...or maybe The Blogsphere is Web 2.0...or The Web is so Old School. So many pithy subject lines...so little space.
So here's the conversation (admittedly...this conversation is very inside baseball):
Ed said: Can we all agree that the term "blog" is now meaningless and should be retired? We have a perfectly good word we can use in its place: website. Just what does "blog" signify anymore that's different from most well-managed websites? Frequently updated content? Nope. An easy-to-use content management system that allows non-techies to publish online? Nope. An authentic, individual voice? Perhaps--but that's changing too.
And followed up with: The significant common factor isn't the underlying blogging technology, but how you approach your online audience. Do you hand down stone tablets from the mountaintop? Or do you speak in a genuine, human voice...and ask questions...and respond to questions asked of you? If your answer is "Yes, all of the above" then you're engaged in an effective conversation with your online audience, and whether you're using a "blog" or not is irrelevant. If your answer is "No," then you're irrelevant (or you soon will be) and a "blog" won't save you from the scrap heap.
Then, rightfully, a shit storm ensued (perhaps Ed's intention):
Marnie said: And I might be persuaded to agree with him about blogs the artifact. Not, however, about blogging the activity. Blogging, the activity, includes linking, frequent updates that center around short bits of text, permalinks to content to make it easy for other people to track. It is not just about the communication style. It is about the activities that make the communications style work.
Kurt Said: Namely, to be bloggish, your site must connect to the network of conversations and people that are also being bloggish in a formally recognized way. Technically it should happen via RSS, trackback, and blogrolling - but it's not the technology that is important. What's important is that there is an unwritten, but agreed upon, standard for discoverability.
Ruby Said: I define blogs as having the following characteristics:
1. first-person voice -> authenticity
2. dialog (either between blogs and/or in the comments)
3. database back-end (enabling archives and syndication)
4. (or 3.5) permanently available archives
Ed has rebuttaled...unrelenting: I think the continuing use of the word "blog" is actually a barrier to the extension of these qualities across the web (although the spread of blogs themselves is obviously a big help.) The more we talk about "blogs" and the "blogosphere," the easier it is for people to think we're referring to something other than websites on the web. Kill your blog--save the web.
I got to say, I'm on the opposite of that fence. To me the web denotes a static, siloed, irrelevant world (wide web) of the 1990's. The adoption of blogs (thus syndication, thus content aggregation, thus democratization of information, thus social and knowledge interconnectedness) is going to kill that barren wasteland once and for all.
I'm not sure what will bridge this schism--which I believe to be one part generational and one part privilege--perhaps just time and some good ol' fashiong spin-doctoring. All I know is that I have been thoroughly enjoying this conversation and look forward to the next round. Ding-Ding!
Comments