Blogosphere?

[Buccaneer]

Explain something to me, please.

Last week, there was a symposium in Denver that talked about the influence of blogs as it pertained to the recent election and generally, in the swaying of opinions. I basically know what a blog is (and their associated bloggers) and even looked at a couple, but what I don't understand is why they are all the rage? Or to put it more bluntly, why would anyone care to really read (let alone be influenced by) incoherent, rambling thought streams?

Not only was reading about the symposium reminded me of asking this but also today's Lolita comic strip where a dude is ferverishly writting a blog on the new Star Wars movie. Why would anyone care to read such a blog (and in real life, any of the political ones)?

I am comparing blogs to 1) regular columns by columnists and 2) bulletin board (or usenet) services. The former have always been topical and well-written, but perhaps blogs fill in the gaps between columns? Do I assume that if a writer is well-known, then blogs serve a purpose to keep in the public's mind? The latter (BBS) seems much more organized and subdivided into specific topics (despite threadjacks). No offense to Cam and Farrah, but in the few times I've read their blogs, it's nothing different than what they (or anyone else) would post here. From what I infer, there are literally millions of people writing blogs. Why? Aren't there BBS for every single interest group on the planet? So why read self-centered monologues when engaging in discussions/debates with others seem much more productive and social?

[bosshogg23]

Several blogs that I have read are more topical than just a stream of thoughts. I dont see them as that different than message boards.

I have no idea why anyone would be influenced to a large degree by a blog. I find them terribly boring most of the time. I find most dynasty threads to be tedious as well. Maybe its the idea of one person rambling on and on about the same topic that loses my interest.

[lcjjdnh]

Well, for me at least, I have a blog for two reasons. First of all, about 10 of us on the sports staff here at our school paper have them, and it's good to give yourself a way to write when you don't have an article. Also it helps as a starting point for columns, and it gives an easy way to provide feedback on them.

Second, it gives me the freedom to talk about what ever I want. For instance, I've covered topics such as Michigan women's basketball to Seton Hall men's basketball. It's a much easier medium than posting at different message boards for each subject.

[Cringer]

The only blogs I have every really cared enough to read a little bit of are for bands/artists that pretty much use that as their main webpage. Since these guys are not mainstream music, there is not many other ways to get info on their projects or what they are up to music wise.

Other then that, I could care less really.

[CamEdwards]

hey, eff you bucc!

Seriously, I started two years ago, shortly after I started doing the morning show in Oklahoma City. For me, it was a way to flesh out my thoughts on subjects and provide listeners with another avenue to talk about stuff we talked about on the show. Over the last 24 months, it's sort of morphed into a "whatever the hell I want to talk about today" kind of blog. I'm not expecting to be on MSNBC or CNN because of the blog. I just write about what I want to write about. And yes, I think a lot of blogs are overrated.

[-Mojo Jojo-]

There are some very smart folks (academics mostly) who have blogs focused on their areas of expertise that make excellent reading (i.e. Larry Lessig, Juan Cole, Gary Becker and Richard Posner, etc, etc).

Also there are topical blogs that provide really superior aggregated coverage on a given subject as compared to the traditional media, like How Appealing which covers federal appellate law, or SCOTUSblog, which covers (surprise) the Supreme Court.

Also there are community blogs which can be handy to keep tabs on what's hot with various crowds you might be interested in, like slashdot (techies), Free Republic (conservatives), dailyKos (liberals).

I tend to find the blogosphere to be tremendously helpful in sorting through the immense volume of stuff put out each day by the traditional media. You just have to know what you're looking for and find the right blogs to read.

[dawgfan]

-Mojo Jojo- puts it about as clearly as can be said - blogs basically are only as useful as the person writing them and/or the quality of the subject matter and your interest in that subject matter. As such, most blogs aren't that great. However, when you find one, or you find that a person you already have a great deal of respect is writing one, they can have value. In large degree they are similar to a good columnist, but with the added benefit of the ability to use hypertext and to solicit feedback. Most of the better blogs I read are filled with interesting links to information that I might not otherwise know about or have cared to find on my own. Another thing I appreciate about blogs is the fact it allows people who might not otherwise have an outlet to be able to show their creative side and express themselves. I think there are a numer of good bloggers that might not have gotten the chance through traditional media to reach the kind of readership they now enjoy with their blogs. It's a wonderful expression of democracy IMO.

One of my faves is the USSMariner, a blog that's been written for quite a few years now by a group of mostly very knowledgeable fans of the Seattle Mariners. Part of the appeal for me is the concentration of sabermetrically inclined writers focusing on the M's, something that has yet to really take hold in the traditional media. They provide a view of Mariners baseball that comes very close to my own beliefs about interpreting the game, and is something I can't get anywhere else. Another good one (if you like baseball) is the new MinorLeagueBall.com which is run by John Sickels, the guy that used to do the "Down on the Farm" columns for ESPN.com. He makes great use of the comment feature to make his blog highly interactive with his readers, something else that raises the blog above a traditional column.

[Buccaneer]

I assume then that interactive blogs more of a controlled environment than a message board? Or what it sounds like (in thinking about the USSMariner example) is that is centered around one/few columnist/blogger types and then they can solicit comments on what they wrote (in a controlled way)?

[dawgfan]

Originally Posted by Buccaneer

I assume then that interactive blogs more of a controlled environment than a message board? Or what it sounds like (in thinking about the USSMariner example) is that is centered around one/few columnist/blogger types and then they can solicit comments on what they wrote (in a controlled way)?

I believe the way most blog software is written it's standard practice to allow for a comments section to accompany any posted article on the blog. The blog author may decide to disable comments for a particular article, but many leave comments on for most or all of their articles. The more involved bloggers will reply in the comments section to other comments made by readers, giving is some of the same qualities of an MB thread. Given the structure of the system, it is definitely a more controlled setting than an open MB though, yes.

[dawgfan]

Dola -

In regards to the political influence of blogs, I would imagine much of that comes from a variety of factors - depending on the blog author and whatever connections/restrictions they may have due to their employer, the nature of the writing is often more passionate than what you'd find in standard newspaper columns. Additionally, the quality of hyperlinking with blogs allows for blog authors to spread additional info for readers that they might not otherwise find on their own, and whatever links they provide don't have to meet the higher standards of newspaper journalism (don't snicker, there are standards).

[Buccaneer]

Thank you, all of this was helpful.