It’s interesting this week. I’ve learned about photoblogs, personal blogs, blogs inside of social networking sites, RSS blogs and more blogs. I feel like I can exchange the whole ‘yadda yadda yadda’ and ‘blah blah blah’ with ‘blog blog blog’ now.
A lot of Uni students doing my course seem to do an awful lot of blogging. They read blogs, they write blogs, they comment on blogs. They explore blogs, they deem blogs as being credible sources, they embrace blogs. So I guess the question is, why don’t I?
My initial response is of course, time. I don’t have the spare time to go on some huge exploration trail to read other people’s opinions. Especially in light of my uni studies, time has become very precious to me, and spending it wisely is an important choice.
But to get a little deeper, I suspect I am resentful of blogs. Blogs aren’t really an anything to me. They are the content without any form. And whilst this may be a good thing for RSS readers, they don’t offer anything at all to a complete web site. It’s like they are a microsite, or a lazy person’s website. A website is more than just a meandering of people’s thoughts – it needs cohesion and design elements; it needs to have a purpose and attempt to fulfill that purpose.
Even when used as a diary, a blog doesn’t serve its purpose. It is just a place where you can type things. You can’t direct, design, engage or entice people with it. You need to install widgets to make it ‘more like a website’ to do that. You only have a limited number of widgets available and (depending on the blog brand used), a limited number of design themes.
Blogs also have no credibility and it isn’t easy to discern a quality authoritative piece from an opinion when both use blogs. But if an opinion is on a complete website, I am far more likely to deem it credible. It’s interesting that I don’t see a blog as a source for uni studies, or as a place to garner new information. I see it as a jumping board – a place to be told something I suspect is lies, and then rush away from the blog to investigate at REAL sources if there’s any truth to the argument. This happens with microblogging too. Twitter is a microblog and more than anything Twitter is great for up-to-the-millisecond opinion. But that occasional opinion can contain fact. Like the death of Lady Sonia McMahon, which I first discovered on Twitter. And immediately went to news.com.au to confirm. Again, the same with a report of an earthquake by actor Daniel McPherson. I had already verified it at another source before more tweets came through with their thoughts on it all.
So I guess blogs just won’t ever do it for me. Sure it’s nice to feel all self-important and waffle away like this, going on about nothing in particular. Of course, I can call myself an ‘author’ now, when I’m out and about and trying to impress someone. After all, it IS technically correct. I am an author. I’m authoring this. But is anything I’ve had to say important? Will it last the 100 year litmus test? No. And is anything I’ve written of reliable source? God NO! Of course not, it’s just me waffling on and on about crap.
A bit like most blogs really. Just full of crap.