Blogs Are STILL Obsolete

Interesting take from Fredrik Wacka of WebProNews on my last post:

I guess the question is when to stop saying "You should consider blogging" and start saying "You know blogs, right, what if you should use that kind of publishing to strengthen your web presence?" or even "Hey, shouldn't you write more openly and authentic on your site?"

Well said.  Fantastically said.  I'm a technology consultant (says so right on my business card), and if I advised anyone to "consider blogging" I'd smack myself.  IMO, the time to stop talking about blogging qua blogging is now.  "Blogging" is no longer the point, if it ever was.  The point is...using non-technical web publishing tools to enable genuine, direct conversations with your market (or donors, or advocates, or whatever collective noun floats your boat.)

Another thoughtful colleague emailed me this morning:

Some challenges for me intellectually with the very distinctions you raise. Blog as publishing tool vs. blog as form of individual expression.

Which is an interesting way of framing the issue, but not the distinction I'm talking about.  Blogs have been successful as forums for individual expression because they're so easy to use as publishing tools.  Any idiot can run a blog these days.  (Yes, that's an intentional setup line.  Ba-dum-bum.  Thank you!  I'll be here all week.)  But what's really interesting is the way blogs, er, websites, have made it possible for anyone--an individual representing him- or herself, or someone representing an organization--to engage an astoundingly large and diverse audience (cf. The Long Tail.)  Blogs are fantastic tools for individual expression, and they're also fantastic tools for an organization seeking to reach its online audience precisely because blogging tools enable conversations, i.e. authentic, responsive, individual voices.

The significant common factor isn't the underlying blogging technology, but how you approach your online audience.  Do you hand down stone tablets from the mountaintop?  Or do you speak in a genuine, human voice...and ask questions...and respond to questions asked of you?  If your answer is "Yes, all of the above" then you're engaged in an effective conversation with your online audience, and whether you're using a "blog" or not is irrelevant.  If your answer is "No," then you're irrelevant (or you soon will be) and a "blog" won't save you from the scrap heap.

(Damn, I'm feisty tonight!  That's right, I said "scrap heap!")

Comments

[Beth]

Ed,

Thanks for your thoughtful post!

So, if the answer is, yes! (that is to speaking in a genuine, human voice...and asking questions...and responding to questions asked of you ...)

What do you think is the change of habit (for a person) or culture shift (for an organization) that needs to happen to move forward?

Speaking from the viewpoint of blogging for personal expression, I know I had to get past the fear of being "naked" online - from making a public typo, writing something that might be perceived as stupid, sharing an idea that isn't totally thought out yet (like this comment) or whatever. The feelings were familiar to me -- took me back 15 years ago (pre-web) to online conferencing places like Well, Echo (East-Coast-Hang-Out), MetaNet and ArtsWire.

Just some rambling thoughts .... as I take a deep breath and hit the post button ....

[Ed]

Really thought-provoking, Beth (and hi!) There's definitely a big change involved. I didn't start blogging until I left N-TEN and felt more free to speak for myself, without worrying about all these different community interests I had to balance. And I'm trying to get my new homies at Beaconfire blogging, like the cool kids at Forum One and Adaptive Path, but it's not in our DNA yet. Definitely something to mull over--sounds like a new post!

[Eugene]

But it's easier to say "just start blogging" rather than "frequently publish a conversational, first-person, point of view website that has automatic feeds that can be syndicated and shared en masse."

Y'know?

[Ed]

Good point, Eugene. Marnie Webb and others have made the very useful distinction between A) blogs as a platform--and we all agree that although different content management systems make it harder or easier to post frequently updated content, the technology itself isn't the point), and B) blogging as an activity, and to your comment, we all generally agree that "blogging" can sometimes serve as effective shorthand for...well, what you said.

However, I do think that organizations should be striving to make their websites--any and all sites, not just designated "blogs"--more authentic, more relevant, more discussion-oriented. Going back to the points I stole, er, borrowed from Doc Searls and the Cluetrain gang, organizations need to be engaged in conversations with their stakeholders, and it's essential that their sites be involved in that process. Not every site should be a blog per se, of course, but sites will better enable these conversations as they become more "bloggish," as we've been saying in this thread. And the concept of a "blog" as distinct from a "website" can be a barrier to that overall evolution. People will make the mistake of keeping the two concepts separate, when they really should be combining.