I am under no illusions regarding the number of people who read Centerpiece. I know that very few people read my blog (I'm new...yeah, that's why), so I don't think I have this problem, but I've noticed over the past few days that other bloggers do.
Witness this exchange that Josh Marshall has with a reader of his. The reader writes of his disappointment (nay, outright disgust) that Josh has neglected to write about Nick Berg:
I am very disappointed that you've written nothing on the execution of an American citizen in Iraq by what looks to be al quada.
Also, take a look at this post by Matthew Yglesias.
Readers most certainly should infer that my lack of commentary on the Nick Berg beheading indicates that, secretly, I favor both the goals and the methods of both Zarqawi and bin Laden or, rather, that I'm so consumed with hatred for the United States that I don't have any time left to dislike Islamist radicals who'd kill me at the first chance they got.
Again, it appears that Matthew received some angry e-mails not about what he wrote but about what he didn't write. I find this really interesting. I thought Blogs were supposed to be, as Andrew Sullivan puts it, "written day by day and hour by hour, not a carefully collected summary of [one's] views." Josh Marshall responds to his reader by saying that, "This isn't a publication of record."
Of course, Josh is right. No one expects Josh or Andrew or Matthew, or anyone else to cover every single story. We really only expect that of the NY Times or the Washington Post, or the 24 hour news channels (and most people complain about them too). But that raises a question. The NY Times is usually recognized as the "Paper of Record," and CNN is basically the news channel of record. Is there a Blog of Record? Should there be? Can there be? What would that mean? Just some thoughts on blogging.
No comments:
Post a Comment