one or two thoughts about blogs

Various things about blogs have popped into the news in one form or another in the last week and it made me think about the question 'what is a blog for?'

Firstly, blogging is dying! Today's guardian says so . Also says Twitter is taking over - must have seen this week's topic on Bill's wiki.

So, that's it then. Well, not really. I spotted stuff about bloggers in the police and ambulance services this week. Both were anonymous, for obvious reasons, but the policeman was forced to reveal his identity in a court case involving the Times

Observer article about it here including this quote

"Blogging's revival of anonymity, long after publishing and journalism moved on to personalities, is surely one of its more interesting achievements. For as well as liberating writers to be more mischievous or truthful than they would dare to be under their own names, anonymity also means they must be judged, at least at first, on merit. On the net, there is not even the imprimatur of a publishing house, newspaper or loyal circle of influential supporters to reassure new readers.

The drawbacks are obvious. Internet anonymity is also a wonderful shelter for bores, haters, nutters, liars, obsessives and fantasists."

The policeman's blog has now been removed by the author, which is a pity. As the Observer article also says about anon bloggers: "their dogged, discordant tootling provides a precious corrective to official smarm." Couldn't put it better myself.

One other thought, relating to the new journalism created by blogs and the blurring of the line between the traditional printed media and the new free-for-all of blogging etc, anonymous or not, is that the Guardian has found a way of putting all the MPs' expense claims online and invited all its readers to search the files and report anything newsworthy to the paper. They call it 'crowdsourcing' (what a great new word!) but a cynic might smell investigative reporting on the cheap.

David