Pros and Cons Chart: Why Blogs are Good and Bad
Posted by danspira
Yes, I know blogs are so “yesteryear,” and that even podcasts are “tired.” And true, I haven’t even written a blog myself. But hey, if everyone’s an expert now and any topic is interesting, well, here is my compilation of Why Blogs are Good and Bad.
|Gets people to be more balanced as information producers, not just consumers.||Consumes people’s time, both in writing and reading.|
|Rapid advancement of ideas, spreading of information.||Exacerbates the problem of short attention spans and shallow coverage.|
|Increased bandwidth for niche issues/interests that lack mass appeal.||Exacerbates the culture of specialization. (Yes I realize this sorta contradicts the previous pro/con pairing… but that’s life.)|
|Real stuff from real people.||Bogus stuff from sockpuppets.|
|More citizen watchdogs.||Lack of accountability in anonymity. Negative, anti-establishment bias, information/opinion cascades and disproportionate attention to conspiracy theories & crackpots.|
I’m glad I got that off my chest… but clearly, even after many years, this stuff will still need to get sorted out. In the meantime, let’s continue racing forward to the next new thing.
UPDATE, May 2007: Now that I’ve actually gotten a blog going, I will add this Good Thing About Blogs, for which I don’t see a bad side: Mainstream acceptance of the importance of separating content from presentation, in matters of information creation, storage and retrieval.
(NB: This is a predated journal entry that’s been editted many times since I started it, and is an open piece in progress. Although you can’t turn two pages of a newspaper (or click through two links on a website) without reading something about why blogs are good or bad, I’ve been trying keep a list of some of the better articles that have most influenced me on this subject. See below.)