/Rant On: The Blog Police
It has been just under a year that i have been blogging, and therefore I will fully admit, that I am no expert on the subject. But over the time i have spent in this space, sharing my thoughts and insights, there has been discussion, comments and criticism as to what a blog is, what it is supposed to be and what it was.
In the beginning [hopefully Sashay will come to my rescue here - seeing as she is alot more knowledgeable in blogging history - and it was her hand that directed me here] but very simply put, blogging was a space where people contextualized topics and links.
I will fully admit, that my space rarely if ever, fulfills this definition.
Another common theme i have seen in blogs (and those who have made comments included) is the diary/journal of 'my life for all to see'. Others use it as an annotated community events calendar. Whereas others have used it to stir up great 'forum-like' dialogues with people with similar interest. I have used it to talk about things that have interested me that i sometimes dont have the time to talk about with my friends.
All this to say, what bothers me is the blog snobbism that is out there ... 'that is not what a blog is supposed to be' is something i have heard often from people, and when I look at their spaces, in my knowledge of what a blog was .. in its beginning - then neither are their blogs what a blog is 'supposed' to be .. so the question is, why can't my space be what i want it to be? Why should i be made to feel that i am bastardizing a medium if i decide to make this space a little more private then the whole wide web? Where is it in the blogging contract that says i can only talk about relevant issues (deemed relevant by who i would like to know) in a particular format (decided by who again?) in a field where people usually like taking something and changing it to make it their own, why do i have to adhere to their rules?
Dont get me wrong, i am in no way being innovative or revolutionary by using a blog for purposes other then its 'intention' - but then, we shouldnt try to use blogs for collective academic think tanks if we are sticking with using a blog for 'what it is supposed to be used for'. In the end, blogging is about a one to many medium. If my definition of many is 20 people then so be it... besides, there are bigger fish to fry in the world then to worry about whether people are using technology they way its 'supposed' to be used.
It has been just under a year that i have been blogging, and therefore I will fully admit, that I am no expert on the subject. But over the time i have spent in this space, sharing my thoughts and insights, there has been discussion, comments and criticism as to what a blog is, what it is supposed to be and what it was.
In the beginning [hopefully Sashay will come to my rescue here - seeing as she is alot more knowledgeable in blogging history - and it was her hand that directed me here] but very simply put, blogging was a space where people contextualized topics and links.
I will fully admit, that my space rarely if ever, fulfills this definition.
Another common theme i have seen in blogs (and those who have made comments included) is the diary/journal of 'my life for all to see'. Others use it as an annotated community events calendar. Whereas others have used it to stir up great 'forum-like' dialogues with people with similar interest. I have used it to talk about things that have interested me that i sometimes dont have the time to talk about with my friends.
All this to say, what bothers me is the blog snobbism that is out there ... 'that is not what a blog is supposed to be' is something i have heard often from people, and when I look at their spaces, in my knowledge of what a blog was .. in its beginning - then neither are their blogs what a blog is 'supposed' to be .. so the question is, why can't my space be what i want it to be? Why should i be made to feel that i am bastardizing a medium if i decide to make this space a little more private then the whole wide web? Where is it in the blogging contract that says i can only talk about relevant issues (deemed relevant by who i would like to know) in a particular format (decided by who again?) in a field where people usually like taking something and changing it to make it their own, why do i have to adhere to their rules?
Dont get me wrong, i am in no way being innovative or revolutionary by using a blog for purposes other then its 'intention' - but then, we shouldnt try to use blogs for collective academic think tanks if we are sticking with using a blog for 'what it is supposed to be used for'. In the end, blogging is about a one to many medium. If my definition of many is 20 people then so be it... besides, there are bigger fish to fry in the world then to worry about whether people are using technology they way its 'supposed' to be used.
posted by Kelly at
16:19
1 Comments:
You bring up several valid points Kell.
First of all, there is the "purity of the medium" argument that gets levelled by old-timers to the new upstarts that DARE to make creative use of something. It's blogging in this case but obviously, this isn't isn't the first time this has happeneed in human history. Among the many examples I can think of, there are the language police who have been doing this for years and are still doing it in this province of ours. "How DARE you integrate English into our pristine beautiful romance language of French?".
The real thing at issue here for traditional bloggers is that if you're not posting annotated commented links in reverse chronological order, then you're keeping a journal and you should get thee to a journalling site/software like LiveJournal.
Are they right?
Does it matter? You like Blogger for that? use it that way then. Do a And tell everyone else to just click away if it bugs them so much.
Chacun a leur gout, n'est-ce pas?
By
Sashay, at 24/11/04 10:23 a.m.
Post a Comment
<< Home