Stop the Blogging Madness (New Study Shows Blogs Are Almost Totally Irrelevant to Public Discourse)

Business 2.0 ^ | August 27, 2003 | Jimmy Guterman

[Timesink]

I think Guterman is right on target with this article. Blogs are fun, but the so-called "A-listers" need to start realizing that their overall effect is zero.

[Timesink]

I also disagree that Drudge is a blog, just for the record.

[Shermy]

There's only minimal evidence that anyone is using the blog format as a business tool.

That's the point.

[Timesink]

The article may be centered around the business applications of blogs, but that article makes clear that they're not having any effect, period, outside of the same tiny clique of self-appointed digerati that existed before blogs came along:

Even the often interesting and provocative postings from top-tier bloggers like Dan Gillmor, Dave Winer, Doc Searls, and David Weinberger are endlessly self-referential. They're all quoting one another, sending readers in a circle. It's like a revolving door with no escape. And so much of the talk is inside baseball: "RSS," "Daypop," "Technorati," "Blogdex," and "Link Cosmos" mean nothing to those not steeped in blog culture. The medium itself is still the main topic of conversation. Boring. No wonder so few people read blogs.

[Richard Axtell]

If anyone thought that blogs were a "business tool", they must have been thinking of some sort of web equivalent of the Kipplinger Letter or perhaps some of the very expensive but informative industry specific newsletters that are out there. As far as I have seen, most blogs are free, non-subscription web sites.

Only Drudge has enough hits to sell lucrative advertising. But Drudge seldom publishes his own editorials, so he is not quite within the realm of what I thought a blog was, an "opinion journal" or "web log". Perhaps one should think of blogs more as vanity self-published opinion, put out there to whom it may concern, with hopeful intentions. The losers will disappear, and the best and most insightful writers will get some recognition, and perhaps move on to influence and prominence.

Blogs overall effect zero? Do you think anyone would pay to watch theatrical auditions? But, somehow, the talent for the big Broadway hits has to be evaluated, and winnowed out. Blogs are auditions for the pundit-hood of the future. Same thing.

[TrebleRebel]

ping

[unsycophant]

The elite writing for the elite? Hardly.

[Joe Bonforte]

For the most part, blogs feature the Net elite writing to the Net elite.

And your comment was

Blogs are fun, but the so-called "A-listers" need to start realizing that their overall effect is zero.

I'd have to day I agree with the first quote above, but I think both the writer of the article and yourself are drawing the wrong conclusion. I'm certainly not one of those "A-listers" (I don't even have a blog, or I'd be posting there instead of here). But as a very early adopter, I guess I am part of the "net elite", which has definitely begun to make blogs one of their main sources of information.

And I think the resulting effect is bigger than surveys would tend to pick up. Here's my biggest evidence. I read several blogs, and I've noticed a growing trend that I will see analysis of a topic in a blog that is not present in any of the major media (I read them too). Then a few days later, I will see that same analysis start to show up in the major media.

I've also noticed FR posters using analysis from blogs. In some senses, FR itself is a giant group blog.

In every field there are "influencers" and "early adopters" who have effects far beyond their numbers. I think that's where blogs stand today. I don't dispute the numbers, but I strongly believe the effect is considerably greater than the "zero" you believe.

It's also indicative that the term "Instalanche" has been coined. That means the overloading of a server because Glenn Reynolds, the Instapundit, has cited an article on that server. If he's having no effect, how could he overload media servers?

[Criminal Number 18F]

Thanks, Joe, you wrote my post and spared me the effort, mostly. In brief:

if a mere 2 percent of Internet users read blogs, the pastime is far from mainstream.

Duh, no kidding. But 90-some percent of Internet users are gormless people wrestling with AOL. They think that Bill Gates invented the computer. They influence nothing; they spend their spare time watching prolefeed on the telly; they are moved by sound bites and slogans, and choose their President based on a tie colour or hairstyle. If they vote at all...

It doesn't matter that 2 percent of net users read blogs. It matters which 2 percent.

A very ironic op-ed, coming from a guy who writes a video-game newsletter. How dreadfully kewl.

d.o.l.

Criminal Number 18F

[Rate_Determining_Step]

>Duh, no kidding. But 90-some percent of Internet users are gormless people wrestling with AOL.

I have yet to see a blog I'd come back to.

People need to learn the art of brevity.



























I mean, people just ramble on and on. They think that 'cause they can type 70 wpm that people will enjoy reading what they've blitzed onto their monitors. Reminds me of when I was a kid and I was in grade school and this kid just wouldn't shut up. Finally the teacher...

STOP!

Blogs just suck.

[Fester Chugabrew]

I tend to think those who post to the internet ascribe more importance to themselves and their words than necessary. In most cases people don't give a tinker's damn about what other people think, let alone notice it. But watch out for the .02% who do. They're your own family!

[Valin]

I've always considered his site as a linksite.

[RonDog]

See also:

OP: EXPANDING FREEPDOM Update -- Build the Free Republic Blog Network!
7/24/2003
Posted on 07/23/2003 9:42 PM PDT by Political Numbers Guy

Operation Expanding Freepdom continues to grow by leaps and bounds with new Freeper blogs coming out of the woodwork and joining our network everyday. I can barely keep up! Thank you to everyone who has participated so far, and if you want to know how to start your own blog, read on or click here, here, or here.

Despite sensible voices like Andrew Sullivan, James Lileks, and Glenn Reynolds, blogging is being portrayed as the medium for left-wing candidates and activists. Therefore, I'd like to begin a feature where we spotlight leading examples of conservative activism in the blogosphere. Here are three excellent election-oriented blogs that are taking the fight right to the liberals. Visit them, bookmark them, and link to them:

BushBlog.us
BushCheney2004
PoliPundit.com

And... drumroll please!... here is the latest Free Republic Blog Directory as part of Operation Expanding Freepdom!

Adam Bishop
A Guy Named Rob
Alphabet City
The Angry Clam
Anna Z.
Ben's Views
Blogolution
The Blog That Care Forgot
Brazos Cantina
The Buzz Blog
Cathryn Crawford
Chad Fairbanks
Everything Politics
Federal Review
Gary Cruse
Imal
MHGinTN
Michael King
Regnum Crucis
Redcloak's Romper Room
Republican Rants
Seamole
Southack
Sparta
The View from Arlen
William McKinley

If you run one of these sites, make sure you link to the blogs on this list. Many of you are new to the medium and are still trying to attract readers. The best, most proven way to get readers is to link to other good conservative blogs and they will in turn link to you. (To see which sites have linked to you, go to Technorati.com and type in your blog address.)

CLICK HERE for the rest of that thread

[tictoc]

top-tier bloggers like Dan Gillmor, Dave Winer, Doc Searls, and David Weinberger

Funny, never heard of any of these people, and I read blogs widely.

Stephen Den Beste sometimes gets 15,000 page views per day. He may well have more readers than Thomas Friedman, unless one believes that every reader of the New York Times reads Friedman's editorials.

Blogs are endlessly self-referential. They're all quoting one another, sending readers in a circle. It's like a revolving door with no escape. And so much of the talk is inside baseball: "RSS," "Daypop," "Technorati," "Blogdex," and "Link Cosmos" mean nothing to those not steeped in blog culture.

That is true, and it puts many people off. Also, just as on FreeRepublic, blogs are commentary. They rely on the continued existence of mainstream media and their worldwide networks of reporters. In that sense, blogs are piggybacking on "other people's money".

[Slings and Arrows]

It doesn't matter that 2 percent of net users read blogs. It matters which 2 percent.

Well put. Looking at another example, the Weekly Standard has a circulation of only about 35,000, and no-one doubts its influence - because of who those 35,000 are.

[Ciexyz]

What is this article talking about? I'm always open to following a link to an informative web site. Thanks to the posters who posted links to BushCheney 2004 web sites (I won't call them blog sites, they're supportive fan sites.)

This is FREEDOM! People aren't limited anymore to what the mainstream media want to filter thru to them.

[Ciexyz]

Re: Post #13.- WOW! Thanks for providing those links, esp. for the top 3 which post reader comment and input. I'll be checking them out in more detail.

[Imal]

Yup, we're all just a bunch of self-absorbed people screaming at God, spewing precious bytes out into the endless void, patting ourselves and each other on the backs, and having no influence on anything.

That doesn't mean it's not fun!

[Richard Kimball]

The elite writing for the elite? Hardly.

We're a different kind of elite. Elite mouth breathers.

[Imal]

Ditto to both of you. Let's pat each other on the back and link to each others' blogs. :^)