In what ways do you see blogs being used for political purposes and/or civic discourse and how is this useful (or not)?
It's clear to me now that blogs are used for both political and and civic discourse. The ways in which bloggers use their blogs to promote specific ideologies is evident in the list of the political blogs on our schedule. Clicking through several of them -- and then on to other political blogs -- provided me with information, stories, ideas -- "news" -- that I didn't get from the news websites I read or from NPR. But it really is more than that -- more than just having access to different kinds of news stories and opinions. I felt connected to some larger public sphere (discussed in the Barton piece) in a way that I haven't experienced before. Barton's ideas about the necessity of maintaining a public arena for conversation is fascinating. While I didn't post comments to any of the blogs I read, and so wasn't an active participant, I was an evesdropper, of sorts. Maybe there were people like me who hung out in the British Coffee Houses (of course they would have been men) and just listened in on conversations until they figured out the conventions for participating. These evesdroppers are still part of the discourse -- maybe acting as the audience for the performers (bloggers). Regardless, I enjoyed spending time (a lot last night!) participating in this activity. It felt very different from reading the news on Yahoo...
I am also fascinated, though not surprised, at the way in which Wal-Mart is using blogs to promote and doctor its image. Is that civic discourse? I think not... It's a shameless version of spin (though what isn't). I wonder, as does Trevor Jones, author of the article "If you blog anonymously, are you really blogging?"- what the consequences are to anonymous blogging. Civic discourse, especially as Barton explains it, helps create this public sphere -- and I'm not sure what place anonimity has in it. I've not allowed anonymous postings from students in my online classes because of the way in which it changes the texts posted, and consequently the conversations that are possible. I'll have to think on/ponder what I like about the bit of inhibition created when a person must take ownership of her text. hmmm...
4 comments:
Rachel, you have discovered one of the main drawbacks of the blogosphere - its ability to completely suck you in for hours. It's dangerous out there :)
I would argue, also, that you were an active participant even if you didn;t comment. Just showing up to this sort of "critical-rational" debate is important.
I'm pondering the concept of anonymous blogging as well. I am always in favor of people putting their names on their ideas, but know that being anonymous has long been important for uncovering important stories in mainstream media. Maybe the concept applies to blogs, too.
OK, so here's another danger of blogs - miscommunication. Sorry for the name slip Susan - I looked at your blogroll and got confused. I am back with you know.
I agree with you, Susan, that it's the feeling of participation and being part of a larger arenat - or your word - connection, that's the heart and potential of the blogosphere.
I find it interesting that you did not post to any of the blogs you eavesdropped. I too found that I wanted to post, but I did not want to go through the registration process asked of me. I guess I am sick of giving out my email, knowing what the result will be the next day when I check my inbox. I wonder if the registration process silences many voice, or should those wishing to participate be willing to take on the burden of registration? I guess the reasoning is that if commenting is really important to someone, then they will take the time to register and deal with the possibility of spam overload, which many have come to many expect from registering with any website
Post a Comment