Howard County Maryland Blog

Local Politics and Current Events

Who Reads Blogs (Apparently Almost No One)

Posted by Ed C on Saturday, March 31, 2007

First a warning from AP (h/t Michelle Malkin)

Blogs are Web sites that tend to be narrow in focus and directed at a niche audience. Most operate without editors and give instant reaction to the news. Their freewheeling, open nature makes them popular but also ripe for unverified statements.

As I struggle with English as my only language, the lack of an editor to correct usage, style on other lessons that I never mastered from my English classes should be obvious. Without spell checking you would think that this was written in some dialect of Old English written before 1604 when Robert Cawdrey wrote A Table Alphabeticall or that Webster guy came along.

As far as an editor to provide fact checking – to verify those pesky “unverified statements”? Remember Dan Rather and his “Fake but Accurate” documents? What about Reuters Photoshopped images. Michelle Malkin has a number of links with other examples just having an editor may not provide as much value as AP seems to believe.

So, who cares? Not to step on The Hedgehog Report‘s turf by talking about polls, but Fox News / Opinion Dynamics Poll conducted March 27-28 asked the following:

31. How often do you read Internet journals sometimes referred to as web logs
or blogs?

  At least daily At least once a week A few Times a month Less than once a month Never
27-28 Mar 07 6 8 9 13 63
Democrats 4 8 10 11 67
Republicans 9 7 9 15 59
Independents 2 9 8 11 69
           

If you asked me to choose between internet access and TV for 30 days, my first question would be how many TiVos can I have? But if forced to choose I’d keep internet access. I use the internet for instant accesses to news, commentary, communication (email), information (thank you Google) and entertainment.

So, for those that read this, besides being Time’s Person of the Year you can also add “Elite Internet User” to your resume.

Advertisements

10 Responses to “Who Reads Blogs (Apparently Almost No One)”

  1. Judas said

    Why is Chris Merdon’s company reviewing campaign contributions made to him? Merdon did not respond to an e-mail from The Sun requesting comment on the campaign contributions.

  2. cindy vaillancourt said

    I don’t have an opinion on merdon…. but i can empathize with difficulties being able to answer questions about campaign contributions without checking the records…. one assumes a candidate knows everything going on in his campaign – and especially who gave money – but i can’t fault him for not having that studd committed to memory – and not being foolish enough to answer the question off the cuff.

    cindy v.

  3. Judas said

    Nice try Cindy, but get real. If someone gave me tens of thousands of dollars, I’d be inclined to recall something about it.

  4. jim adams said

    I agree with you Cindy, but Judas may have an exceptional memory and expect perfect retention of details from everyone.

    Judas, with that type of memory, and I suspect the willness to answer questions as Cindy mentioned, off the cuff, you should go into politics.

    But then again to we need another Judas in office?

  5. D. Thomas said

    Off the cuff? He didn’t respond to an emailed question. He had plenty of time to formulate his excuse.

  6. cindy vaillancourt said

    Please define “plenty of time” —- maybe you’re right, and enough time has passed to have done the appropriate research.

    As for remembering if someone gave you tens of thousands of thousands of dollars — even if that kind of donation were not outside of the allowable limits, it would only be prudent to check on the details before commenting.

    And, sadly for my husband, even for an amount like that I would have to check my records before committing to an answer “on the record” —- especially in an atmosphere where any misspeak or mistake is construed as an intentional lie or conspiracy.

    I believe it is prudent to check facts before committing to them.

    cindy v.

  7. D. Thomas said

    Campaign contribution records are still available on the net. Unless he had something to hide, Merdon could have spent a whopping 10 seconds to see that yes, he had accepted contributions from those wanting a piece of the action.

    Ignorance is not a defense.

  8. Judas said

    Jim Adams- I believe that you missed the point. My memory is no more or less fallible than that of anyone else. I don’t expect Merdon to recall what color shirt he was wearing when he accepted the contributions. Nor would I expect him to recall if so and so contributed $100 to his campaign. He clearly remembers who or what groups contributed tens of thousands of dollars and why. He is not stupid. Quite the contrary, he is smart. He knows exactly when to keep his mouth shut.

  9. jim adams said

    Judas, thanks for being so gracious with your response. I came across a little mean, just having a bad day, sorry.

    I am not trying to defend Merdon, my thougths are, a word spent is a word lost, never to be recovered, and I know reporters will tell what they want to hear. That has happened to me more than once. It happened when a reporter interviewed me about my opinion of this blog. The story came out bass ackwards.

    There could be solid, good, honest reasons why Merdon would stay mute. Telephone, telegraph, tell a reporter, or in today’s terms, cell phone, blog, reporter and a little mistake is all over the world.

    Why is the reporter asking Merdon, when the best and most confirable sources are availabe on the webb. The reporter wants a story, a little mistake from Merdon, results in a bigger story, or the reporter is too $@#$#%$ lazy to locate the information (oop’s showing my bad day again).

    If I missed your point again, scratch it off to my ignorance, or my over abundence of verberage (looking for an out let of expression)

    But Judas, you may remember in the Good Book, that someone mentioned “Silence is Golden”. So I think we both agree on the value to Merdon of keeping his mouth shut, even if it has a tint of dishonesty in it’s appearence.

  10. timactual said

    I am a little confused. The first comment, by Judas, refers to the company Merdon works for reviewing its contributions, yet the rest of the comments seem to refer to Merdon knowing who contributed to his campaign, and how much. These seem to me to be different things. And, if the information is so easily available on the internet, why ask Merdon at all? As for keeping his mouth shut, I agree with Jim Adams; talking to reporters when you don’t need to can be counterproductive. It is probably smarter to use the ever popular “No comment” even when you have nothing to hide.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

 
%d bloggers like this: