|
Author
|
Topic: Where are all the female bloggers?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
madman
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4436
|
posted 24 September 2004 02:45 AM
Hinterland:Are you suggesting that heterosexual males are jerks? My question was, why is there not a column to deal with issues that may involve the straight male? What about the hardships that a straight male may endure. If not here, where would you like this question posted?
From: Republic of western Canada | Registered: Sep 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
skdadl
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 478
|
posted 24 September 2004 12:34 PM
It is a big world, pogge. Daunting, even. Just from the little bit I've learned from following you and the others who cover the blogs, I've been convinced that these are a powerful good thing. Also often lots of fun. I can also see, though, how much work goes into the most interesting ones. That's the daunting part to me. I can cluck on and on any time about a number of topics I care about, but if I were going to be at all useful, I'd have to knuckle down and do some quiet research. Sigh. Trudge, trudge ...  But I would like to dip a toe, maybe. 
From: gone | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Reality. Bites.
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 6718
|
posted 24 September 2004 12:50 PM
quote:
Originally posted by madman:
Why is there not a special page for heterosexual males on this board?Just curious.
Maybe because there aren't any for homosexual males, heterosexual females or homosexual females either?But while you may not qualify for a special page, you will always have a very special place in my feelings.
From: Gone for good | Registered: Aug 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
skdadl
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 478
|
posted 26 September 2004 03:17 PM
Has anyone else read the article in today's NY Times Magazine about bloggers?Maybe this should be a separate thread -- we'll see whether it draws any more discussion. It's an interesting piece, especially if you know some of the main characters a little from their blogs. The author of the article, a straight journalist called Matthew Klam, is a slightly irritating narrative voice early on, but you get over that -- and maybe he did, while writing. And of course it's all about American bloggers, American political bloggers, so there's that. But he does good profiles of Markos Moulitsas (Daily Kos), Duncan Black (Atrios, of Eschaton), Jerome Armstrong (MyDD), Joshua Michah Marshall (Talking Points Memo), and the Wonkette (Ana Marie Cox). There are some good stats, and there is some good history -- if the history of the last year or so qualifies as history! But then, that's what makes it all so provocative -- that this has happened so quickly and is still in such flux, you should excuse the term. And to give the straight journalist credit, he does not end the article with an anodyne putdown, which I was semi-expecting. He sounded ... sort of like me. Bet he gets a blog of his own going in the next few weeks. 
From: gone | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
pogge
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2440
|
posted 26 September 2004 03:33 PM
quote:
Originally posted by skdadl:
But then, that's what makes it all so provocative -- that this has happened so quickly and is still in such flux, you should excuse the term.
It's happened so quickly that some are already talking about the death of blogging as we know it. And the "some" in this case is arguably himself one of the best writers in the blogosphere: Billmon of Whiskey Bar, though here he's writing in the LA Times. Whiskey Bar has been dark for over a month. I'm still mulling over much of what the article has to say but my immediate response is this: would that the traditional media these days were half as introspective as this blogger is. [ 26 September 2004: Message edited by: pogge ]
From: Why is this a required field? | Registered: Mar 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
skdadl
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 478
|
posted 26 September 2004 03:38 PM
Didn't you think that the article got better and better as you read along, pogge? I did. I was not charmed by the section on Wonkette (that happens early). It wasn't just her; I had the awful feeling that he was going to use her as some sort of moral warning, etc. But happily, he didn't. He just dropped her. I have a feeling his editors made him write about her because she is the glamour. But why is she the glamour? Because she seemed to be getting conventional media connections for a while? I got to the end of her section and I was shaking my head sadly, thinking, Girl, you are so over ... But the rest of the article is a lot of fun. Sure sounds like a lot more fun than the boys on the bus are having.
From: gone | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
pogge
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2440
|
posted 26 September 2004 05:01 PM
quote:
Originally posted by skdadl:
Didn't you think that the article got better and better as you read along, pogge? I did.
Note: here's a link to the story skdadl refers to. It got better because Wonkette doesn't represent blogging. Sponsored blogs like hers are the exception and I suspect the readership is quite a bit different. The closest comparison I can think of is Political Animal (Kevin Drum) which is the old CalPundit now being paid by Washington Monthly magazine. But in that case, WM simply picked an established liberal blogger and offered to pay him to do what he'd been doing. It's interesting that in the early days Drum's writing became a bit tentative for a while, as if he was having trouble believing he really had the same kind of editorial freedom he was used to. These days he sounds like the old Kevin Drum. But it's a mug's game to try and define the essence of blogging. You can start a blog for free in just a few minutes at Blogger. And you can take it in any direction you'd like. There are literally millions of blogs that we don't talk about when we're discussing politics. Some are personal journals, some are special interest blogs, some are just...different. Look at the other two bloggers the story focuses on. Arguably DailyKos isn't even a blog any more. Or it isn't just a blog any more. With the transition to the scoop software the site is now more than, and different from, most blogs. It's a community with a purpose: electing Democrats. And Marshall may make most of his money from his blog but he remains unusual among bloggers. He's a professional journalist with the contacts, and the time, to pursue stories and do first hand reporting that most bloggers can't. Steve Gilliard wrote a long post in reaction to this piece and you might fight it interesting. Steve was in the Tank during the convention. He was also writing for, and about, the internet long before he started blogging and knows a lot of the players in this story. He was highly critical of the way bloggers covered the DNC and much happier with the way things unfolded at the RNC. Edited to fix Blogger link. [ 26 September 2004: Message edited by: pogge ]
From: Why is this a required field? | Registered: Mar 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
'lance
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1064
|
posted 26 September 2004 05:08 PM
quote:
Originally posted by skdadl:
'lance! They are so fat! That made me feel so old! How could they let themselves go that way???I ask you.
I consider myself gently, and rightly, chastised for smart-assedness. [ trivia ] I think Apple doubles as a food critic for the Times. Now, in all seriousness: that's nice work if you can get it. [ /trivia ] [ 26 September 2004: Message edited by: 'lance ]
From: that enchanted place on the top of the Forest | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
skdadl
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 478
|
posted 26 September 2004 05:11 PM
Thanks for that, pogge, and I will read Gilliard later or tomorrow. I thought it was interesting that even Klam made that point towards the end of his article -- that by the time of the RNC, the bloggers had figured out the advantages of distance -- in other words, how to be journalists ... not that the journalists remember how, mind. Oh, dear. The ironies. Still, it is all so fast. I can't get over how fast it works, and how quickly people are learning. Not that I am, particularly, but I'm a good fan.
From: gone | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
skdadl
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 478
|
posted 26 September 2004 05:18 PM
Oh, 'lance, I was not chastising -- not you, love. I thought you were agreeing with me -- quel shock! I mean, R.W. Apple, such a hero of my youth. And now he looks ... so, um, comfortable. I'm gonna get in trouble myself for referring to his avoirdupois, but really, the photo is offensive, and that for sure was some conventional editor's bright idea.
From: gone | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
Email this thread to someone!
