The Official Rules of Blogging?

19Jan09

If you don’t want to call it a blog then don’t, but his content is still the reason he’s number one.

It’s the bald fella’s blog to do whatever he wants with.

If Laurel was so anti Seth’s removal of the ability to comments she should have joined the conversation 2 years ago. When he turned them off.

Bit late me now thinks.

Great post Craig: a well thought through weigh into the debate.

I also think social media bloggers can sometimes tend towards gratuitous backslapping or the other extreme, and it’s good to step back once in a while.

I always thought it was strange that Seth didn’t allow comments, but at the end of the day, it’s his choice as to how he engages with people. And I don’t think painting him as an ivory tower dweller is really that helpful.

Thanks hon, you just reminded me, I have to let AdAge know that I moved my blog a few days ago. As you know, it should be up in the top 100, 120. Cheers Laurel xxx

Fantastic post Craig. Good summary of both sides. The original definition for a blog has pretty much become redundant anyway. I think of a blog as simply a post on a website, doesn’t even have to refer to an opinion piece or by one author. It could even be an extended news piece! As long as I’m getting a value exchange for my time that’s all I need/want.

Some interesting points Craig and useful as it demonstrates the level of polarization this issue brings about. On one side we have the “if your popular it doesn’t matter what you do or say, you must be doing something right” and on the other “if your doctrine is about the new online paradigm, being personal, having a conversation, bringing about change through social interaction, then you should do that yourself”.

Laurel was pointing out that this is a principle issue, about practicing what you preach. It is nothing to do with blog definitions or rankings which is what you seem to focus on in your post. I feel there are quite a few social media folk who on one hand say “web 2.0 allows us all to contribute to the discussion equally” but also still bow down to the broadcast channels of TV and books – dazzled as the young marketeers they are by their headlights. Why do the likes of Jaffe and Godin write books? What is it that this broadcast channel gives them that their ‘top blogs don’t'? Surely it is all about reach and purpetuating their personal brand. But if that personal brand is all about pushing ideas and not listening then it is contradictory to what is happening generally in our connected society – comments and discussion are good. I think you calling this discussion a ‘flame war’ gives some idea of your stance on open debate?

Another adjunct – as well as being open to comment there is a level of subtlety too. Moderating comments (requiring approval first) and/or deleting overtly negative ones (if you are fully open) are also a problem for me. Why? Because the discussion appears inauthentic. And back to the point on Seth’s blog. There is a a level of inauthenticity in many of his posts that purport two way’ness. To use his words from Write like a Blogger “5 – Interactivity is a great shortcut. Your readers care about someone’s opinion even more than yours… their own.” So why block it?

Gary

All good points.

A few responses on my part. My highlighting of rankings and lists was purely in response to Laurel asking that Godin be removed from the Power 150. Why? Because she feels that his doesn’t qualify as a blog.

“Flame war” was Laurel’s term, used in her post which I was quoting. It in no way reflects my stance on open debate. I am all for open debate….my post states clearly that Godin has the right to do as he pleases and Laurel has the right to criticise him.

I feel that moderating comments is necessary only for weeding out highly abusive words, not steering the discussion. I object to negative comments being blocked too. But I have had comments directed at others submitted to this site that were crude & abusive and I feel it would be irresponsible to publish them.

Side note: interestingly, Joeseph Jaffe told me he objects to Godin blocking comments too.

My whole point is, blogging is delightfully rule-free. We are all entitled to opinions, but there are no rules regarding blogging. By demanding removal from Power 150 seems to be trying to impose rules on us all.

Thx for your comment.

Should a blog allow comments or should it not, this is an old discussion. Whether Laurel has stirred up controversy or merely a storm in a teacup she has people talking, even Seth Godin himself. Aren’t her’s the sort of blog posts we are meant to write?

I think one of the biggest problems in social media blogging is that we spend more time talking about social media blogging than actually putting it into practice for others and proving what a great option it can be in the marketing world. If we all keep proselytising and attacking those who stray outside “strict doctrine” we will be in danger of disappearing up our own backsides.

My point 3 comments earlier Craig – but I have to disagree with ‘strict doctrine’ point. The new entertainment and marketing paradigm is about two way, conversation, participation – getting the old audience ‘involved’ and active…having thought leaders in this area not practising that is, in my mind, the real problem. Eg: the politician preaching green policies while running 5 cars, 3 houses and travelling by plane every day. Social media could do without any hint of hypocrisy don’t you think?

One of the great thing of blogging is the freedom of expression. Talk about what you want, when you want! You also have the freedom to share feedback with the world, or keep it to yourself (or option c, not see it at all). While I think that is completely Seth’s call as it is his blog, a great thing about media in general is freedom of speech. While Seth Godin has the right to show or not show blog comments, it’s equally fair for Lauren to express her views on the issue. While I don’t think Seth Godin should be removed from the list, I do think Lauren’s right in expressing her thoughts about his blog. That’s what this is all about!

MLDina

I agree 100%. Blogging allows us to express opinions freely and then discuss them with others. As you point out, Seth is entitled to run his site as he wishes and Laurel is entitled to object to how he does it. My only objection is someone demanding another be removed from a list, or not be considered as blog, purely because that site/person doesn’t fit their perceived rules.

Interesting post, Craig.

The point I’d like to focus on is that playing the semantic game will be of interest to those that enjoy that type of debate. It will be of less interest to people who prefer to play the practitioner game.

I concur that many SocMed “experts” spend more time on the semantics than on the practice. Given the relative nascency of the field, I find this a shame – IMHO it’d be great to have more case studies (successes AND failures) to learn from and to gain insights.

GTG the SocMed Practitioner Train just pulled up at my station & I need to get back to work…

Couldn’t agree more Markus. Lets concentrate on examples of SM success and get past the navel gazing.