than the kind you see on Blogger and independent blogging sites, because LJ-type blogs allow threaded comments, which gives commenters the freedom to talk directly to each other. We may still suffer some of the problems of blogging infrrastructure that he and you point out, but we're a little better.

Personally, I just don't take blog discussions that seriously, seeing it as more of an opportunity for writer-hobbyists and people who would like to chat a little online. You obviously bring a more serious game to the matter, and I imagine this blogging life gets on your nerves sometimes, because we just aren't as serious, if only because we cannot take outselves seriously as intellects and scholars. If there were entry standards that had to be met, most of us wouldn't be able to maintain blogs - we're here because it's open to even average folk, as well as less than average folk, heh.

Re: Limits of an online journal

[poovanna.livejournal.com]

Hehe, I like LJ as much as others. For instance, I adore how comment threads sometimes degenerate into pic-spam.

Why do I write? Because it helps me order my dis-organized ideas into a theme. I do not like order per se. But it causes you to see unexpected connections with other ideas, and this is fun.

While I could write anywhere, I chose LJ because, I also:

• like being connected to my online friends;
• like it that I can come here to play when I feel frivolous/silly.

Getting the rare, insightful comment is an icing on the cake.