Gawker 
Enter your username and password.
New York, 7:03 PM
Sat Nov 21
19 posts in the last 24 hours
Tip Your Editors:
tips@gawker.com
Tipline: 646-214-8138
Editor-in-Chief:
Gabriel Snyder | Email
West Coast Editor:
Richard Rushfield | Email
Contributing Editors:
Valleywag:
Ryan Tate | Email
Media:
Hamilton Nolan | Email
Politics:
Alex Pareene | Email
Investigations:
John Cook | Email
Entertainment:
Brian Moylan | Email
Nights:
Adrian Chen | Email
Azaria Jagger | Email
Ravi Somaiya | Email
Weekends:
Foster Kamer | Email
Video Editor:
Richard Blakeley | Email
Original material is licensed under a Creative Commons License permitting non-commercial sharing with attribution.
11/11/09
11/11/09
11/11/09
11/11/09
11/11/09
Edit: Yes, and there's currently a raging controversy about whether human babies should be allowed!
11/12/09
11/12/09
11/12/09
11/12/09
11/11/09
11/11/09
11/11/09
Your post brings up an interesting debate. Next time you're in L.A., first rounds on me... #huffingtonpost
11/11/09
11/11/09
Anyway, you're welcome. Keep up the great posts... #huffingtonpost
11/11/09
11/11/09
11/11/09
11/12/09
The other one that I've heard is that you cannot tell during your own life whether you are a writer or a copywriter. Only your thombstone will tell the truth on that question. #huffingtonpost
11/12/09
This isn't a jab about your writing in general, just about the single above sentence. It is just wrong. #huffingtonpost
11/12/09
11/12/09
11/12/09
11/12/09
11/12/09
07/21/09
07/20/09
07/20/09
As for those with vulnerable egos who blog for "larger entities" -- we're talking about a very small number of people here, yes? If one is lucky enough to have a job writing/blogging for a "large entity" I guess I'd say, one should be able to take the sniping of trolls and anonymous cowards. They're the people who have nothing better to do than waste time writing abusive comments, while the blogger is actually a writer with a paycheck. That should help soothe the ego. When I have been in that situation, for instance as a writer at Salon, I'd try to learn from the criticisms of substance and just ignore the idiots.
Also, we do keep getting better at moderation and tools that make it easier. This conversation here would be very different without Gawker's new system, for instance...
07/20/09
07/20/09
07/20/09
07/20/09
07/20/09
07/20/09
07/20/09
07/20/09
I never used my blog to message things to my friends, and I never saw it as some revolutionary new form of media either. I use it now the same way as I always did - as a way to express myself, about various things, when I feel like it. I'm actually amazed when I check my stats and see that I have a few regular readers at this point, because my stuff is so random (but hopefully more in-depth than the "bad hair day today!" stuff that some people used to blog about but have now taken to twitter or facebook).
I do use the social networking sites for BS stuff that I don't feel has any permanence. That's what they're good for. I don't feel like this is replacing blogs in any way, though. Blogs were never very good at that kind of thing, or at least I always considered it kind of a misuse of the platform to have all these permanent pages out there just talking a bunch of nonsense.
07/20/09
Your description -- "as a way to express myself about various things when I feel like it" -- is exactly what I wrote SAY EVERYTHING about. For so many of us it's just not about getting thousands of readers or pumping up revenue.
07/20/09
Doesn't anyone remember that MySpace was THE FUTURE OF THE INTERNET AND THE UNIVERSE just two (three?) years back? Content technologies mature and continue to serve audiences large and small. The race to Twitter has more to do with gold rush mentality. Many (most?) people who started a blog weren't worried about getting an invite to TED or founders equity.
The fallacy of 'blogging' is that most people could write as well as professional journalists. Twitter has certainly solved that problem, but I'm not sure that's a problem I wanted solved. I like a higher barrier to entry. Minimizes chaff.
Also: I like this feature.
07/20/09
07/20/09
Does blogging simply enable the obsessive personality to express itself, or does it actually help drive people mad?
07/20/09
07/20/09
If you're already on the edge, it could send you over. Fortunately for me, I'm one of those obsessives who picks battles instead of jumping into every little controversy.
This is why my blog collects dust for weeks at a time; I would rather reach people as a commenter on a well-known blog than to post something brilliant where no one will read it.
07/20/09
That said, I've definitely noticed that the more time I spend on Gawker and Wordsmoker, the less I spend on my own blog, and yes, it probably is because I enjoy the instant gratification of A) knowing my thoughts are actually being read and B) getting instant responses, rather than constantly looking at the lame "1 comment" on each of my personal blog posts. But getting to write about subjects you want to write about is a luxury of a poster, and not a commenter, and as I abandon being the former for the latter, I can't help but notice an increasing inclination to disregard subjects of personal interest.
07/20/09
I disagree with you that choosing your subject is a luxury only posters have; as a commenter, I jump into 1 percent of the threads I look at. The ones I do join are almost always of some personal interest; otherwise, why would I have looked at the thread in the first place?
07/20/09
And yes, of course one's inclination is to only follow threads in which they have interest, but my point is, what about the things you'd like to discuss in a Gawker-esque forum which will never be discussed on this site? Yes, the 1% of threads is great for those interests of yours which it captures, but to be able to discuss anything you want and get the feedback and opinions of numerous strangers is only something you can do as a poster. Unfortunately, without the readership of a site like Gawker, your blog about your passion for knitting yarmulkes for kittens will only achieve the effect of a tree falling in the forest.
07/20/09
07/20/09
07/20/09
Twitter's capable of killing many blogs, but as noted elsewhere, some discussions just don't work at 140 characters. Come back in three years and we'll see what happened.
The problem for me is that I've been through so many so-called "communication revolutions" that I've lost count. I look at IM and see CompuServe CB chat, at Facebook and see Yahoo! profiles, at Twitter and see IM, and so on. I'm beginning to think that amnesia might be an effective cure for skepticism.
07/20/09
07/20/09
I didn't write about the gossip blogs for two reasons: (1) philosophically, I wanted to focus on how blogs enable personal voices and bring new threads into the media environment, and the gossip blogs really don't fit either of those criteria. (2) Personally, I'm just not that interested in them, and the book, for better or worse, was shaped by my interests, along with my sense of what was significant.
07/20/09
07/20/09
07/20/09
07/20/09