Comments on: Finally, The Myth of a Flat Blogosphere

By: Sortition

Sortition — Sat, 28 Jul 2007 07:24:22 +0000

The creation of a blogosphere elite is another example of the apparent inevitability of elite-forming – a rather depressing phenomenon. Cf. Michel’s “Iron law of oligarchy”.

Unless you are living in a very small group, cognitive limitations prevent a truly flat, or even meritocratic, society based on everybody being able to listen to, understand and evaluate everybody.

There is however a way to break the Iron law and create a flatter, less elitist media – rely on random sampling. Imagine a high-profile media channel that selects its writers at random from among the entire population. Each day a few people are selected at random using some lottery system. Each of these people is given the opportunity to compose an article about any topic they feel is important, and the articles are then distributed through the channel. No star pundits, no regular columns – a cross sections of the opinions of the members of the community.

By: Leading The GOP Race: D) None of the Above at Faux Real

Leading The GOP Race: D) None of the Above at Faux Real — Thu, 19 Jul 2007 00:04:19 +0000

[...] Dean was really interesting last round because of the development of the netroots and this feeling that we were all particilating in a new kind of digital democracy, but all the new candidates are trying to follow his fundraising/marketing model without a lot of new imagination. Of course, the things that brought Dean down was very closely tied to the new media that held him up. Similarly, all the folks that became web-based leaders in blogging politics embraced a top-down model that really undercuts the community-based optimism from last time around. [...]

By: kid oakland

kid oakland — Wed, 18 Jul 2007 12:42:14 +0000

Great essay and engagement with your sources. You're not alone.

By: Rob

Rob — Wed, 18 Jul 2007 00:32:48 +0000

I’m not sure this long tail situation is really a problem. In fact, it seems like a huge strength. While it’s true that I read Kos and Crooks and Liars, I read them almost like a I read the newspaper. I glance had headlines and only click through on articles that I’m interested in. Then I come here, or go to Slacktivist, or the He-Man blog, and while away the hours. It’s true that fewer people read them (although Slacktivist is now mentioned on the Wikipedia page for the Left Behind books, so that might have changed), but they sit there in my favorites toolbar, right next to Kos and my mom’s blog. People focusing on how many hits and links Atrios and Kos get are, I think, missing the true strength of blogs.

By: upyernoz

upyernoz — Tue, 17 Jul 2007 21:39:43 +0000

your post was interesting, even though i don’t totally agree with it. mary scott o’conner, for example, has the bad habit of attributing all kinds of things to atrios that he hasn’t actually said. in your post you effectively adopt her line that atrios intended to insult “lesser” blogs when he trimmed his blogroll. there’s a tendency to treat atrios and kos as interchangeable. so if kos says he has no responsibility to smaller blogs, then atrios has to answer for it–even though atrios seems to be of a quite different opinion on that issue.

so while i think you make the error of conflating all the “a-listers” (except bowers) into one, you’re correct that the ability of non-a-listers to become a-listers is rather small and diminishing over time.

but one thing that gets lost a lot in these discussions is the possibility that maybe there are some benefits to not being an a-lister. there are a lot of advantages to being unknown. i’m a proud z-lister with only 120 or so hits a day (and yet i’m on atrios’ blogroll. i thought that wasn’t possible! i’m not even the smallest most obscure blog on his list). personally, i’d prefer to not have much effect on the world. when the kerry did something i didn’t like during the 2004 election, i was glad that i had the freedom to call kerry stupid without worrying that it might cost him a couple of votes in a close election.

i think a lot of new bloggers see only the famous ones at first and get the impression that’s what the entire medium is about and that if no one reads your site you’ve somehow “failed”. that’s simply not how i see blogging and i think it’s unfortunate that people like o’conner get all hung up on becoming one of the big-wigs. blogging has a lot going for it even for the small-wigs. in fact, i kind of prefer it that way.

By: Elayne Riggs

Elayne Riggs — Tue, 17 Jul 2007 17:20:43 +0000

The liberal/left blogosphere will inevitably shift even more into at least two distinct groups — those who believe in community and those who believe in top-down punditry. It’s already begun. A lot of the quotes you have from Kos and Atrios etc. have to deal with top-down stuff; the community persists anyway, in the form of Atrios’ regular commenters and YearlyKos and such, but within the person’s blog itself there’s no room for civility, just the “middle finger in the face” of anyone who dares disagree with the wisdom from on high. Those of us who believe in building community and bringing together folks with disparate interests will never be able to be pigeonholed as “political blog” or “cultural blog” or “personal blog” or what-have-you, and therefore will always languish on the C list at best. And you know something? Given the tsuris I’ve seen in places like Shakesville lately, the C-list is plenty good enough for me.