As seems to be the norm here, Peter Daou has written something worth reading. Check it out here. Daou and Josh Marshall are the two people thus far who I feel have been able to see the forest amongst the trees of the blogosphere in terms of analyzing and realizing the politcal potentials of this medium. Others, such as Kos and Atrios have definitely done much in terms of articulating and illustrating the potentials for this medium in terms of fostering political community and effectively activating it for change. However, in terms of articulation, I feel like Daou's essays on "the triangle" have been the clearest argued statement of how blogs can affect political change and Marshall's use of his readership's muckraking abilities on specificed issues such as social security bamboozlement has been the epitome of the potential of the blogosphere in bringing together citizens as active independent researchers conferring together to figure out what is the "truth" as best they can. So yeah, to me, most anything Daou writes about what blogs are doing, aren't doing, could be doing, shouldn't be doing, and so on, is worth a read.
I'm going to weigh in a little bit later on the latest chapter in the blogs vs. Washington Post scuffle, especially regarding the Post's online editor, Jim Brady's latest missive about the ordeal. My opinion in short form: The Post fucked up then fucked up again, but I don't agree with all of the criticism and tactics that have been dished by some of the big liberal blogs, mainly Atrios and Firedoglake.
- Glitter
PS, for those of you on the Ithaca College campus, keep your eyes open for the fresh issue of a certain magazine that will be hitting the stands this evening.
No comments:
Post a Comment