I just fnished watching David Pogue’s rather bland and, I thought, humorless piece on CBS’s Sunday Morning. The version posted at the link is, essentially, a transcript of the piece. I suppose that for someone who’d never heard of blogging or, perhaps, who’d heard of it but didn’t know much about it (practically everyone) it was a fair basic introduction to blogging. No real insights.
I noted one prominent feature of the piece that I thought was inaccurate: Ana Marie Cox is characterized as the founder of Wonkette who then went to the big leagues by getting a book deal and a column at Time Magazine. Is that correct? Or did Nick Denton hire her to write it?
I suppose that this is too technical for a 5 minute piece on TV but I distinguish among a number of different types of blog, based mostly on organization and economics rather than subject matter.
First, there’s the corporate blog. This is a blog operated by a company, generally with a paid blogger, whose purpose is, fundamentally, to promote the products or services of the company or, maybe, just the company itself.
Second, there’s the professional blog. This is a blog in which the blogger is paid to blog but not to promote a product. The blog itself is the product. Example: Wonkette. Is Joshua Micah Marshall’s blog a professional blog or a corporate blog?
The third different type is the blog operated by a professional journalist or writer which is used by the blogger as an outlet for material he or she hasn’t been able to sell, isn’t suitable for sale, or is used to promote the blogger’s skills. Some of the very best and most popular blogs are of this type. Examples: Michelle Malkin and Michael Yon.
Fourth, there’s the personal blog. This is the sort that both David Pogue and Meg Hourihan were making snarky comments about. You know, the blog in which the blogger blogs about what he or she had for breakfast, what happened during the day, posts pictures of their kids or pets, and so on. I read a few of these (mostly relatives) and even do a little personal posting myself. Pogue and Hourihan are right: the audience for any given one of most of such blog is probably pretty small but I’m peripherally aware that some personal blogs (particularly sex blogs) have a substantial following.
Finally, is the blog of the type to which I’d assign The Glittering Eye: the amateur pundit. Many of the most popular blogs and most of the blogs I read belong to this type. Example: Instapundit.
I don’t think that amateur punditry is a threat to the traditional media outlets (or political parties) but I do think that it’s a challenge to them. In the final analysis amateur punditry won’t be coopted by being bought and can’t be shouted down. The challenge that it poses is first, it demonstrates how easy it actually is—no J-school degree required, and, second, it provides an outlet for points-of-view that differ from the established orthodoxy.
” I suppose that for someone who’d never heard of blogging or, perhaps, who’d heard of it but didn’t know much about it (practically everyone) it was a fair basic introduction to blogging. ”
The audience for “Sunday Morning” is an older crowd, non-technical…. so yes, my assignment was to create an *introduction* to blogs for them. To a blogger like you, naturally this segment introduced very little new! It was, as you correctly perceive, aimed at novices who’ve heard the word “blog” but have little idea what it’s all about.
Incidentally, I did indeed note the difference between “personal” blogs, as I called them, and “big, commercial” blogs that try to drum up traffic…
–David Pogue
I have cared very little about traditional media portraits of blogs, because even thought they are typically condescending, hey, it’s publicity.
But the quote near the end, which Mr. Pogue let hang, highlights the medias misunderstanding of what the better blogs actually do:
Ms Hourihan, despite her pedigree, doesn’t seem to remember those instances wherein blogs have either scooped or corrected media accounts and have hung on to stories with impressive tenacity.
Not that all that glitters is blog, but the media do demonstrate a certain attention deficit all their own.
Oh, and forgive the cut-in, but Mr. Pogue’s response speaks louder than his story. My goodbye post contained a reference to Katha Pollitt. She responded to my post quite quickly (it’s astounding how many pro journos look themselves up at technorati). The media is paying attention, and that’s a good thing.
Thanks for dropping by, David. My bottom line point is that the amateur punditry blogs deserved at least an explicit mention. Glenn Reynolds, for example, probably has as many readers on any given day as most New York Times columnists.
I would say it’s actually a mistake to say that Glenn Reynolds is an amateur pundit. He draws enough income between his blog and his columns for two other publications that he has to be considered a professional blogger.
I’m basically of the opinion that anyone who derives significant income from blogging should be considered a pro.
Yeah, I thought of that, Dean. It’s certainly arguable that Glenn has lost his amateur standing. But there are lots of others including yourself, Ed Morissey, Greyhawk, and the guys at Powerline who certainly still qualify.
The zeroth type of blog is the link blog, which is links to interesting sites the blogger has found, with occasional commentary. Somehow everyone always forgets that type, even though it was the first…
This page is wonderful!!!My name is Hannah and I’m just tring to get noticed but, please come to my site and post a comment!!!
David P–re the comment “Just because the resources of a — a professional newsroom are so much greater. A lot of times, especially with the deep reporting, it takes a concerted effort to stay on that story-you know, months”…”resources” should not be measured only in terms of numbers of people. There are many bloggers with expertise in specific knowledge domains–some are engineers, some are law professors, some are business executives. If depth is the criterion, it is more likely to be supplied by someone who actually knows something about the subject.