Blogging Ethics?
So Rebecca Blood believes bloggers have a responsibility now? Ms. Blood sure seems to have high aspirations for weblogging in the future. News organizations pointing to blogs as serious sources? Not in my lifetime. Why? In my experience, blogs, by nature, are not generally well-researched pieces of writing. If they are, I don't believe they should be classified as blogs, but rather online publications. Sure, occasionally, some blogs may contain a lot of insight, and have credibility as a serious source at some low level, but I don't see this expanding to any widespread level. I think blogs are quite informal, and should remain that way. Otherwise, they become too much of a...publication...like news articles, and are no longer blogs.
Don't get me wrong. I'm all for correctness and credibility. Come on, I'm the person who gets annoyed when people use it's and its incorrectly, when people confuse you're and your, and especially hopping mad when someone writes 'of' instead of "'ve." Really mad. I even blogged about it on my real blog. I would've linked to it right there except I don't remember where it was that I talked about it. Anyway, I still disagree with Rebecca about these rules she wishes to set, though. Have you ever read a forum? There's something about online forums that make people dumb. And stupid. I absolutely can't stand reading forums. Sure, it's quite humorous, but it's so completely annoying how people state opinions as fact, make up statistics, have absolutely no regard for the English language in terms of grammar and spelling, and generally always are reduced to childish insults. But that's the nature of forums. Blogs, on some level, are similarly tied. But if you suddenly told bloggers that they had to check their facts, they would be restricted, and the way they write would be completely changed. Sure, a lot of confusion and stupidity could be avoided, but there would be a certain level of diversity and opinions lost. And I just don't think that's what we want.
Let's completely turn around now. As for deleting and changing material you've already posted, I agree that it would probably be unethical to delete it or change it without telling anyone. For example, what if Chuck decided that it was embarassing that Rachel Lucas talked about his assignment on her blog, and took his blog offline, or just took out the part where he talks about Rachel Lucas? Then all the people reading Rachel Lucas would be left in the dark, especially those who try to follow her link to Chuck's blog. They'd be confused and left wondering what the whole story was. I agree that any changes should be duely (duly??) noted so that the reader is informed. I liked to write something like "EDIT: I changed this and this blah blah" just so people are clear on what was changed.
In conclusion, to combine these two views, I agree and disagree with Rebecca Blood. I think that as a common courtesy, bloggers have some level of responsibility to their readers, but as far as I'm concerned, they can be rude if they want. Personally, I think Ms. Blood does take her guidelines a little too far with her utopian view of the future of blogging, but hey, to each his/her own.
Don't get me wrong. I'm all for correctness and credibility. Come on, I'm the person who gets annoyed when people use it's and its incorrectly, when people confuse you're and your, and especially hopping mad when someone writes 'of' instead of "'ve." Really mad. I even blogged about it on my real blog. I would've linked to it right there except I don't remember where it was that I talked about it. Anyway, I still disagree with Rebecca about these rules she wishes to set, though. Have you ever read a forum? There's something about online forums that make people dumb. And stupid. I absolutely can't stand reading forums. Sure, it's quite humorous, but it's so completely annoying how people state opinions as fact, make up statistics, have absolutely no regard for the English language in terms of grammar and spelling, and generally always are reduced to childish insults. But that's the nature of forums. Blogs, on some level, are similarly tied. But if you suddenly told bloggers that they had to check their facts, they would be restricted, and the way they write would be completely changed. Sure, a lot of confusion and stupidity could be avoided, but there would be a certain level of diversity and opinions lost. And I just don't think that's what we want.
Let's completely turn around now. As for deleting and changing material you've already posted, I agree that it would probably be unethical to delete it or change it without telling anyone. For example, what if Chuck decided that it was embarassing that Rachel Lucas talked about his assignment on her blog, and took his blog offline, or just took out the part where he talks about Rachel Lucas? Then all the people reading Rachel Lucas would be left in the dark, especially those who try to follow her link to Chuck's blog. They'd be confused and left wondering what the whole story was. I agree that any changes should be duely (duly??) noted so that the reader is informed. I liked to write something like "EDIT: I changed this and this blah blah" just so people are clear on what was changed.
In conclusion, to combine these two views, I agree and disagree with Rebecca Blood. I think that as a common courtesy, bloggers have some level of responsibility to their readers, but as far as I'm concerned, they can be rude if they want. Personally, I think Ms. Blood does take her guidelines a little too far with her utopian view of the future of blogging, but hey, to each his/her own.