Steve Richards has written an excellent article in The Independent, bigging up political blogs - not least this one. About a year ago I was a guest on Steve's GMTV Sunday programme and he told me that until very recently he had never bothered to read blogs as he considered them an irrelevance and an irritation. However, he has changed his mind and now considers blogs to be a real influence on the political process. Read the article HERE. Dizzy comments on it HERE.
Thursday, August 02, 2007
Steve Richards on Blogging
Steve Richards has written an excellent article in The Independent, bigging up political blogs - not least this one. About a year ago I was a guest on Steve's GMTV Sunday programme and he told me that until very recently he had never bothered to read blogs as he considered them an irrelevance and an irritation. However, he has changed his mind and now considers blogs to be a real influence on the political process. Read the article HERE. Dizzy comments on it HERE.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
19 comments:
Blogs are the feedback loop.
TV and newspapers give out all day every day and need a way to see how the audience is seeing and hearing.
Blogs are the quickest, cheapest and best way to get a feel of what people are saying 'out there'.
He forgot to mention me Iain ...and his selection of blogs was a bit dull( as is he ).
very good analysis by Steve Richards - excellent article.
although he does overlook the enormous elephant in the blogging room - the anti-jihad blogs (Jihadwatch, LGF, etc) and the pro-victory blogs (michael yon etc)
Steve (along with about six billion other people) has clearly not read: http://about-whose-news.blogspot.com/2006/06/why-right-wingers-blog-so-nicely.html or http://about-whose-news.blogspot.com/2006/06/more-on-rightwing-blogs.html and who can blame him (or them)?
On CH there is a discussion on the 87% support figure for Cameron carrying on now.
William Norton offered the view there that with blogs, IDS would have gone much sooner. But the majority are saying that the opposite is true - that Maude, Portillo and the modernisers would not have had such an easy hit on IDS as bloggers could have defended him.
I'm with the latter view - that blogs undercut the power of the media. The attempt to assassinate Cameron in the last two weeks didn't stand a chance with all the support he enjoys from the blogs. They've changed the balance of power, and especially they've reduced the Fourth Estate down from the almost dictatorial position they had achieved under Blair and Campbell in 2003 pre-Iraq.
Richards may well believe that blogs have political influence - I do hope he's got that right. But I'm not convinced.
It could equally be argued that blogs are entertainment - gossip if you will - but do they really have an effect on the actions of the government of the day or the major political parties? Anyone here recall an instance of blogs changing policy?
I think the tide is turning for Cameron.As tapestry put it so well ages ago " What is the point of cutting of your nose to spite your face".
Perfectly well meaning people will always disagree but if we cannot unite against Brown what on earth would it take?
Incidentally the way the " Grammar schools fiasco ", is treated by the Press you`d think there were fist fights going on. It was only a reasonable debate. Clearly even ordinary discussion will have to be discplined which is a shame .
I think blogs are read far more widely in the US than in the UK at the moment. The village and politicos read them but I am yet to be convinced how many "ordinary" people read them.
Andrew Ian Dodge has it right, in my opinion. The internet is politically huge in the US and blogs are a major part of it. Look at the financing of Ron Paul and Barak Obama. they are not getting their $$$ in big chunks from the usual channels. It's all about the grass roots. Their "Inside the Beltway" political blogs are absolutely superb. Josh Marshall's TPM Cafe comes to mind immediately. Then there is the must-read "Informed Comment" blog by Juan Cole that focuses on the Middle East. We Brits have nothing to touch either of these blogs at the moment, and here's why: They're written by able, committed, driven professionals who focus completely on their blog, Iain.
They're written by able, committed, driven professionals who focus completely on their blog, Iain.
Like any other journalist then ? Whats the point of that. There is already a chasm between those who , like Iain , are virtually proffessional and "Real Bloggers". I like both really but part of the point is that real people have a say not just"able, committed, driven professionals "....yeuch
"August 02, 2007 12:25 PM"
i think what he means is that the political blogs in the States are vastly more partisan and passionate and downright vocal that ours in the UK - maybe thats because of our libel laws and Ofcom preventing the establishment of political radio stations.
the american blogs are amplified enormously via partisan talk radio.
thank god for Podcasts.
That's right, John. Money buys power over there, and no doubt blogs get bought up as easily as everything else. Iain Dale wouldn't sell his blog even he was offered US$50 million, would you Iain?!
A crucial Steve Richards point is the LACK of anonymity - very useful when putting the comments into context.
Also, can I point out, that your regular correspondents are rather essential to the medium, for without them you would be a voice crying in the wilderness.
I prefer C4 news to the BBC any day, simply because they are all shameless leftie woopsies. Not only that they are open to having shameless hangers and floggers on for the sake of balance. Acknowledgement of bias is fine - we know where you stand and can have dialogue. This breaks down when an organisation like the BBC hides behind a specious cloak of impartiality, whilst pursuing a left-wing liberal agenda.
I think the major strength of this blog is the frankness of the host and his very liberal attitude to people who disagree.
May it long be a force for good.
wrinkled weasel...'his very liberal attitude to people who disagree.' - (even though he's a conservative)....as long as they're not anonymous as from this week.
The blog is much more civilised than it was before with the anonymous trolls being difficult, and there is apparently still an increase in readership size.
Examples of blogs changing the course of history are hard to find. I am sure though that blogs have helped Cameron get through the latest two weeks during which he's been targeted by the media in coordination with an attempt to end his leadership inside the party.
They kind of act as a steadying influence on events by providing an instant commentary, and defusing tense situations by giving everyone a place to express their thoughts.
No one can ever prove it either way of course.
Tapestry. I am sure that right now people are doing their PhDs on this very subject.
But if you want to know what people really think, as opposed to what people are told they should think,or will admit to in polite society, I suggest this medium is a good example.
It provides a very balanced historical narrative in that the blog simply refuses to conform to the blogger's agenda, what with the wide variety of opinion. Contrast that with what historians will make of Alistair Campbell's account of the Blair years and you see we may be on to something.
"Examples of blogs changing the course of history are hard to find"
Dan Rather.
Exposing photoshop fakery during the Israel/Hez war.
the "miliblogs" reporting on Iraq, bypassing the MSM.
thats just three off the top of my head.
John Trenchard:
OK you've mentioned three that have raised issues, but please clarify how these blogs have actually changed the course of history. They may have brought things out into the open, but has that altered the actions of those involved?
chuck et al.
"Changing the course of history" is not a very useful term since you change the course of history every time you walk out the door. If we can define it as influencing trends, organisations, changing society and culture etc, so that different behaviour is observed, over a period of time then there are examples, but they are not linear enough or figurative to pin down.
For far too long "political correctness" has stifled popular thinking. It is an example of how the blogosphere has and will show the absurdity of it.
Bloggers challenge political correctness, not only by their presence, but by their truly representative readership. By representative I mean it is representative of a constituency that is socially anarchic and beyond command and control.
Contrast that constituency with the audience on the BBC's Question Time, which is stacked according to an arbitrary social model, reminiscent of the worst excesses of communism or fascism.
I ask you, who gets nearer to the truth about what people think? - a politically correct QT audience who cheer the liberals an boo the nasty right wingers,
or
people on here who don't give a shit?
Gordon Gekko, a mine of wonderful philosophy, said, "If you want a friend, get a dog." People on TV current affairs programmes want friends, or just approval. They are not going to champion unpopular causes or speak out because they then get the Parick Mercer treatment, for the the slightest deviation from the line.
There are limits. No swearing and no incitement to hatred of individuals or communities, but even here, the PC brigade will use the latter to stifle debate. - I detect, for example, that any criticism of aspects of homosexual behaviour is deemed homophobic by some (not by our host)or that mention of Immigration has caused this poster to be described as a "Tory Moron".
We must resist the trend in society of trying to burn at the stake those whose ideas and attitudes differ from the mainstream, however distasteful they may be.
That way, blogs are and will "change the course of history" for they are the natural progeny of the samizdat.
Post a Comment