: Steve Outing just wrote a damned fine column (we think) on the hyperlocal blogging experiment we’re running at Advance.net. Outing concludes: :”Community publishing was a good idea in the late ’90s that just didn’t pan out. Maybe this time the industry will get it right.”
Posts from October 16, 2003
The interview of the dinosaurs
: There will be many snarking links — all deservedly nasty, I’m sure — to Adam Clayton Powell III’s interview with NY Times technology writer John Markoff at OJR trying to dismiss weblogs. The question is as bad as the answer:
Q: Well, you’ve touched on a really central concern of a lot of people — over the last 10 years, if not longer — particularly among journalists who, I guess you could say, are more traditional, who look ahead and see all these pitfalls that are coming — of people who suddenly start creating content who don’t have the same standards as, well, The New York Times. Do you see that as an issue or are we beyond that now?
Pitfalls? That’s a fine way to frame the question, Mr. Powell. No leading, no prejudice, no bias there, eh?
How about the opportunity this presents: More people giving us more information from more perspectives. If you cared about informing the public, you’d see the benefit in that. Pitfall, indeed. Now Markoff spouts:
JM: Well, I’m of two minds. I certainly can see that scenario, where all these new technologies may only be good enough to destroy all the old standards but not create something better to replace them with. I think that’s certainly one scenario.
Pardon me for interrupting, but that made no frigging sense whatsoever. Can you parse that for me, Mr. Markoff? Or do you need an editor to speak sense? How do new standards “destroy” old standards? Something won’t become a “standard” unless it is accepted by someone in power — the publishers or the audiences. This isn’t a game of PacMan.
The other possibility right now — it sometimes seems we have a world full of bloggers and that blogging is the future of journalism, or at least that’s what the bloggers argue, and to my mind, it’s not clear yet whether blogging is anything more than CB radio.
The reference is as old-farty and out-of-date as the sentiment. It’s clear that Markoff isn’t reading weblogs and doesn’t know what’s there.
Hey, fool, that’s your audience talking there. You should want to listen to what they have to say. You are, after all, spending your living writing for them. If you were a reporter worth a damn, you’d care to know what the marketplace cares about. But, no, you’re the mighty NYT guy. You don’t need no stinking audience. You don’t need ears. You only need a mouth.
And, you know, give it five or 10 years and see if any institutions emerge out of it. It’s possible that in the end there may be some small subset of people who find a livelihood out of it and that the rest of the people will find that, you know, keeping their diaries online is not the most useful thing to with their time.
Well isn’t that condescending. “Keeping their diaries online.” Again, it’s clear that the guy hasn’t read them. I tell you what I eat only once a month (at Burger King … and I’ll have a post later today on that new mustard chicken sandwich, by the way). The rest of the time, we tend to talk about, oh, politics, war, society, technology, religion… just the kinds of things that the New York Times tries to put on its front frigging page.
When I tell that to people
We, the people
: There has to be a line where this stops. I’m all for the idea that we, the people can be journalists in our weblogs.
Now I see an extension of this, taking the idea to religion. HyperGene Medialog reports on a minister and congregation who adapt Dan Gillmor’s line: “We know more than our pastors.” On the odd (very odd) day when I (jokingly) think I should go into the ministry, I think that the last thing I would want to do is spend three years in seminary and I don’t really see much of a way around it. There are some things you just have to know and think through and work out.
I’m waiting for somebody to start a blog called We the Doctors: We know more than our physicians, for many people do think that. But if I don’t see a diploma and license on your wall, I’m not following your advice.
I’m a rabid populist but I do think we can take this thing too far.
: Hypergene interviews the collaborative pastor, who paints a picture of worship that would give my pastor (and my sister, the Rev…. and me) heart attacks:
A: Here is an example from our first service: Doors open at 5:30 with our espresso bar open, tables and chairs are scattered around a low platform, live music is being played
More comments on comments
: Some interesting comments on the comments on comments below.
: EvilPundit says, quite rightly, that comments, too, should have permalinks to others can link directly to them. He points us to detailed if chatty instructions here. I’ll need to steady my coding hand with a few shots before undertaking this but it looks righteous.
: Lisa Williams says what we have here is a parallel development alongside the blogosphere: the commentsphere. I’m not sure I agree that it’s separate; comments are part of blogs; they are posts on posts. But to do what she wants, we still have to add the ability to permalink comments. [Anil, et al, add that to your list...]
: UPDATE: This just in from Anil: “As far as comment permalinks go, I’ve got them on my site right now, and I think we’re updating the MT and TypePad templates to include them by default, but we’ve all talked about it internally and are strongly in favor.” As usual, one step ahead….