Why Blogging May Not Achieve Its Promise

I just perused an article about the blogging phenomenon in which a couple of points were pounded home having to do with blogging leading to the demise of newpapers and the overwhelming influence that certain participants, chiefly because of their existing prominance (in my opinion) are presently having on all matters great and small. I would have to say that I took issue with virtually everything the author of the piece had to say. He misses the point of blogging and incorporates into his article far too much praise for the elitist dolts who are doing their earnest best to dominate it. What he tries to put across as a new tool for the democracy-starved among us is just more of the same blather we've been fed by the established press for so long. Gee, aren't we lucky that we can have a say instead of simply depending on the limiting and ancient format of a letter to the editor.
What has my tomatoes fried is the ugly fact that this new portal for the great unwashed has already turned into just another venue for those who have an established presence in many forms of media, both printed and electronic. Why does such an individual need yet another place to spout off when this new and growing domain rightfully belongs to those who lack such access? Of course you cannot stop them. That would be, ahem, un-democratic. And, of course, you and I are not snobs. We'll let just about anybody into the party. Yet I cannot help but feel just a little resentful that somebody who already has a syndicated newpaper column, and a W-2 to prove it, has to push his (or her) way to the front of the line as if there might just be two or three people on the planet who have yet to benefit from their message. Chances are they will be financially compensated as well, due to their existing fame. Of course, it doesn't end with just the professional writers. Anyone with a public presence now has to have a blog to "speak directlly to their following", as the referenced article put it. Undoubtedly, there are "ghost" bloggers to handle such chores for time-challenged celebrities. Gosh, a whole new industry! And I sit here when I could be composing factoid blogs for a busy guy or gal in a popular TV sit-com.
Here's my message: Butt Out! Whether you're already published or a political name or a Hollywood somebody, we already know enough about you and your opinions. Don't detract form the most promising medium to have ever come along for the airing of thoughts by those who have always lacked a public voice. Don't make new heroes out of the wunderkind Ivy Leaguers who slurp Starbucks in Soho and fill up their blogs with the esoteric French and Latin-studded language of the pompous. As a blogger myself, the very last people I want to hear from are the smart-asses in New York, Washington, and L.A. who believe their views are cooked in Heaven's kitchen. You may also want to seperate yourself, if you have something more than a dozen brain cells, from the notion that newspapers will be all but out of business in five years due to competition from blogs. Of course, if the column dwellers put the better part of their energies into blogging and journalists follow suit, we'll simply be getting our news and opinions from their blogs instead of more easily locating them in our daily papers. I can't wait for the day when I will have to subscribe to about a hundred or so blogs to get the news and, in doing so, spend maybe sixteen hours in the effort. It'll be just like cable TV. Then we can get screwed full time.

My Brain is Not at Its Desk...

Since this is my first post, it would be nice to use it to offer you some insights and even wisdom which you may currently wish to posses. Well, you may have come to the wrong blog because I'm dumber than you are. How do I know that? Because I'm doing all the work here while you're sitting back, maybe sucking on a coffee or brew and taking your time reading this. Therein lies the problem.

Think of me as the working class while you are the petty bourgeois. Well, I intend to make you work for the time you'll spend here. No, this isn't about word games or those painful logic puzzles Marilyn Vos Savant just has to add to her weekly column to make the math-challenged (like me) feel ashamed that we didn't try harder in Miss Scanlon's Algebra I class. How could I pay attention when the kid sitting behind me was named Frankenstein. Honest to God. This is about forcing you to think about things you may not enjoy thinking about.

That enormously popular author, Michael Crichton, has written a book called "State of Fear" in which his fictional characters must eventually face some "truths" which their personal and professional experiences initially compel them to reject. The premise of the story, and Crichton backs it up with towering piles of data, is an almost complete reversal of the beliefs about the environment which nearly all of us have endorsed as gospel for some thirty years. Because I dare not infringe on his copyright, I can only relate the general ideas he puts across, which I found refreshingly fascinating. Maybe that's because I like to hurl rocks at orthodoxy. Crichton certainly did.

He specifically attacks the global warming assertions and his data back him up. There are others in the scientific community who feel their questioning voices regarding this hypothesis have been quieted also, primarily due to peer attacks and the fact that funding typically goes to the crises du jour, as is also the case with medical research. A lot of environmental sacred cows are taken on in this book, and that's good. Not because we should ever lose sight of what our bad habits have done to our surroundings but because it's simply necessary after a time to reassess where we are headed when it comes to such an important matter. We should be past the hysteria by now and getting focused on what we know to be true. After all, look at where we've gone with our lack of focus; Cell phones and high-tension wires causing cancer? Wrong. DDT taken off the market without proper scientific studies made of its alleged toxicity so that millions could then die of consequent mosquito-borne malaria. There are other examples you wouldn't even want to know about.

This isn't about discrediting the environmental movement. It's about getting science, not malarky, behind future research. I love my planet. The other ones suck at maintaining human life. I just want to save it with science instead of superstition.