Let Them Write Cake

"Dude, I've been reading you bleating on about whatever you've been bleating on about for months now. And its been fun. But today's example, about blogging demonstrating the democratisation of access, seemed farcical in the extreme. I would venture that the traditional "real notepads and practised shorthand" journalists, will, with the aid of seasoned editors and experienced sub-editors, provide something informative, well-judged and worth reading. Whatever the presser you went to was about, you didn't manage to tell me about it. I'll bet that the broadsheet hacks who were there got half-a-dozen column inches out of it. But you didn't. Much as I like your daily ramblings, I think it represents a dangerously self-involved egoism to think that churning out 500 words per day on waiting for the boiler dude has much to do with the craft of journalism. The news today -- that people like podcasts but no one actually goes out of their way to listen to them -- would seem to give the lie to the idea that anyone gives much of a flying fuck about blogs et al. Having broadband plus an opinion does not equal democritisation. Blogging is the icing; you are not the cake, dude. "

This comment on yesterday's househusbandnot. I totally agree. As I hit the 'publish' key to yesterday's post, I thought exactly the same thing - well kind of the same thing. (Good memory on househusbandnot though d.u.d.e. You really have been reading it since the beginning haven't you? ) However, I was never pretending that blogging was journalism. I think I was taking three things - journalism, blogging and technology - and trying to make them into two to make a point about communications in general. What I was trying to ask - and obviously failing to explain - was why are all the great opportunities for new communications just being used by geeks rather than 'real' journalists and good information disseminators. If the two sides continue the stand off against each other, neither will move forward.

And who would ever disagree that blogging by definition is ever anything other than self-involved egoism? No deadlines, no editors, no real context, no subs, and usually no readers. How could it be anything else? The real danger is when I/we/they pretend that it is anything else, egged on as I/we/they are at the moment by snipes from journalists, and other misleaders including the fact that we 'publish' our blogs. We don't publish anything. Publishing suggests audiences and process and order and discipline. Blogging is almost invariably none of those things, least of all disciplined. But maybe I was falling into a big old trap called my ego yesterday. I'm not apologing for that. But certainly apologies if it was boring or misleading.

So thanks for the comment. Although I think you are mixing up something with the no-one watches podcasts = blogs are crap argument. Kind of depends on what your et al is really. Although it does further emphasise my point about the mismatch between available technology and how we can use it to be effective communicators.

In amongst all this bolloxing on about communications, I failed to notice that today's househusbandnot is the 100th I have written. I was promising something special to mark this occasion, but all you got was me talking about myself in a vacuum again. Oh, well. Nothing like consistency. And thanks to mrs househusbandnot for a demand for a return to more animal stories. Will see what I can do.