The trouble with the net is that it changes so fast, and develops in so many distinctive ways, that everyday people have problems keeping up with it. Worse, they don’t see new matters as they are but as an alternative, as reflections of things they are already familiar with. It’s as even though any person stuck sight of a zebra for the first time and stated, ‘Oh look, a horse with black and white stripes.’ Well, sure, that’s almost real, but a zebra is not a horse. It’s a unique species. And what is growing on the internet isn’t antique thoughts with new stripes, either. They are new species too.
I heard a man on Radio 4 this morning, and he turned into complaining that bloggers aren’t as suitable as old-fashioned newspaper columnists. His argument rested around the fact that they weren’t being paid! The underlying assumption he had – that he becomes revealing – was that if individuals who wrote blogs were any good as writers, they might be able to get jobs in newspapers. Since they aren’t – employed in newspapers – they should be inferior writers and shouldn’t be read!
To me, that is an instance of mixing up genres and failing to peer how the net has changed things. Sure, a few bloggers are not true writers, and some blogs are uninteresting or even incoherent. But a few bloggers, then again, are first-rate writers and would be welcome inside the offices of any guide (if they selected to attempt their hand at the arena of journalism). Any everyday net reader is aware of this. I don’t have to argue the case. It’s handiest the everyday newspaper readers, the people who drop in on the net once in a while, dip inside and out, cruise around, and don’t clearly get an experience for it, who may agree with that the terrible blogs they locate are standard. They are not.
There’s additionally the idea that if people aren’t paid, it’s due to the fact they may be on top of what they do. It’s now not like that. Most people write blogs due to the fact they have got something to mention, not because they have got followed the expert role of ‘journalist’ or ‘commentator’ or ‘columnist.’ Only later, if they actually are appropriate at it, (and those note and come to their site often), then they may decide to throw in some AdSense commercials or contain a few different money-making ventures at their cope with. But – the person on Radio 4 poured scorn on these tries. He quoted the case of a blogger who, he asserted, was ’50th inside the world’ in phrases of recognition. The guy had handiest made $3,500 final yr from his blog (said our radio pundit); somehow, to him, this proved the person wasn’t a good author. Nonsense. It ‘proves’ he isn’t always a properly-paid newspaper columnist, drawing a charge to provide a normal weekly column. However, it says not anything approximately the usual of writing – merely that the rewards for writing articles on the net are on a different degree from accessible inside the ‘traditional’ writing world.
The trouble virtually, it seems to me, is that the new global internet authoring has created new approaches to ‘being an author.’ Above all likelihood, our commentator longs for the days whilst he ought to attend polite dinner events and people may want to speak newspaper columns they’d examine, from writers they fashionable. The great issue then, of the path, changed into that if a person stated, ‘Did you spot what so-and-so stated in The Observer this week,’ then there was an amazing hazard that everybody might have seen it. (But now not anyone sees the equal articles on the web, they may be too considerable.) Even better, in case you hadn’t seen the article in the query, you may nevertheless pass home and dig out your replica, or borrow one from a chum, or even – heaven is aware of, a new generation – visit the net and download a copy from the newspaper’s website. There would then be a feeling of a shared way of life, anyone studying the equal things, giving their opinions at the equal portions they’d examine. It changed into comfy.
But, just as TV broadcasting adjustments have produced masses of channels and a huge divergence in viewing styles, the web has given wonderful new opportunities for greater writers to get online, greater views to be expressed, and extra debate to manifest. It’s simply distinct. It desires new skills. For instance, you’re within the procedure of analyzing this text in front of you. It may have cropped up on any number of net sites. You would possibly have located it everywhere. But, in case you want to discover what else I’ve written, it’s simple: you put the call ‘Mike Scantlebury’ into a seek engine and music down other articles by me. You might then determine to print them out and keep them in a folder.
People used to do that. The biggest difference then became that their ‘favored’ columnist could be observed within an equal place, at an equal time. Say, a column of their favored Sunday newspaper. Now, it is one of a kind. Now you can need to hunt around to find other stuff by using the identical author. But if you favored what the character stated, you can still determine to store the clippings. Hey, what have you got? A folder complete with bits of paper (much like the example above). That hasn’t changed.
What has changed is that extra critiques are getting an airing, greater voices being heard. That’s threatening for folks that need to sense at ease with a ‘spokesperson’ they feel comfortable with. The plethora of opportunities to be visible is difficult for anyone who likes to have a dependency. So, in case you are used to buying your ordinary Sunday newspaper because you like its fashion, its stance, its take at the information, how provoking would it be to head in the store one day and find that there had been suddenly one thousand papers on sale, rather than the choice of six or 8 which you were used to seeing? It would be disconcerting.
Our friend’s solution on the radio is that he has determined to close his eyes to this new desire and try to restrict it comes what may, mainly by deriding the brand new writers and attacking the range of desire offered using the internet. No need. That will manifest besides. Why do you think his example turned into the ‘fiftieth maximum popular’ blog on the internet? Because humans do not study everything, it really is available often. People make picks, anyway. Readers liked what the ’50th’ person had to say and stored coming back. That made the blog popular. Even better, think the author then turns into famous, who is aware of, a few newspapers might come alongside in the future and offer them a function (or even, perhaps, syndicate their output inside the paper). That might be high-quality for our guy on the radio. He would then be able to read the newspaper and speak the article’s interior along with his buddies at dinner events, simply as he has continually carried out. In truth, he could be looking at an animal with black and white stripes but no concerns. He may want to nonetheless faux it was a horse.