INDCJournal: Blogging Advice

« Eason Jordan at CNN | Main | "Fascists and Nazis, Democrats and Republicans" »

February 04, 2005

Blogging Advice

Posted by Bill

Counseling Jordan from Cheese and Crackers about his overreaction to a 13 year-old blogger that broke the rules ("[B]astard! You stole an Instalanche!"), Florida Cracker offers some hilarious advice in her comments section:

A clicker and treats has worked wonderfully for my over-reactive dog. Every time you see someone else get an Instalanche, just click and reward yourself with something. Soon your feelings of jealousy and outrage will be replaced with a paired-associate of a more positive feeling.

You know, that just might work. And come to think of it, many bloggers could use the advice before getting too foamy about dumb things, including me; I've certainly cut loose on people with a vengeance in the heat of the moment (though they were all of legal drinking age). It's appropriate to make a combat analogy for emotional communication over the bloodless distance of the internet: it's a lot easier to kill someone with a Hellfire missile at 100 yards than it is to run them through with a bayonet, looking them in the eye as they grasp for breath and clutch at your lapels with slick, red hands. As a result, we all have much itchier trigger fingers and "Born to Kill" scrawled on our helmets.

And a note on the whole Cheese and Cracker kerfuffle:

1. The guy apologized. It may be gratifying to milk those last sweet drops of orgasmic outrage, but I think we can ease up on the posse (unless you're making a funny joke; then, more). Remember: the siren song of an Instalanche can do strange and mysterious things to a man. For example, I've considered flying to Denver and killing Goldstein on several occasions when Reynolds linked one of his top ten lists and ignored my stewing genius. And those Insta-impulses were mutually exclusive of the other times I've given serious thought to offing Jeff.

2. Jordan's comment apology was not a "bot." A bot is a script that would drop text in a comments section with some automation. Mr. Golson simply wrote an apology, copied the text and pasted it in the comments sections of the various blogs that had swarmed to deliver a smackdown. Which was a smart thing to do. So please, don't complain that "the bot" is somehow "not good enough!" That's one step away from yelling about stolen Instalanches. And that way lies madness.

Let's all snap the clicker and have a delicious treat!*

* Unless you're taking a shot at the "Paris Hilton of the Blogosphere," in which case - "Weapons free. Fire for effect! Wait - perhaps I should go in for some hand-to-hand."

UPDATE: Speaking of which, some SOTU Wonkette criticism in the NY Sun:

Bloggers Ruffle Feathers With State of Union TV Duties BY PIA CATTON - Staff Reporter of the Sun February 4, 2005
It was a political panel disparate enough to make you do a double take: Journalist Andrew Sullivan and "Wonkette" blogger Ana Marie Cox were being asked by CNN's Wolf Blitzer for their reaction to the president's State of the Union address and the blogging world's take on it.

It did not take long for snippy postings to pop up on the Internet, pointing to the imbalance of experience between the two panelists (who, ironically, have both very recently decided to stop their Web-based work for mainly print mediums). And though their criticism of CNN's casting job may be motivated by a certain degree of envy, the bloggers also raise a point: It takes more than a blog to make a decent television pundit.

Mr. Sullivan served as an editor of The New Republic, has written numerous articles in influential print publications, and authored books on homosexuality and gay marriage. He was an early participant in the world of blogging on his own Web site, where he posts his work.

Ms. Cox, a former journalist who worked for American Prospect and Mother Jones magazines, runs a Web site that's best known for a lively but raunchy mix of sex, gossip, and politics. She was the first to reveal the identity of Jessica Cutler, a Senate mail clerk who was posting tales of her exploits on her own blog, Washingtonienne.

Ms. Cox did not respond to requests for comment.

"You've got Andrew Sullivan analyzing the political importance, imagery, and language in an important context. Whereas [Ms. Cox] is just offering up snark and shallow superficial jokes," said Bill Ardolino, 29, in an interview with The New York Sun.

Mr. Adolino, of Washington D.C., criticized Ms. Cox's live Web commentary on his blog INDC Journal, just after she compared the hug between a soldier's mother and the Iraqi voter to "something from Michael Moore's playbook."

"One serious question though, what [person] over at CNN thought that Wonkette was capable of valid, reasoned political analysis that didn't involve�sex?" wrote "Mark" on More Eclipse Ramblings.

Fausta Wertz, a blogger in Princeton, N.J., who runs The Bad Hair Day Blog, weighed in that there are bloggers with greater political experience. "If they want a blogger, why not have Roger Simon [of U.S. News & World Report and Rogersimon.com] or Jeff Jarvis [of Buzzmachine.com]?" she asked the Sun. "Wonkette is the Paris Hilton of blogging. Paris has gotten very far on publicity. Beats me what else there is to her."

But others see this as the equivalent of putting up writers from Newsweek and InTouch to offer contrasting opinions. "Just as there are gossipy publications, there are gossipy blogs. Just as there are serious publications, there are serious blogs," said Rob Goodspeed, coeditor of DCist.com, part of the Gothamist.com network."[Ms. Cox] has a funny site.She doesn't ever pretend to do more than be a gossipy blog."

Indeed, Mr. Sullivan saw the booking as a study in contrast.

"I think they're looking to reach out to bloggy readers.The blogosphere contains many multitudes and approaches," he said via e-mail. "We're very different, but maybe that was the point."

The hope of attracting "bloggy readers" was very much on the mind of CNN Washington Bureau Chief David Bohrman, who produced the segment. "There are several hundred really key bloggers who have something to say and who are being listened to," he said.

He's looking for those viewers to get news out of the "typical, �Eat your vegetables!' look at politics."

And Mr. Bohrman said he wants it to get even nuttier: "If I had my way, I'd cover politics from a bar. That's where people like to talk about politics. There's no reason why you need to talk about politics like you're in a Fortune 500 conference."

For some, though, this segment missed the boat. "Though she certainly has her funny moments, she's just plain crude," said National Review Online's Kathryn Jean Lopez. "And to have her seriously tracking or, worse, representing blogosphere thinking is ridiculous. CNN could spare us Wonkette."

Good article, though I think that she used my tame quotes. And someone beat my commenter to the Paris Hilton analogy!

PS - I'm confused and conflicted about fair use and excerpting whole articles from the NY Sun. The article is subscription (I have one), but I know that 99.999% of you won't click through, pay and read it without my full excerpt. Subscription-based web models are a bad idea, in my opinion.

Posted by Bill at February 4, 2005 10:32 AM | TrackBack (5)

Comments

He cut and pasted? He's as bad as Rumsfeld and the auto-pen.

I find it gobsmackingly vile.

Now, back to reality - I've narrowly avoided 3 instalanches. 3 stories of mine have been linked to by X and Glenn linked to X instead of me. If I needed artifically high hits to make myself feed better, I'd hit F5 all day long. An Instalanche is only temporary although it may garner you a dozen or so more regular readers.

In order to pull in more people, you must consistently write stuff people want to read. I write whatever the @!#$ is on my mind, and so far it has a nice following. It'd be too much work to get the numbers up higher and that would suck the fun out of the blog faster than Hillary Clinton could suck the air out of an auditorium (and that's saying something).

Posted by: Sharp as a Marble at February 4, 2005 11:30 AM

Regarding the "whole Cheese and Cracker kerfuffle."

An apology on your website is a wasted effort. Even if your readers were offended, the insult was directed to Austin. When Mr. Golson posted the apology on his website, that was the true apology. How does this affect me? Not one bit, as I said, the insult wasn't directed to me or any of your readers. Therefore, forgiveness from me is not required.

This all boils down to respect. The action that was displayed by Mr. Golson has caused me lose respect for him. Respect can only be regained with action.

It will take much for Mr. Golson to regain my respect, because I see so few teenagers with an appetite for civil discourse, it pains me to see one treated in such a heated way.

Posted by: Kent Shambaugh at February 4, 2005 11:52 AM

Kent -

An apology on your website is a wasted effort. Even if your readers were offended, the insult was directed to Austin.

I totally agree that it's not sufficient on its own, but I don't think it was a wasted effort.

And I wasn't saying that he deserves respect based on the apology, just that he probably doesn't deserve too much more righteous outrage. That being said, whatever opinion you take away from the guy is certainly valid.

I'm just not sure that he needs to be strung up from a tree at this point, is all.

Blogging and internet interaction is a highly personal, speed of light medium, and sometimes people flip out. Shrug.

Posted by: Bill from INDC at February 4, 2005 11:58 AM

Bill,

I posted on the whole Jordan/Austin/Cheese/Crackers dust-up. Jordan posted the same apology in my comments, so I posted his apology as an update. Then I got this e-mail from him:

You bastard! I didn't give you permission to reprint my comment. You'll be hearing from my attorney soon, in the meantime, I've taken the liberty of calling your grandma and cussing her out. All she could come up with was some crap about me being a "Nice young man." She's pathetic!

-jg

Some people never learn. BTW, that was a joke. I mean, you know, the part about him sending me that e-mail. Meaning that he didn't really send it to me. The e-mail, I mean.

Posted by: John from WuzzaDem at February 4, 2005 12:36 PM

Thanks for the clarification, but I figured; your grandma is much more brusque than that.

Posted by: Bill from INDC at February 4, 2005 12:38 PM

Speaking of instalanches...anyone swing by my site this morning? Heheheheh.

Posted by: fat kid at February 4, 2005 12:40 PM

Don't let it destroy you!

Posted by: Bill from INDC at February 4, 2005 12:45 PM

I may be the only blogger who got an original, non-C&P comment from Golson about this. I think I'll take that as my clicker treat.

Posted by: McGehee at February 4, 2005 12:54 PM

Typing the same thing over and over again is pretty silly. It would be ok in the days before there was such a thing as cut & paste, but what's the difference, unless you feel that the guy should be doing a Bart Simpson write-a-hundred-times-on-the-blackboard thingie as some sort of penance. It's why god invented c&p.

I can agree about getting different types of bloggers to be interviewed, but Wonkette hasn't shown any reason why she should be in front of the cameras. Get someone who has some chops.

Posted by: rbj at February 4, 2005 01:37 PM

Bill -

Thanks for picking up my trademarked, patented, copyrighted 'must credit Electric Megaphone' exclusive phrase "The Paris Hilton of the Blogosphere", and especially for providing any props.

Hope this catches on better than my proposed 'CART' strategy for the CBS memos, which sounded really cool in my head...and did get me my one (1) site comment to date.

Getting my own troll is so far only a dream, of course. I realize they have to be earned, and the good ones seem to be spoken for.

[The Electric Megaphone was put together as more a proof of concept / demonstration piece than anything else - but it's a place holder for when I want to jump on the internet soap box (which would be a good name for a blog, btw). So far I think I am a DNA fragment in terms of blog ecology. Maybe if I posted at least once a month, and provided some of those 'link' thingies...]

Posted by: Parker at February 4, 2005 01:42 PM

BTW, I have made comments calling Wonkette "The Paris Hilton of the Blogosphere" before the state of the union (always using that construction).

I admit that it is a fairly obvious observation, so with Ms. Wertz this may be a case of 'great minds thinking alike' - or else 'low minds running in the same rut'...

Still, if she were a thirteen year old boy blogger, I'd give her what for!

Posted by: Parker at February 4, 2005 01:52 PM

...perhaps I should go in for some hand-to-hand.

Better you than me, Gunga Din.* You don't know where that thang's been. I wouldn't touch her with your...you know...manhood.

* Note: Accurate Kipling quote: "You're a better man than I am, Gunga Din!" But since you're not, I had to munge it a bit.

Posted by: Boyd at February 4, 2005 02:53 PM

Bill,

I assure you that my granny is one of the sweetest little old ladies you could ever hope to meet. BTW, I told her what you said and she wanted me to tell you to go f*ck yourself.

Mark Noonan from Blogs for Bush left a couple of (non-c&p) comments at Dean's World apologizing for the now-infamous famous Cheese and Crakers Snackdown (I mean Smackdown), although according to him he only became aware of what transpired late last might.

Posted by: John from WuzzaDem at February 4, 2005 02:57 PM

"Hol-land Tun-nel"
(clap, clap, clapclapclap)

See Bill? I work on levels, baby!

Posted by: TC-LeatherPenguin at February 4, 2005 02:58 PM

John -

Just tell g-ma that I'd like my boxers back.

TC -

I'm blocking out the imagery.

Posted by: Bill from INDC at February 4, 2005 02:59 PM

Fausta here!

When I told the lady from the NY Sun that Wonkette's the Paris Hilton of blogging, I thought I was saying something pretty obvious -- and great minds think alike. But don't feel bad if you have said it before; after all, the name of my blog is The Bad Hair Blog, not the Bad Hair Day Blog. Roger L. Simon's also not happy that The NY Sun confused him with another Roger, who I didn't even know existed.

I'm also flattered that anyone would think I'm young enough to be 13. However, 13 going on 40+ is more like it.
You're young only once, but you can remain immature forever!

Posted by: Fausta at February 5, 2005 08:38 AM

Fausta -

Re: the 13 year-old comment - Another inside joke:

http://www.indcjournal.com/archives/001511.php

And "the Paris Hilton of blogging" is perfect. Obvious, yes, but like a valuable gem sitting unnoticed right under our noses.

Posted by: Bill from INDC at February 5, 2005 10:24 AM

Fausta and Bill -

Oh, all right - what say we agree to put "Wonkette - the Paris Hilton of the Blogosphere" into the public domain?

I would like recognition as "One of the earliest proponents of the phrase...", though.

BTW, Blogosphere is capitalized, right? Like Blogistan?

Posted by: Parker at February 5, 2005 11:23 AM

Excellent suggestion, Parker!

And let's hope Wonkette doesn't decide to become the Janet Jackson of the Blogosphere . . . yet.

Posted by: Fausta at February 5, 2005 03:32 PM

Bill,

OK Uncle - I give!

I apologize profusely for my sins in your comments section at:

Here at 08:07 PM

My point was

AND WE'LL NEVER KNOW RON'S POINT, BECAUSE LIKE A CRAZY FOOL HE PROCEEDS TO DO THE EXACT SAME THING THAT HE JUST APOLOGIZED FOR, NAMELY SPAMMING MY COMMENTS SECTION WITH A WILDLY UNRELATED AND ANNOYING POST.

WHAT'S WRONG WITH HIM? I DON'T KNOW.

TAKE A HIKE, RON.

--ED

Posted by: Ron Wrght at February 5, 2005 06:28 PM

Bill,

It's your Blog Bill. I was sincere in my apology. If my last post was way off base, I will accept your judgement. It's your call.

Posted by: Ron Wrght at February 5, 2005 09:38 PM

Why are you apologizing and then doing the exact thing that you are apologizing for in the first place?!

Bizarre. This blog isn't a message board for your agenda or unrelated links.

Posted by: Bill from INDC at February 5, 2005 11:30 PM