Bloggers are more of a threat than people realize, and they are only going to get more toxic. This is the new reality. — Peter Blackshaw, Intelliseek (which has a blog!)
Forbes magazine’s cover story (try BugMeNot to bypass reg.) makes a few good points about blogs and certain legal issues, but the overall tone is hysterical (as in neurotic, not funny). According to the article, blogs promote a lynch mob mentality. I’ll admit that in the aggregate, blogs can whip up a frenzy and create an opinion storm that probably scares the establishment more than we bloggers imagine. And that’s good.
This is America. It’s our duty to challenge politicians and the press, and with a free market system, businesses better beware, too. What frightens them so much is they can’t control us. Yes, if we libel companies or individuals, there should be consequences. But a blog swarm in itself is not a crime or an infringement of anyone’s civil rights.
A blog swarm can be a stinging gadfly, a much-dreaded possibility, or someone’s worst nightmare, but in my opinion, blogging is free expression at its purest. If we’re willing to embrace this freedom, we ought to be willing to embrace its power.
Although the Forbes article is technically not a tirade, I really enjoy reading and listening to anti-blog rants.
Is that normal?
(Hat tip: Micro Persuasion)
Related posts:
- Easongate
- ABC Busted By The Blogs
- Peasants Don’t Blog
- ‘Manly’ Maney Says Blog Novelty Will Wear Off
- Ken Fuson’s Confusion
- Nick Coleman’s Blog Envy
Update: Mean Dean has spoofed Forbes already!
Unrelated Update: See my update on the Harry Potter post. Spoiler alert! If you have a response, please comment there.
{ 7 trackbacks }
{ 21 comments }
One time I saw a snobby Chicago columnist say on local tv that she would never have a blog. She made sure she used a condescending tone to say it. I’ve read a lot of blogs that are much better than her highly-paid fluff.
I love it.
The blogosphere is a direct competitor and an immediate threat to legacy media. Thusly, because anti-blog diatribes in the MSM are so transparently reacting to that, so desperately railing against that, is what makes them amusing.
Lynch mob mentality? Or unobstructed ability to share information, opinions and ideas?
To some, the two pose equal threat.
“Although the Forbes article is technically not a tirade, I really enjoy reading and listening to anti-blog rants.
Is that normal?”
Of course… The new normal is that the Blogosphere is Revolutionizing… well…
EVERYTHING!
Let FREEDOM ring!
Jenny
A blogger…can’t remember his name, had touched on the fact that the U.N. wants to somehow seize blogsphere. Anyone have have info. on that?
I wonder if the publishing of “Journalist Freud” had an impact on blogsphere?
thanks, Maribel
Apparently (and I’m going by what Xeni Jardin had to say about the article at Boing Boing) the Forbes article goes into ways for companies to exact revenge on bloggers that say things they don’t like, such as paying other bloggers to say nice things about you (AKA astroturfing, or the Microsoft approach), digging up dirt on the bloggers and trying to discredit them, hitting their ISP with a takedown notice under the Digital Millenium Copyright Act (just one of the many things wrong with the DMCA), and possibly suing the blogger (the RIAA approach?).
Of course, any company that employed these tactics would rightfully be considered anathema by the entire blogosphere…so is Forbes doing its readers a disservice by giving them this advice?
A streak of masochism is required personality for every blogger. We’re not always feeling the love.
Is that normal? Heck, yes! Half the bounce in being a gadfly is to enjoy the reaction from the bite!
Colleges, newspapers, television “news rooms” and magazines are chockablock full of a static cadre of the “smartest people in the room” who supposedly cover the entire realm of human knowledge.
Just look at what happened to the one-eyed Goliath, CBS, when the little know-nothings in the hinterlands shredded their credibility in the Bush National Guard documents scandals. They still can’t understand how a bunch of no-names pulled it off.
In the future, some blogger will get into big-time legal trouble and Time will run a cover story on whether the blogosphere is dead.
More worrisome to me are the continued efforts by the UN to wrest the internet from US control. Ours is the only country in the world that can allow and tolerate the freedom of speech we enjoy on the internet today.
Good post – and thanks for the hat tip – which I’ve recognized on my own post entitled ‘The Attack of Blog Hysteria: fisking the panic over bad blogs.’
Also thanks for the hat tip on the bug me not site. Cool tool!
Blogs are the new broadsides and pamphleteers. The Old Media (and the Old Guard) is right to be wary–revolutions start with sharing information.
One of my favorite teachers blames pubs for the American Revolution. Think about it: a bunch of guys, sitting around drinking and jawing. Next thing you know, there’s a war on.
I had my brick and was waiting for the rest of the mob to show up outside the Forbes offices so we could break some windows, but no one showed up. Maybe it’s Friday and most bloggers are busy thinking where to go for the weekend to avoid all the annoying Halloween parties.
I don’t see what is so frightening about people with opinions. I guess they don’t like that these people SHARE their opinions with others. Is the MSM supposed to be the only people allowed to do such a thing? Sounds like Forbes just wants to be another brick in the wall.
I’m on at least 1 daily Forbes.com email newsletter for techy stuff. I’m unsubscribing immediately. As for the MSM being threatened by blogs, hell yeah! Everything I read in the MSM is first filtered through one of my several favorite blogs.
Yes, they’re scared of us! We’re seeking truth where we can find it rather than having them push their b.s. at our passive selves. Bring it on!
I’m a journalist and a blogger. I still don’t understand why bloggers think corporate journalism is threatened by blogging:
1) Blogging is still a reactive process of commentary. I see lots of linking to MSM. I don’t see much original reporting.
2) I’ve never seen a blog report million dollar earnings or billion dollar values (in real dollars, not Technorati faux dollars).
3) Most bloggers are as guilty of bias and poor news judgment as the corporate journalists they criticize. It may be for different reasons, but it makes it no more “balanced” as the liberal-flavored news desk or wire desk at some East Coast daily.
I like your blog, LaShawn. Not a personal criticism here. Just can’t share your enthusiasm, as much as I’d love to see blogging become both a real journalism entity and for-profit venture.
Speaking as a professional journalist myself, I’d have been embarassed to crank out a story as biased and slipshod as Lyons’. What’s his problem?
I thought challenging authority and the press are good things? I guess not if your part of the ‘establishment’. it surprises me that many of those who are journalists are probably the same ones who protested during the sixties and fostered the attitude towards those in authority. How quickly power and prestige corrupts.
Ha!
Being an eeeeviilllll blogger myself, what a complete bin of hooey! They are soooo scared that we unite, provide positive angles to stories, and shine the light on the darkness known as MSM.
Bah. Bunch of sissies!
THANKS La Shawn for bein’ there!!!
Take care, and God Bless!
As a blogger and a geek, I can’t understand why _SOME_ professional journalists like Lyons miss so many facts?
For example, in his rant about Google taking steps to keep pr0n off their index – but doesn’t mention that Blogger, which Google owns, has a multi-step process for handling defamation and/or copyright violations.
Instead he offers a sidebar with some really shabby advice, especially when you consider it is contrary to what the DCMA says of ‘fair use’ as offered by EFF:DeepLinks:
http://www.eff.org/deeplinks/archives/004104.php#004104
Blogging is democratic expression with a built-in critical filter. The filter, which is just as democratic, operates as soon as one of us posts something that cannot be defended, and others of us step in and attack.
A model of intercommunication with this built-in corrective is just to much for any centuries-old institution like the Fourth Estate (and what is up with that self-aggrandizing definition?) to take.
Viva!
Agree compeletly, La Shawn. Nice analysis.
Brad
Comments on this entry are closed.