The problem with the blogosphere

Posted Sun, Feb 23, 2003 at 1:12 pm

I went to the blogsphere conference at the AFI last night, and I'm now on a first-name basis with the deans of L.A. blogdom: Matt and Ken, Eugene and Mickey. Yes, that Mickey.

Eugene stated that the blogosphere is a meritocracy. I'm trying to decide whether that's true or not. What I find annoying about the blogosphere is its incestuous, sycophantic nature. If I wanted more traffic, I could cozy up to my fellow bloggers, asking for links. However, what if I then want to not only disagree with them, but, say, pull a prank or two on them? What if I say something they don't like, and they then pull my link? What if I don't get links because someone doesn't like me (fat chance of that happening) or what I say? And, this whole thing about keeping a daily journal still gives me the creeps, as does the insular nature of this whole thing. Who gives a fuck about your chat fights?

I think the blogosphere desperately needs some cacophony. The only problem is that this would just be considered cute, and, if Instapundit decided to link to it, people would be in on the joke. No, something stronger is needed. Something that will revulse and enrage the entire blogosphere. Stay tuned...

Comments

Camilo (not verified)

Tue, 02/25/2003 - 19:13

Just link to my site. See, I am being honest. But really, the private journal became public knowledge, and the need for external validation - links and traffic - the ultimate personality fix.

page (not verified)

Tue, 02/25/2003 - 18:19

(ED'S NOTE: I'm a little late to the party, but I always am.)

Hot damn! You finally said what I've been wanting to say and haven't been able to articulate. Well done.

the Diablogger (not verified)

Tue, 02/25/2003 - 16:26

I agree. All this trawling for traffic is just sick.

I mean, if I linked to my blog here, it would just go to show how much I'm wrapped up in self-promotion.

And if I were to go a step further and say, link to a recent penetrating post about the war it would demostrate even more grotesquely my egotism and utter lack of self-restraint.

Thankfully, I've decided to hold off and retain some modicum of virtue.

Jesse Walker (not verified)

Tue, 02/25/2003 - 06:29

Can I be a moderate here? I think the blogosphere is a meritocracy *and* an insular breeding ground for sycophancy. Or, rather, a collection of competing insular breeding grounds for sycophancy.

Raw merit will get you ahead here. So will, uh, other things.

AMac (not verified)

Mon, 02/24/2003 - 16:56

Um, call me old-fashioned (...an old-fashioned blog-reader???)...but don't web-log writers write (a) because they want to, and (b) because they fancy that readers will want to read their pieces?

Incestuous, sycophantic, insular...I don't quite get it.

What does your Muse say? Is she happy? Are you? Are your readers? Have some faith, if your stuff is good, people will find your URL, eventually. I did. If you want to trawl for readers, do it with a lilt, save the anguish for your stock portfolio.

Andrea Harris (not verified)

Mon, 02/24/2003 - 16:13

Who's Mickey? Is it that kid who doesn't like anything except Life cereal?

Oh wait. That's Mikey. Never mind.

Laurence Simon (not verified)

Mon, 02/24/2003 - 09:47

I'm holding back my most revolting posts for when the Gulf War starts. I'll be cheering the IDF for every pro-Saddam Palestinian "demonstrator" (ie terrorist) they have to hose out of a Merkava's treads.

Chuck (not verified)

Mon, 02/24/2003 - 09:15

I rather thought Andrew Sullivan's blogging for dollars was the revolting item... or perhaps something about priests and babies at Almish Tech Support.

I can't put my finger on it, quite, but revulsion's been done to death. I'm sure of it.

vlad (not verified)

Sun, 02/23/2003 - 21:05

"Eugene stated that the blogosphere is a meritocracy."

Actually, I think the Luke Ford fellow said that.

Justene (not verified)

Sun, 02/23/2003 - 18:01

There are a number of links on my page to pages I often disagree with. Calpundit and Two Tears in a Bucket are both far more liberal than I am. Richard Bennett is more conservative and often writes things that make me cringe. They all have well-thought out opinions on subjects of interest to me. I don't require agreement as a criteria.