Main Content

“Call me Ishmael. Some years ago—never mind how long precisely—having little or no money in my purse, and nothing particular to interest me on shore, I thought I would sail about a little and see the watery part of the world.”

— Herman Melville, Moby‑Dick or, The Whale, New York, 1851, p. 1

See John Gruber and Merlin Mann’s Blogging Panel at SXSW: “Blogs Turbocharged” on March 14, 2009.

So began Herman Melville’s novel on that white whale Moby‑Dick, and so begins this blog. And what would propel me to start on this quixotic endeavor? After all, blogging has met with several untimely deaths {1} throughout its short history: death by celebrity, death by ads, death by comment trolls, and ultimately death by tweets. Yes Virginia, it seems Elvis has left the building. ¶ I see no reason to believe that the reported demise of the personal blog is an accurate portrayal of the current state of blog writing. There are still many blog authors writing passionately about subjects that interests them for a community that is just as passionate. There will always be an audience, whether comprised of many readers or just one.

See, “For a Fee Some Blogs Boost Firms,” reported by Jenn Abelson (Boston Globe. 26 June 2005).

Blogging in its current form {2} has essentially two histories: the first, dating back many centuries, is the personal journal; the second, much more recent, is that of paid advertisement disguised as journalistic reportage. The author of the former is compelled to share what was once private with a public audience, while the latter reports for the purpose of attracting visitors in exchange for roguish tribute. That is not to say that the non-professional blogger does not court visitors, it is to point out that in an ad-based model, whether clandestine or otherwise, content is secondary to volume of uniques.

In Philip Greenspun’s article prepared to support a talk at Wordcamp 2009, on how writing has been changed by the web and the weblog, he speculated on the original blogger—was it Marcus Aurelius, the second century Roman Emperor? Of course, Mr. Greenspun was being provocative, since Marcus Aurelius’ journal was only made available posthumously and not widely distributed until it was printed in 1558 in the form of a book entitled Meditations. For the writer, his words were a private affair. And therein lies the difference between the historical diarist and the modern-day blogger. Between the private and the public. {3} Once the blog writer is conscious of an audience, the diary—that collection of words—becomes performance.

The Art of Ridicule

In the 1996 French film Ridicule, Patrice Leconte tells the story of a poor French lord, Marquis Grégoire Ponceludon de Malavo, who must engage in the court game of l'esprit at Versailles in order to gain royal backing on a needed drainage project. In the hopes of emulating their high priest of ridicule, the aristocracy invent the sport of barbaric wit to be performed during parties and gatherings. And in the current-day equivalent of the court of Versailles, ahem, the game is now played behind our screens where it is now more spectator sport. As Christy Lange confesses:

Christy Lange, “Critical Values: The world of difference between writing a blog and an article for print publication,” Frieze Magazine, issue 122, print edition (April 2009): 13.

But I do read blogs on websites like Television Without Pity or Gawker that ruthlessly but exactingly dissect, satirize, even ridicule all that’s hypocritical and deplorable about media and pop culture. They make irreverence feel like the most important critical tool of my generation. This kind of commentary is appealing precisely because it’s not tempered or even- handed, but because it’s “snark”—the fired-back insult, the sarcastic aside.

Ms. Lange goes further to describe the trap falls of blogging as a forum of personal opinion. Yes, the seduction of channeling our informal voice is appealing. Yes, we strive to invite knowing trust by casually offering a biting aside. Afterall, informality and knowingness are proof of our rank as Cognizant-rati. And in a culture where deceit and criminality are Official Policy this frankness can be justified. But, there is always a penalty for naked opinion. At the end of her essay she cites Mark Twain from his recently published article, “The Privilege of the Grave,” wherein Mr. Twain offers:

Mark Twain, American Notes, “The Privilege of the Grave,” The New Yorker, (December 22 & 29, 2008): 51.

Now there is hardly one of us but would dearly like to reveal these secrets of ours; we know we cannot do it in life, then why not do it from the grave, and have the satisfaction of it? Why not put these things into our diaries, instead of so discreetly leaving them out? Why not put them in, and leave the diaries behind, for our friends to read? For free speech is a desirable thing.

Free speech is a great thing, and yes, freely expressing our opinions is a dangerous thing. But, to hide our thoughts in a bound volume with the intent of releasing these secrets—after the fact—is a disingenuous act of discretion. It is to be an actor in an empty theater performing her play while the audience awaits behind locked doors. She becomes a well-lit mime whose steps echo in the darkness. And what is a mime without an audience? A ghost—a walking phantom.

See: Denby, David. Snark: It's Mean, It's Personal, and It's Ruining Our Conversation, (New York: Simon and Schuster, 2009).

I do need to make a distinction, though, between what we know to be Snark and criticism delivered in an unforgiving tone. Due to the difficulty of communicating on the web, there are times when we misinterpret the hard tonality of a critique by certain critics as a personal attack. And, in turn, dismiss this criticism as vitriolic ridicule. Collectively, we must do a better job of accepting criticism, whether spoken with the gruffness of a jackhammer or written with the civility of Constable’s brush. We need to make an effort to reach in amid the clamorous noise and grasp the substantive meaning of what is being conveyed. Mining the words of a critic may not be an easy task, but it can be a rewarding effort.

The Age of Advertisement

See, “Report: FTC to go after blogger freebies,” reported by Caroline McCarthy (CNET News. 22 June 2009).

Earlier last year the FTC stated that it will go after bloggers who receive kickbacks from companies or marketers whose products the blog writer was promoting without proper disclosure. In this effort to reign in false claims and expose conflicts of interests, the agency hopes to place blog writers under the same legal scope of accountability as professional journalists. The proposed oversight guidelines are broad-reaching and will cover any form of repeated pay-for-post arrangements regardless of medium used.

It is without surprise that certain estimable blog writers and fameballs would falsify their experience in exchange for meager compensation. {4} In turn, it’s unsurprising that companies and marketers, en masse, would engage in such arrangements; as it is no surprise that good people will do bad things. But, do we really want the FTC to go after the casual blogger pimping her free sample of yarn:

John C. Dvorak writing in PC Magazine: June 22, 2009: “FTC Is Ready to Pounce on Dishonest Bloggers.”

We do not need the FTC looking into Milly when there are large corporations ripping off the public every day. The community of bloggers can make Milly miserable for her misleading review, but the public can do little about financial scams, major price fixing, overbilling by the phone companies, or any number of big scams.

Putting aside the arguments about the fairness of these new guidelines, or questioning the implementation of their enforcement, we have to ask whether this is a problem endemic to our time or to blogging—frankly, is this behavior new? American culture has had a history of smearing the divide between anecdotal reporting and up front advertisement. We can look back to the early part of the last century to witness this first age of advertisement. Blog for pay is just a reflection of the saturation of ad presence in our contemporary culture. What’s old is new again, always.

Anxiety of Authorship

Not surprisingly, the capricious and public nature of blogging causes a self-conscious anxiety for the blog writer. An anxiety expressed by Paul Boutin and which should be expected as self-publishing on the web is still in its infancy:

Paul Boutin writing in Wired Magazine: 16.11: “Twitter, Flickr, Facebook Make Blogs Look So 2004” (October 20, 2008).

Writing a weblog today isn’t the bright idea it was four years ago. The blogosphere, once a freshwater oasis of folksy self-expression and clever thought, has been flooded by a tsunami of paid bilge. Cut-rate journalists and underground marketing campaigns now drown out the authentic voices of amateur wordsmiths. It’s almost impossible to get noticed, except by hecklers. And why bother? The time it takes to craft sharp, witty blog prose is better spent expressing yourself on flickr, Facebook, or Twitter.

See Joe Clark’s article: “Deconstructing ‘You’ve Got Blog’” (fawny.org. December 28, 2002).

Not only are we far removed from the Golden Age of blogging, but the blog writer is being assaulted from all corners: by sundry ringers and the surly khōrōs with its cacophony of heckles. Our well-earned authenticity has been worn over and wrung dry, leaving us with a few prosaic words of expression to mean what we want to say, er tweet. And lest we forget monetization {5}:

Jeffrey Zeldman writes a response to Paul Boutin’s article: “Um, don’t blog, or something” (November 3, 2008).

Well maybe the reason you’re not supposed to blog is that you won’t get rich blogging, because Calacanis did, so I guess he used up all the rich. Sorry, no more rich to go around. I mean, what’s the point of expressing yourself if there is no immediate rich to be had?

Buried within Jeffrey Zeldman’s sardonic argument is the problematic cause of Boutin’s dilemma: we blog to reap rewards, whether monetary (in the form of paybacks) or personal (to satisfy our egos). In essence, the action of blogging is the result of crass needs or desires. Further, Boutin’s amateur wordsmiths must compete with the professionals. And how can the amateur blogger challenge the formidable skills of the seasoned journalist writing for the Huffington Post, the Wall Street Journal or the New York Times, or the professional blogger uploading rumours to engadget or gizmodo? Certainly, authenticity would trump status—a fait accompli, no?

But, seriously

What does it mean to blog? As we have seen above, the FTC would like to cloak the blog writer under the same honor system as the working journalist. Yet, it goes without saying that the monitored blogger will not be afforded the same measure of respect nor will her blog be viewed with the same level of credulity as a news rag. The writer Yves Smith stresses the disparity of accreditation:

Yves Smith writing in Naked Capitalism: “Blogging Needs to be Rebranded” (May 22, 2009).

While blogs clearly have loyal fans, to the populace at large that doesn’t partake, they are disreputable. Blogs are just another way to waste time on the Internet, fitting in there somewhere with Twitter, Facebook, and YouTube, but no corporate sponsorship to legitimate it. Bloggers are a faceless rabble, pamphleteers trying to whip up interest in their pet causes.

And further:

To the extent the MSM deigns to take note of bloggers, the references to individual blogs and bloggers are comparatively few. More often, articles refer to “bloggers” as if they were a Mongol horde mounting an assault on whatever established institution is on their radar today, or pieces that, while technically newsworthy, nevertheless serve to underscore doubts about bloggers standing.

Simply, to blog is to write. And as writers, blog authors need to resist the generalized categorizations directed at them. It’s part of the blogger’s struggle towards equal standing.

The Purpose

Whether the blog author defines herself as an amateur or professional is irrelevant. What we can accept is that blogging can still afford us a forum to communicate our ideas and thoughts. It may be personal, but it is not private nor intimate. It need not be ad-based. And as authors we need not compete with each other.

* * * * *

This blog is divided primarily into two sections: (a) long-form articles on a variety of subjects and (b) a log, or more appropriately a tumblelog, of notes and postings of images.