Twitter killed the blogging star?
October 29, 2008 by Colleen Coplick
Filed under Social Media
A couple of days ago, Wired’s Paul Boutin claimed that blogging was dead with this lede:
Thinking about launching your own blog? Here’s some friendly advice: Don’t. And if you’ve already got one, pull the plug.
So…. ok. Fine. Blogging is *so* 2004. Everyone’s gone to Twitter etc, blah blah blah.
What’s this really? This article? Is blogging dead?
No.
You’re here.
I’m here.
I’m here a lot. Heck, many of you guys are here a lot. I can tell. (I have my ways…. mwa-ha-ha!)
What I see in Boutin’s article, is that he’s being inflammatory. He’s trying to stir shit up. Hell, it’s one of the tenets of blogging. Controversy = page views and links. Which, totally correct, and Paul has done a fantastic job of doing exactly that. Page views? Hell yes. Links? OMG yes. Hell, I’m plotting freelance articles that follow this exact formula. Give ‘em something controversial and watch the page views blow up.
In that regard, I’ve done exactly what Paul wanted, by looking at the article, blogging about it, and linking to it.
As Miss604 said, “I think blogging is changing (not dead); it’s evolving into something much bigger, allowing for more applications and tools to emerge in the online realm. It’s changing the conversation and allowing for more of a two-way street; you and your audience, wired and mobile, on and offline.”
She’s right.
Just sayin. Or maybe I’m just bloggin. whichever.
Compared to Twitter, blogs allow for more indepth communication, by the means of a) more space to state your case b) allows more links to relevant content and opinions c) keeps comments (or links thereto) in one place d) allows you to integrate multi-media, mashups, widgets, etc. to increase/complement the value of your content. e) keep a more easily retrievable history of your content
In my case, I’m only micro-blogging presently, but I will probably start a blog based on the above.
The main disadvantage to me of blogging it would require a greater time investment, that I don’t have at the moment.
Blogging isn’t dead. It just must adapt. Right now people are OD’d on blogs because of people’s sheeplike nature.
I have noted that, like in music, people have no idea what’s good and what’s not, so they depend on their friends (or nowadays some online reputation thingy) to tell them. So some splogger goes out and does the blogosphere equivalent of payola and poof a “popular” blog with absolutely no value.
People are OD’d on the splogs. After a while you realize that scoble & John Chow (big arrogant asshole) aren’t really doing anything for you, who’s winning is them. Me, I’m an indie blogger with NO ADS — well almost.
Perhaps someone can make a software that analyzes blogs for ads and those that score low surely must be recognized as the most authentic voices. I dream that my blog will be someday be like the NPR of blogs totally reader supported, or something.
Colleen: I read that as well and completely disagreed. My blog is growing and I am adding new ones to my RSS reader at least twice a week. It could be dead for some, and I can imagine that those who have been blogging for ten years could very well feel as though it’s dead. But it’s alive and well for me and I enjoy it immensely. We have to remember, everyone has an opinion. It’s up to us to buy into it or not. I say do what feels right, and if blogging feels right…then it isn’t dead.
I know Paul. Not only is he being inflammatory, he’s striking out at a boss that recently downsized him from blogging full-time.
This is reactionary. Wired’s the only group here who should be ashamed. Paul’s just being Paul. Wired’s letting him be Paul on their pages without any “controls”.