BLOGOSPHERICS
A variety of observations, readings, measurements and analysis of activities in the Blogosphere.
BloggerCon II
There will be another BloggerCon [1] meeting in Cambridge this April. It is noted in ink on my calendar, no question about it. Iíve already made plans where to watch the Yankee-Red Sox game on Friday night as I drive up to Cambridge. Plans for the Saturday and Sunday games are still up in the air, although I will probably find some Red Sox fans there who will tolerate my loyal and passionate Yankee fandom, and invite me [2] to watch with them.
Last time, at the inaugural BloggerCon this past October, I went up simply looking to take in the sessions, see whomever I might there, and see what I might learn. There were two or three people I was seeking to meet last time, and I was fortunate to run into all of them at the first sessions I attended.
This time I am making some advance people-meeting plans, and may even submit a paper to the collection being put together by the Berkman Crew: Dave Winer [3] (The Blogfather), et al. I sure hope they give out a little certificate to the attendees. This way I could frame it, put it on my wall, point to it and tell people that this is my diploma from Harvard Law. It would make my mother very proud (except, of course, for the deception aspect).
About The Blogfather . . .
[Macro error: Can't include picture "Dave Winer" because Can't include picture "Dave Winer" because the image tag in the shortcuts table is not well-formed.]
Dave is highly opinionated and impassioned. He is truly the man responsible for the embryonic stages of blogging, and his efforts and his companyís software enabled many (including yours truly) to get on the blogging bandwagon. There were forums, there were personal pages, but it is Dave who was and is the driving force that generated what has become an entire blogosphere. Back in September, 2001, just two days before the date we all chillingly recall, Dave wrote a history of the Weblog [4]. Makes for a very good read.
I wrote Dave a note around the holidays, with some thoughts that Iíd intended to blog around that time of year. For any variety of reasons, it turns out that post never saw the light of day (or of your monitor, either), getting lost in the shuffle, falling through a blogcrack, whatever.
Hereís the gist of what I wrote to Dave (which is in an e-mail that I canít find anywhere on my machine, probably lost in one of those Outlook mini-crashes, the likes of which prompted me to go to Open Source Mozilla Thunderbird, as I free myself from the clutches of Micro$oft). I suggested that he might sit back for a moment, reflect, and take great pride in having been the creator and motivator of an entire category of web usage. More than a million people are blogging, and to a large degree, Dave is seminally responsible for he very existence of the blog. His company [5] offered the first software to this effect, and did so freely for personal bloggers. They had products for sale to companies, but individual blogging was enabled, courtesy of the largesse of Dave and Userland. Moreover, Daveís company provided hosting for blogs, as well. Such a deal!
Prior to the advent of Open Source, and that being a catch-phrase (and a category!), Dave sponsored free-access support groups for the software [6] (ìweíre all newbies on this busî) and the creation of communities and encouragement for and from the users to expand and improve on the product. Now there are entire businesses based on the original concept. Dave has at times been welcoming and accepting of these additional players in the field, and also at times been a little snippy about or toward them.
Bottom line is this: had Dave (and Userland [5]) not developed this concept and business base, would the other blogging software companies exist? Would blogging have expanded into the burgeoning category we now know? Would campaigns all have blogs if not for Daveís original and initial efforts?
Dave is a prideful fellow, and why not? He has lots to be proud of! But the truth is that he gets drawn into (and occasionally wages) various flame wars, having to do with software issues, development issues, and so on. The thing is, Dave does this all very openly. WYSIWYG when you read Scripting News [7] or DaveNet [8] or any of the multitude of other locations and sites where Dave makes his feelings known. Living a very public web sort of life, one will rankle others, ruffle feathers, and have very public spats.
Is that a shortcoming, or is that just Dave? I am reluctant to judge. Dave makes his own choices, he is a grown man, he does as he pleases. There is no doubt he is a man of his convictions; he hides behind nothing. Being so open, he is a plain-sight target. Frankly, many a politician could learn a thing or two from Dave. Whether one agrees or disagrees, loves, likes, dislikes, hates, or is just put-off by him, there is never a question as to where he stands. Further, in Scripting News, Dave posts it and keeps it current. Dave makes himself accountable, of his own volition.
And even when one might not agree with Daveís position (like, say, his idea that egotist waste-of-time publicity-seeker and distracter/spoiler Ralph Nader might make sense as a sort of political blog speaker or commentator at BCII), he sure can make it entertaining to follow.
So I say give Dave his props. And when you disagree with him, you have three choices: 1) send him an e-mail; 2) blog about it and thus open it up to some level of public commentary; or, 3) keep it to yourself.
I look forward to BCII, and to seeing Dave there. One of these days he and I will finally find the time to get that pastrami sandwich or chopped liver weíve been threatening to have for some time, now. Two native New Yorkers schmoozing over deli sandwiches. Who knows what ideas might come of that?!
Blogitosis
One of the wonderful things about the web, and by extension ñsometimes- in blogging, is that it is such a level playing field. Forgive me the sports metaphor here. On the web, or in oneís blog, there is no requirement to state oneís age, gender, religion, nationality, race, country of origin, height, weight, orientation, whatever. Until such points happen to be made, or are chosen to be made, the reader or correspondent or interacter knows nothing more than their impression and experience of the writer/blogger/site developer.
In the Blogosphere, we now have evidence of a new malady. No, not "Mad Blog Syndrome."
This one is known as ìBlogitosis.î Symptomatic of Blogitosis is a foul (albeit virtual) stench, originating in the belly of the blog. It stinks up the joint and is offensive to others. Sadly, no Tic-Tacs, Certs, Altoids, chewing gum or blogwash seem to be available. Thatís fine, actually, since all of those products are short-term fixes, not cures.
Blogitosis can take many forms. A putrid stench comes from some racist and hateful blogs. There are political blogs that just reek with invective, complaints and argument. Some compassion, open-mindedness, and perhaps some Ex-Lax or a Bromo might be the sure in those events.
There are variations on the theme, such as the countless LiveJournal blogs containing the offensive, fetid, ad nauseum whining and declaration of adolescent anxieties. Only time can cure that strain of the disease.
A particularly rank strain emanates from the Blogitosis that is caused by self-importance and the being of overly serious. These bloggers, with their malodorous pong, are among the most offensive. This is because they perceive the reeking pong to be aromatic and of benefit to those who read it. Some refer to this strain as Bolitosis-Egocentra.
One need not be a doctor, or even a medical professional, or a master of HTML and coding, to diagnose this malady. It is quite simple, actually. One reads an entry, notices the foul air, and notes to oneself, ìgee, that stinks.î
Les Blogs des Femmes
There are those who will say something in French, or in faux-French, in order to add an air of mystery, intrigue, or just to try to make something sexy. Others do this in order to make something that stinks seem, well, perfumed. An exception to this would be the foodstuffs formerly known as French Fries. Apparently those stink, but Freedom Fries pass muster, to toss a phrase (but not a salad).
What the hell is he rambling about, you might wonder. Okay, hereís the beef. Or, perhaps, the boeuf.
Just a few paragraphs above I was waxing the light fantastic about the web, and how blogs may be free of all the sort of characteristics that evoke bias, discrimination, prejudice or partiality. Until and unless the writer chooses to state any of those characteristics, the path is clear of such obstacles.
Allow me to add here that I tend to be very put off by those who bring their politics to every little thing they do. Some people canít turn a page, eat a meal, or inhale and exhale without feeling some need to politicize it. This generally is the domain of the fanatic, or those who perceive themselves (or their particular interest) as put-upon.
Youíve met these types. Mega-histrionics, even in a passive-aggressive manner. They call you a something-ist or make some other allegation when all youíve done is breathe, blink your eyes, and grown your fingernails. They tell you how you are part of the problem. They yell at you that you donít even know it, and thatís an even more offensive problem in their estimation.
It can be personal politics, local, national, international, attitude, race, religion, whatever. They are always right (as in self-righteous), and you are somehow at fault, offensive, biased, and a part of the problem. Well, gee, damn you for those loathsome ways and get on the stick and come around to their more proper and correct way of thinking. And donít you dare accuse them of any sort of reverse sort of bias or attitude. Hell, no! That is not only insulting, but it is beneath their dignity. And it only debases you that much more (in their most worthy assessment).
Then there is the subtle variation on this theme: the highbrow angle, those walking the on the more sanctified ground. They do so, of course, with you in mind, and with no sense of self. You, too, can be as exalted as they. Yeah, sure. Simply join them on the path to the higher moral ground.
Which brings us to my complaint. But first, a minor digression leading up to the point.
Blogging can be very personal. It can be professional. It can be a vehicle for personal or business promotion. It can be a soapbox (ahem, ahem). There are topic-related blogs. There are study-area related blogs. The key point here: there is no limit, no legislation, nor is there a regulatory body with some sort of overseer authority. One may blog about and as one pleases. There are no barriers to entry, other than perhaps the ancillary costs of connectivity and equipment. Other than common sense, there really are no rules, except in some cases where there may exist limitations or rules on the part of the hosting provider.
And thus, all sorts of interesting blogs populate the Blogosphere. This is a good thing. A very good thing.
It makes for lively discussion, exploration, statement, and all sorts of good reading. One learns, one discovers, one has oneís horizons broadened, simply by taking in the content of a variety of blogs.
The web being the ultimate in freedom of choice and user-select/user-demand fulfillment, one can choose to read what one will. Ignore what one will. There is a freedom here, even a personal anarchy of sorts. This makes for all sorts of topic areas -- blogs exist in every size, shape color, metaphor, meme and special interest or arena. Readership is always in an opt-in basis. A truly free system, where the exchange of ideas is always a matter of choice.
So why, I ask, is there a need for there to be some sort of gender-based session on women who blog [9] at the upcoming BloggerCon? There are no obstacles in the way of women blogging! In fact, there are tons of blogs by, for, and about women. Plus countless blogs written by women that are not at all about what might be defined as womenís issues. Adding to the incredulity is that there are plenty of sites by and for women, and they seem (IMHO) to operate on a plane that is beyond this ìistî level. Example: Blog Sisters [10] ñ an excellent group-writing blog. By virtue of its existence and the fact that it is a viable and ongoing, growing entity, one would think the contributors would have no real need to ìstudyî the femme-issues of being a blogger.
If some [11] jamoke [12] were to call for a ìMen Who Blog, and How Issues of Being A Man and Manhood Have An Impact on the Blogging Experience.î they would be laughed out of Cambridge! Or possibly interviewed by the Crimson and the Lampoon for consideration as content for the next yearís Hasty Pudding. And then shown the door.
Womenís Issues are a very real aspect and a worthy topic of discussion in a multitude of disciplines and areas of study. Thereís no shortage of appropriate areas where this makes sense. It would seem that blogging is an area in which women face no barriers. Whatís to discuss? It seems more worthy of celebration than of introspection. See above reference to level playing field, lack of barrier to entry.
But is this really an issue when it comes to writing a blog? If so, please enlighten me.
OKAY, I GET IT
In much the same way, as stated above, that I am looking forward to meeting various members of the blogosphere, after reviewing some of the source material that served as catalyst for this Blogs Des Femme mini-rant, I realize a thing or two.
My reaction is to the terminology and is conceptual, not to the actual purpose [13].
It just so happens that some women I know (and not just read) have weighed in on the discussion, and they have more biting comments about it than what is written in this space. I saw these comments while perusing various blogs I read on a regular basis. Were it not for their blogs, I might have missed this thing altogether.
Hereís the bottom line: this boils down to women wanting to meet and connect face to face with other women who blog. Well, yeah, that makes total sense. There are lots of fellow bloggers I am eager to meet (nb: of both genders, btw), and BCII is the perfect opportunity to do just that.
So if this ìwomen who blogî meeting is really just a way to take the connection from online (and possibly the phone, as well), then of course! But the impression that a ìpolitical woman thing re this blogging issueî was being considered . . . seemed a little over the top. To me, anyway.
I look forward to seeing people of both genders at BloggerCon II in April!