...I've been thinking that we haven't exactly explored the most obvious thing about my blog: that it exists. If you consider that, back in 1962, the very concept might seem unreal, you might be mistaken.
What kind of media existed back then? Newspapers, magazines, news letters, radio shows, television... All had some form of opinion based content available to the public. Usually, a popular newspaper or broadcast media personality had a column expressing his or her opinions on news of the day. Johnny Carson's Tonight Show had the monologue segment. By the late sixties, early seventies, TV shows like Laugh In, The Smothers Brothers, Flip Wilson, all had humor based on social events of the day. There have been people like Paul Benzaquin, Jerry Williams, David Brudnoy on the radio. Paul Harvey was nationally syndicated by radio stations.
If you had a mimeograph or your own press (yes, some folks had them..) you could make your own newsletters, limited to printed words and the occasional sketches.
Phil Donohue came along, in the mid seventies, with a syndicated TV talk show that involved the audience in asking the guest questions.
Just about every publication had some form of letters column, allowing readers to ask questions, share stories and opinions. Some newspaper Letter to the Editor contributors might graduate to a local columnist spot, if they were popular enough and their writing was acceptable.
So, what did the Internet do to change all this? The first, obvious thing was to democratize the process. If you post it, it is available for an audience to see, if they want. No third party to decide whether it's good enough or not. In this, it resembles a news letter publication. A vanity press or self published work, if you will...
Another thing to notice is the hyperlink. before, if you wrote an essay or story, and you referred to an existing work by another writer, you had to foot note or end note it with a notation citing the specific source. With the hyperlink, you can refer to a source by providing the url of the on line source, embedded into the word you're referencing... A bit of copy and paste, and you're done!
One other thing to notice about blogs... You can punt! If you're a regular follower of a blog, you may notice that when the writer gets lazy (as I do, often) he or she will simply reblog someone else's work (if it's on topic), or insert a link to an article elsewhere (occasionally accompanied by a short piece of text describing the article and it's relevance, or a copy and pasted preview of the article's first paragraphs). In this case, the blogger is only taking credit for finding the article, and recognizing why it may be important. It's branding the article in terms of relevance, not plagiarism. With the post, the blogger is telling the audience; "this is something you should know". Which is, essentially what a blog is all about, isn't it?
Which brings us to motivation- why do we blog? Is sharing information that we think people should know all there is to it? Yes, and no... For some, it's about attention. Not necessarily a narcissistic type of attention, but a statement of: "I am here, and this is what I think". A statement that declares one's existence and seeks acknowledgement. For others, it really is all about the content, and discontentment with what goes on around them. Educating the audience in what to think about, what questions they should ask. Sharing the concepts that matter to them.
And then, there's tribalism. A blogger shares to gather company. Talk about an interest, and hopefully those who share that interest will respond. And a small community forms.
...And this article now comes down to me. This is who I am, how I think. I'm sharing with you so that you know that I am here. I'm sharing with you, hoping to teach you something you may need to know. I'm sharing, hoping to be friends...
No comments:
Post a Comment