Logic Lost. USA Today Tech Guy Writes About Blogs

A little different type of post today. I wont make this a habit, but this guy really got to me with his ad hominem attacks, oh-so-clever linkages and plain goofiness.

What is so fascinating to me about these anti-blog types is that they are so fascinated by something they say isn't important to them. This guy goes after the obvious and adds intrigue where none exists. Let's take a look, shall we.

"A 2005 version of Monty Python's famous "Spam" skit:

Man: Well, what've you got?

Waitress: Well, there's egg and blogs; egg, bacon and blogs; blogs, blogs, egg, blogs, blogs, bacon and blogs; blogs, sausage, blogs, blogs, bacon, blogs, tomato and blogs ...

Wife: Have you got anything without blogs?

These days, the hype about blogs is off the charts."

Agreed. Notice the subject of this article for instance. So what? There's no shortage of hype on any page of any major newspaper.

"And you know what that usually means: Run for cover, because a bubble is going to burst and make a big mess."

Not necessarily. And how is growth in something that is an interest or avocation to many a life changing "bubble"? Let's not confuse the free and open access to publishing which has very little hard costs associated with it with Yahoo stock selling for $300 per share. That was stupid. This, at worst, is harmless. At best it is giving voice to those who haven't had access to, you know, publishing their views in a newspaper. And some just like to do it. BFD. Lighten up Newspaper column guy.

"Pamela Anderson has a blog!"

Ooh. A slam meant to show us how intellectual the writer is, and simultaneously painting all bloggers as bubble headed celebrities. Ad hominem attacking at its best.

Tom Peters has one. Seth Godin has one. Mark Cuban has one. Lots of very intelligent people have them. But, let's focus on the semi-actresses to make our point - which was -- ?.

"A recent Pew Internet & American Life Project study found that 16% of the U.S. population reads blogs and that 6% of adults have created a blog.

(According to "Mental Health: A Report of the Surgeon General," 6% of U.S. adults use specialty mental health services each year. Do you think it's the same 6%?)"

Uh. Nope. Do you? Oh - I get it. Another "I'm so clever I can create linkage where none existed before" statement. Wow, this guy has got the ad hominem attack down cold. No facts here that are relevant, just a juxtaposition of words to create a linkage in the reader. They must learn this crappy kind of writing in J-school. (Don't say 'crappy', that is too strong. Tone it down buster -- ed.) Uh, sorry.

"In fact, let's create an Alice in Wonderland moment: I'm writing about reading about my columns in blogs, which bloggers will inevitably post. So now, I'll be able to read a blog about my writing about me reading about my writing in blogs."

Yes. Cool, huh? I wonder if the guy really is this clueless, or maybe he wants people to think he is so cool and intellectual that all this 'blog' stuff really is beneath him. So the ability to write about someone who wrote - and then read reviews of that writing is "Alice in Wonderland" to him? Hmmm.... Sheltered he is. Actually happens all the time. Even in newspapers.

"Blogging is to the 2000s what Web sites were to the 1990s and desktop publishing was to the 1980s," says Guy Kawasaki, managing director of Garage Technology Ventures.

In other words, we've seen this movie before. A new technology makes it easier for individuals to create and share information, which gives people an intoxicating sense of power they'd never before experienced."

No. Wrong! (-sirens going off - where did this guy get his "other words" assessment from Kawasaki's statement? Oh, that juxtaposition thing.) Blogs don't give anyone anything. No "intoxicating sense of power" can come from opening a Blogger site. None. Most blogs never attract more than a couple of dozen readers before the authors tire and give up. So their "intoxicating sense of power" is somehwat short lived, eh?

Some folks just want to share their experiences and knowledge. Some want to keep customers closer with information and such. Where folks experience an "intoxicating sense of power" is in writing columns that speak down to large groups of people that may be excited about something new. "Yes, you little confused people, thank God I'm here to set you straight in my Noospaper column. Now for a douse of cold water, you morons."

"Next thing you know, this new technology is a "revolution" that "changes everything" and "makes dogs and cats love each other"and other such claims."

What? My dog and my cat love each other now. That's cause of Blogs? Damn.

"But in the past, each technology has also gone through a cycle of superhype, followed by a hype-o-glycemic crash. After that, the technology reaches equilibrium and steadily evolves into a crucial piece of the global fabric.

"For the moment, blogs are on the ascent to the detriment of other media activities," says Larry Downes, professor of information economics at the University of California-Berkeley. "But newer and more interesting communications technologies will unthrone blogs soon enough."

Yeah. Sure. There ya go. A teacher from Berkeley. Take that to the bank. Newer and more interesting huh? Cool. (He knows something we don't know.) When they burst on the scene giving people an intoxicating sense of power, this guy can rip them. Brush up on your ad hominems, dude.

I love the hyperbole here:

• "detriment of other media activities" (What is that about? Media is being harmed by blogs? Where? Stats please. Most of what I have seen is that Media is being hurt by, you know, bad reporting and loss of credibility.) Detriment? Nope. I think it has helped to weed out the lesser qualified, and ethically challenged from their ranks. If that is a detriment, I am confused.
  
• "newer and more interesting communications technologies" (Says who? Oh, sorry, there's that teacher from Berkeley. You know, whenever I am looking for an answer for something that is happening globally in real time, I always run to some academic to get the 'truth'. Then, I usually find out they don't have have a clue. Never did.)
• "unthrone blogs" (Unthrone something that is silly and superfluous? Pam Anderson's blog will be 'dethroned'? Unthrone? Oh yeah, that reminds me why I never go to academics to get information based on a realistic evaluation. There are, of course, great professors and teachers. But I have had far more bad experiences in acedemia than good.)

"The novelty of blogs will wear off, Downes says, just as it did with Web sites a handful of years ago. "How much time do you spend anymore just surfing the Web — you know, for fun?" he asks."

Really? Ya think? Web sites' novelty has worn off? There ya go. Straight from the Berkeley guy. That is why online advertising has grown at an incredible rate. That's why so many businesses have created very successful online channels. There are so many success stories based on Web sites and strong marketing strategies that this type of statement is silly. Oh, and many of us don't surf for fun anymore, we are too busy working on the web. And I don't read Blogs or write them for 'fun'. I do both for a variety of reasons, but most of all to increase my knowledge on a wide scope of interests.

"If everyone had a blog, no one would blog," Downes says."

Uhh... sure. There ya go. Hey, I got one for you. If everyone was a columnist, no one would read columns. Oh - OH- hey---- if everyone was a University teacher, no one would go to school. Man, this is fun. So if everyone was a...(knock it off -- ed.) Sorry, just couldn't for life of me find anything relevant there.

"So, yeah, blogs are cool. Anything that gives people a voice benefits society and makes us all better and smarter — and, as bloggers have proved, makes established information outlets more accountable. But blogs don't seem to be the second coming of the printing press. They're just another turn of the wheel in communications technology."

Thanks for clearing that up for us Noospaper Column Guy. Where would we 'little people' be without you to lead us to the clear and shining path of deep understanding.

Blogs may not be the second coming of the printing press (who ever said that?), but it is proving that maybe the models of publication that we have lived with for the last century may not be either. Communication will be forever changed, even after Pam's site closes down.

Look, blogs aren't the "new media" savior. They are a specific type of information exchange that was unavailable to most people in the past. It provides a voice to those who may have something to say, yet doesn't gurantee an audience if what they say is of no interest. Unlike newspapers and "reader's advocate" types, it allows a dialogue with the creators that can lead to insights and discoveries and new voices. It also doesn't allow for fuzzy thinking as other knowledgeable 'bloggers' will shred intellectual lapses and dishonesty.

Personally I am a little wary of people who attack other folks freedoms, abilities, vocations and avocations. I have always wondered why people create anti-sites about things that don't impact them. (My daughter had a bunch of anti-Brittney Spears sites when she was a sophomore in high school. I laughed at how much time she would spend on sites about a person she didn't have any interaction with, and whose music she didn't like.)

If you don't like blogs, don't read them, don't think they are of any consequence, let 'em be. If, however, you are locked into that sophomoric view of the world as centering around you and your interests, your myopic opinions, then, you know, write a column about it.

USATODAY.com - Once blogs 'change everything,' fascination with them will chill

UPDATE: NevOn adds additional clarity...

It's become literally self-evident that blogs in particular are here to stay and those members of the mainstream media - whether print or broadcast - who embrace them will find that they will help open up new channels to build relationships with readers, viewers and listeners in new and different ways.

Read the whole thing.

UPDATE: LaShawn Barber takes this article as fodder for an incredibly insightful article on Blogs, Bloggers and MSM Columnists / Reporters... Read this article, it will be a terrific resource someday.

Kevin Maney doth protest too much, methinks, but it’s a natural reaction to a perceived threat. When journalists insist so strongly that blogs are a passing fad, a trend that will inevitably decline, they betray their own lack of depth and knowledge about the sheer number of blogs out there for whatever profession, pastime, or perversion one could imagine. Maney’s understanding of blogs barely scratches the surface of what’s really going on all around him.

As above, read the whole thing.