When I started writing this blog way back, oh, a week ago, I resolved not to talk too much about politics. I decided that because, frankly, there are already more than enough blogs about politics, representing a vast and wide variety of points of view.
I tend to believe that the most informed decision is made by those who have direct access to the facts, or at least go out of their way to find out as much as they can. A corollary to this belief is that the more one reads about what other people think, the less likely one is to evolve an independent take on an issue.
Newspaper editorial boards and columnists, television and radio commentators -- every day they print their opinions on the issues of the day. They "define the debate," if you will. And as the traditional media have consolidated more and more, the number (and quality, but that's another story) of independent voices in these same media have declined.
Enter blogs, fulfilling what I initally (and idealistically) saw as the promise of the internet -- giving individuals an opportunity to publish and find an audience at a reasonable price. No one can, at this point, deny or ignore the fact that -- even as the traditional media have consolidated and popular internet sites have grown in reach -- the internet has made it possible for a network of highly opinionated individuals to put their thoughts directly before a reading audience.
In the current US presidential campaign, we've witnessed the impact that the bloggers have had. The most obvious example is the role mostly conservative bloggers played in exposing CBS' forged Bush military documents. But bloggers have been everywhere this political season, with some of the more experienced and/or influential ones being featured on political television broadcasts and in newspapers. Blogs have become a story in themselves, as "new media" tend to become, at least before the novelty wears off.
So, what to make of this trend? I think the role of blogs is not simple enough to be defined in terms of "good" or "bad." Without a doubt, they're both good and bad, and by that I'm not merely referring to the content. With the freedom to publish, we've had to accept the fact that any quasi-journalist who ever fancied himself or herself worthy of publishing a column (myself included) in a newspaper now has the power to do so -- regardless of their qualifications or the validity of their opinions.
By way of confession, I'm a bleeding-heart lefty, probably off-the-chart liberal, at least by American standards. There's no question who I'm rooting for in the presidential campaign (here's a hint: my candidate's name does not rhyme with "tush"). I consider myself an intelligent, informed voter with a keen interest in politics, policy, and process. I spend hours a day reading political websites about the campaign. The more I read, the more likely I am to turn to the blogs before I read, say, the news.
And, if you read many blogs, it is clear that I'm not alone. Blogs report on each other about as often as they report on actual events that have actually taken place. Bloggers salivate over what their contemporaries are going to say next, and then often post excerpts of the portions they particularly agree with -- an electronic orgy of "What he said" where a simple link and excerpt validate theories, opinions, and ideas that would otherwise require a coherent argument (or, at the very least, factual context) behind them.
None of which is a problem, except for that the blogs, themselves, have become the story. Take, as evidence, the debates: Why watch or read the transcript when the blog community has already excerpted the key exchanges, taken score amongst its own, and told you who won?
The point, I suppose, of this ramble is that while political blogs are interesting -- even compelling at times -- and can serve a purpose, the blogging community is inherently insular and inbred. They (we) are wonks talking to, for, and about other wonks. They, in and of themselves, are not more important than the news viewed independently through one's own critical lens, just as (sayeth the ad man) a bowl of cereal is merely an important part of a balanced breakfast.
Cheerleading, analysis, and spin aside, we need to bear witness in order to be an informed society.
I was walking home from the metro last night and passed a poster for the 3rd district of Paris' celebration of "