The moving finger

Do bloggers own passion?

April 14, 2008 · 8 Comments

From SilkCharm

DEFINITION: Bloggers – write about what they are passionate about. Journos – write about what other people are passionate about

It’s interesting that this has bubbled up today – given the news reports about the blogger dying at the keyboard. Passion is great – but not at the expense of your life.

Of course as someone who theoretically has a bit of a bit of a foot in both camps I’m not sure it’s an entirely fair definition – if you look at some of the highly successful gonzo journalists, Hunter S Thompson, Tom Wolfe, etc  you could probably argue there was a fair bit of passion there.

Tom Wolfe in an article in the Wall Street Journal said

One by one, Marshall McLuhan’s wackiest-seeming predictions come true. Forty years ago, he said that modern communications technology would turn the young into tribal primitives who pay attention not to objective “news” reports but only to what the drums say, i.e., rumors.

And there you have blogs. The universe of blogs is a universe of rumors, and the tribe likes it that way.

Favorite blogs: Mr. Wolfe, “weary of narcissistic shrieks and baseless ‘information,’ ” says he no longer reads blogs.

Of course the writing standards for blogs are lower (heck – anyone can play!) so I guess there’s less need to be able to defend, define and explain your passion; or even write well about it.

The best thing about badly written blogs of course – is that one doesn’t have to read them, but then the same is true of a well-written but essentially dull story.

So in answer to SilkCharm

Do you want “objectivity” – stories filtered, nay watered down, for public consumption? Or do you want “passion” – stories spoken from the heart complete with emotional tugs, tirades and misspellings? Is there a place for both?

Me? I want it all. I want stories with passion – without emotional tugs, tirades and misspellings.

And anyone who regularly reads the Guardian – knows it’s possible.

Categories: Politics · Technology
Tagged: , ,

8 responses so far ↓

  • Laurel Papworth // April 14, 2008 at 2:49 | Reply

    Aye but I think there are as many ways to consume media, create media and seek out media as there are people.

    In other words, we seek our milieu, our swarm, our tribe. You may not include Perez Hilton (’star’ blogger) and New Idea (trashy magazine) in your reading list, and yet … they remain uncomfortably amongst the most read items in our culture.

    All bloggers are not created equal nor are all journalists. My personal opinion? Determining who is bestest and second bestest is a hiding to nowhere, but I do so love to rile up the twitterati :)

  • beatonl // April 14, 2008 at 3:10 | Reply

    hehe and I *love* playing devil’s advocate. ;)

  • Colin Campbell // April 14, 2008 at 3:59 | Reply

    Blogs are so temporal and have only very limited requirement to be defensible (we can apologise to the maligned). We can all go to the news sites for more balanced evaluation (vetted by lawyers) or we can enjoy the spin provided by some very clever but perhaps unpolished bloggers.

  • Dan // April 14, 2008 at 5:07 | Reply

    I think it’s a false dichotomy to draw between journalism being ‘objective’ and accountable and blogs being full of passion. Anyone who is subjected to The Australian knows that journalism is thoroughly capable of being worse than many questionable blogs. There are respected, professional journalists who publish well-written pieces with real passion, it’s just silly to expect to find them in the Sydney Morning Herald or Time Magazine.

  • Journos and Bloggies, always worth a post. « Worte,Zeichen,Bilder // April 14, 2008 at 10:24 | Reply

    [...] Journos and Bloggies, always worth a post. Jump to Comments DEFINITION:(by Silk Charm/via/via) [...]

  • O'Maolchathaigh // April 15, 2008 at 6:24 | Reply

    Yeah, I want passion, but I want to see a spell-checker used at least, and a grammar check would be useful too. Why have the flow of writing sidetracked and distorted by atrocious spelling errors and grammar? Write it all down, yes, but, then proof-read it before posting. Comments and emails are less important and we are all more forgiving of those, but, if you’re going to write a story, or tell your own story, then I’d prefer to see things that had some editing. I reread my own postings afterwards, over and over, and not only make corrections, but changes.

  • Grant Czerepak // April 15, 2008 at 7:36 | Reply

    Personally, I think one of the greatest flaws in blogging and responding is anonymity. Every person if they are to be member of the democracy of the tribe should use their real name and provide a basic profile of themselves. Otherwise there is no accountability and consequently no credibility.

  • Ochlocracy versus Democracy on the Web « relationary // April 15, 2008 at 9:00 | Reply

    [...] on the Web 2008-April-14 — grant czerepak I just came from reading a post on the Moving Finger blog.  It talked about Marshall McLuhan’s foresight regarding the tribalism of a global [...]

Leave a Comment