podcast from this morning's Today programme, featuring a rather bemused John Humphrys picking up on Wired's recent article on blogging which suggests that because "blogs are so 2004", it is not worth starting a blog, and that those of us like me who already have one (or more than one) should think about closing them down:
“The blogosphere, once a freshwater oasis of folksy self-expression and clever thought, has been flooded by a tsunami of paid bilge. Cut-rate journalists and underground marketing campaigns now drown out the authentic voices of amateur wordsmiths.
It’s almost impossible to get noticed, except by hecklers. And why bother? The time it takes to craft sharp, witty blog prose is better spent expressing yourself on Flickr, Facebook, or Twitter.”
The argument seems to be that peoples' attention spans are so short, that everything needs to be condensed, and hence the increasing popularity of Twitter (see for example,http://twitter.com/r4today).
As I've posted previously, I think they're very different media: blogging is for content, micro-blogging is actually about connection and ambient awareness. So I agree with Humphreys interviewees who suggest that blogs which are really personal diaries will migrate to Facebook and Twitter - as these are much more appropriate places for this.
Blogs, I think like mine, which are a "publishing tool - a platform for discussions and sharing ideas", I think will continue to thrive and grow.
It's also why, although I know that many blog readers like pithy, one-paragraph posts, I make no apologies for the length of some of my entries. This blog is about content, and I hope you'll agree that while it may not be that folksy, at least some of it is quite clever.
But if you want 140 character updates, follow-me here: http://twitter.com/joningham.