This is a commentary from Scott Anderson from the March 12, 2007 edition of the St. Louis Post-Dispatch and www.stltoday.com.
Mr. Anderson believes there are too many blogs (about 70 million according to the Wall Street Journal, which Mr. Anderson uses as the basis for his argument).
Mr. Anderson thinks bloggers spend too much time giving their opinions online, behind the mask of the Internets, and less time in taverns and churches ranting and raving. He said this was once called “conversation.” As if people don’t go out and talk like in the “good old days.”
First of all, just because there are a supposed 70 million blogs, that doesn’t mean they are all active; with vast audiences reading them. I have created 5 blogs (2 that I update on at least a weekly basis) since 2001. Meaning that three of those blogs are now dead. My wife has created 6 blogs (always starting one, updating it for a couple of months, and then burning out) and only updates 1. So right there you have 8 dead blogs. I’ve stumbled across a ton of blogs because of a google search, only to find the latest post was from 2005.
A blog is as easy to create as it is to forget.
For all the hype about interactivity, blogs are first and foremost the epitome of one-way chatter.
Has Mr. Anderson even seen a blog? Blogs usually have a feature called “comments.” This way people can “respond” to your opinions and make the blog a two way communication.
I have what I hope is a helpful suggestion for bloggers: Instead of just sitting inside your house and commenting on the world around you, why don’t you, um, get up and leave? There is a whole non-cyber, non-virtual place waiting for you and your opinions. It’s called the world.
It takes me about 20-30 minutes to update my blog (depending on the length of the post and how much research I need to do). So, this means I have 23 1/2 hours left to get out there and talk to all those interesting people that inhabit my town.
I’m not getting on the “blogging is the new journalism” bandwagon (I’ve read too much bullshit to be that blind) but I must admit it is really funny when I see someone from an “old media” outlet using a “new media” forum to belittle the very medium he’s using.
And besides, he’s telling me that my opinion, published online just like his, is somehow less relevant and less meaningful.
One can now spell hypocrite this way: S-C-O-T-T A-N-D-E-R-S-O-N. But I’m sure he’ll never see this, unless he takes his laptop to the church, tavern, or grocery store.
Oh, and the funny thing is, I found Mr. Anderson’s column via www.stlbloggers.com. How funny is that?