On Blogofacism
Thanks to Susan Nunes for linking to Lee Siegel’s latest attempt to engage with what he calls the world of “blogofacsim.” He’s going to get a lot crap for it (again), but I think he makes some good points. There is definitely a sense of the school yard in all of this–remember Heathers anyone? Sure, he was wrong to raise the Facism flag and shouldn’t be surprised by the vitriolic responses he received, but his point about there being an elite group of bloggers framing the discussions and creating a pecking order is right on. But I don’t see that dynamic not happening–the need to form a pecking order is basic human nature isn’t it? Very few people are comfortable when the don’t know if they are either an insider or an outsider in some kind of group–its how we define ourselves.
And I do think Siegel is right on about linking as a way of shirking responsibility. And, yes, I’m probably as guilty as most.
Yet the specter of the blogosphere’s gradual assimilation into the mainstream is just as disheartening as the blogosphere’s complacent groupthink and insular chitchat. It points to a certain buried diffidence, which you can see in the mask of anonymity so many bloggers hide behind. Is it too much to ask people to put their name where their mouth is? Even for bloggers who use their own names, all the compulsive linking–to a degree, linking is the new logrolling–is a way never to say anything provocative without nervously assuring the reader that someone else said it first. Maybe the blogosphere is in such danger of slipping into the status quo because a lot of bloggers have the mainstream editors’ very same social reflexes, but in reverse.
I’ve certainly been thinking about the whole anonymity thing. However, blogging is not my profession, and I prefer to keep it separate from that. In the beginning, anonymity seemed harmless because no one was reading anything I wrote. That’s changed somewhat, and I haven’t quite figured out how to handle it. If it makes you feel any better, I do experience some anxiety over it, and even had a short exchange with Brian Burghart, the editor of the Reno News & Review in response to his “Blog Me A River” column just yesterday somewhat on the subject.
One last thing–when responding to Siegel’s claims that responding with rage is not productive–the correct response is not to point out what the other side is doing. You can’t win the argument by claiming that “they are worse than us.” The correct thing to do is ask yourself if Siegel is right and proceed accordingly. And I think he is.
Similar Posts:
Enjoy this post? Leave a comment below or subscribe to my feed. You also can sign up for email delivery by clicking here.
And if it makes YOU feel any better, I get feelings of anxiety over using my name. I think that if you’re actually saying anything, it is tough on you either way. I think you’re right about the heirarchy - it’s inevitable. And it exists on a whole bunch of different scales; nationwide, statewide, and locally. As for Susan, i wish a lot that she had comments there. I always seem to want to talk about something over there. But I can only imagine the comments she would get. It might be pretty ugly.
You know, I just re-read that piece by Burghart. I’ll say this. He was very cool to me when I wnted to know about something he’d written. But in this case, he wrong on a very basic level. While his examples are perfect for his point, he seems to be making the same mistake he’s accusing bloggers of making. He’s just dissing for the sake of dissing. He says they control their content - which is fine, but he’s then saying that if we are unhappy about something, we need to approach it on their terms. Sorry, but that’s why I have a blog. If he’s unhappy with my response, maybe he can take a gander and discuss it where it was written?
Can’t win either way? If we all agree, and that’s likely on some progressive issues, then it’s groupthink? However, if we disagree, and that’s likely too given the nature of the progressive lot, then “Oh mercy the Fever Swamp’s having a meltdown?” Having never been one to bury my diffidence, and having seen no such proclivity on “Discontents,” I wonder just why he’s upset? As for linking — why re-invent the wheel? If another blogger has said it more completely, or said it better, why not just link up rather than retype? If another blogger has, say a good interview with candidates and campaigners, why not link and spread the word? After all, “netroots” is more than a cliche, it’s a form of communication. The more links the merrier! Anonymous — yes, because not everyone wants to be Political (Social or Economic) Pundit of the Day. Some folks have other lives and who’s to judge if they wish to compartmentalize?
Surely one reasons he’s upset is because some have told him he has no right to be. I guess my take on the linking thing is that some use it as sourcing without making sure the sources they use make sense. There is good and bad linking just like there is good and bad sourcing.
Its seems like his chief concern comes from a humanist position. We should be better than those we criticize. I posted this I think he is attempting to be reflexive which I appreciate. I don’t always see that quality in some of those he argues with….
I think you nailed it in the first sentence “somebody told him…” Personally, I’m not secure with blogs linking to blogs for sourcing unless there’s a link back to a verifiable source like an AP story or a report. I can think of a couple of progressive blogs offhand to which I’d not link because they have a sketchy reputation for tin foil hat theses and link back to equally tin foil hat sources. I suspect Siegel’s just not comfortable with the blogosphere, and this seems to be a common thing for editorial writers?
And he is pretty elitist as rule–he’s the culture critic and book reviewer for the NP as well as for other publications. He wrote an intro to a biography on Walter Benjamin for christ’s sake. Still, I have an inclination toward his kind of thinking and writing.
I think you hit the nail on the head–he just doesn’t like the form discourse takes in the blogosphere. Yet, he blogs or is forced to blog. Still, I think pieces like this are good for inspiring conversations like this.