Many Northeast Ohio bloggers have already read Dick Feagler’s little rant on bloggers, blogging, and the recent press coverage of the Wikipedia and it’s erroneous information on John Seigenthaler. Many of those Northeast Ohio [bloggers](http://www.coolcleveland.com/wordpress/?p=197) are, quite justifiably, [pissed](http://www.brewedfreshdaily.com/2005/12/11/dick-feagler-facts-a-hassle-blog-them-away-in-just-seconds/) [off](http://www.buckeyepolitics.net/2005/12/11/pds-feagler-dont-read-blogs/). While Feagler’s column was a snarky, somewhat humourous and fairly insulting look at weblogs, he mixes terminology like a college-town bartender and waters down current events and trends like dollar-fifty Long Island iced teas on a Tuesday night. The man needs a tech tutor and he needs one now. Because of this, I’ve decided to do our dear old Dick a favor and give him a bit of a brief primer.
#### Blogs and Wikis: Similar, but Different
Weblogs, or blogs, are similar to wikis in that they are methods of self-publishing. The Oxford English Dictionary defines a weblog as “a Web site on which an individual or group of users produces an ongoing narrative.” [Wikis,](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Overview_FAQ#What_is_a_Wiki.3F) however, are websites that visitors can edit and post information to in a “democratic” fashion. The Oxford English Dictionary’s definition of a wiki as “a Web site that allows collaborative editing of its content and structure by its users” shows a bit of a difference between the two media. Weblogs are a form of personal publishing where wikis are a method of collaborative information-sharing.
The [Seigenthaler incident](http://www.editorandpublisher.com/eandp/departments/online/article_display.jsp?vnu_content_id=1001612397) illustrates how dangerous a democratic approach to information sharing can be to an individual, but the [identification of the culprit](http://www.nytimes.com/2005/12/11/business/media/11web.html?adxnnl=1&adxnnlx=1134399395-0LoRmfk17B31rbn6TPZeNw) shows that even those who deliberately provide false information will be dealt with. To sum it up, blogs and wikis are different animals. Got it, Dick? _Good._
#### Personal Publishing in the Digital Age
Blogs show how easy it is to get published in the digital age but, like those mimeographed bulletins and self-published “newspapers” and leaflets of the not-so distant past, getting published guarantees neither readership nor credibility. The idea of having a voice is seductive, but if a blog begins to gain readership, the author begins to realize that there is a certain amount of responsibility that goes along with storytelling. If a blogger wants to have credibility as a “journalist”, they must provide source citations just like any credible journalist.
Some readers are more credulous than others. Remember the whole series of stories written by Judith Miller for the New York Times? Many of us believed those stories, and some continue to even after the facts have been published and her stories have been discredited. Remember [Bat Boy,](http://www.who2.com/batboy.html), the half bat, half boy found in a cave in West Virginia? Readers of Weekly World News will, but how many of us (or them) will admit to believing the story?
Bloggers who want to be taken seriously have to undergo the same scrutiny as a reporter and, in some cases, bloggers are looked at through an even higher powered lens, since the most widely read blogs are open to world-wide scrutiny. As with the analog world, with its supermarket tabloids and similar dross, the internet has its share of garbage. From teen blogs full of schoolyard gossip to conspiracy weblogs full of second-shooter theories and tinfoil hat stereotypes, a pound of skepticism is required as well as alternate sources for information.
#### Open Forum for Public Expression
Many weblogs have “comment sections”, which allow readers to provide insight and in some cases even dissenting opinions to each and every post. These commenters have a voice that is nearly equal to the blogger and they make sure that voice is heard if there’s erroneous information. Think of these comments as a more immediate letter to the editor. Instead of waiting a week to call a writer on false information or a particulary offensive opinion, a blog commenter can hit “Post” and have their opinion up there for all to see.
Not every weblog has a section for commentary, and many readers view the absence of such a forum as somewhat damaging to the blogger’s credibility. Flamewars ignite in a comments section, level-headed discussion occurs, and often more light is shed on subjects as well as alternate viewpoints.
#### Editor = Accuracy?
Nearly all weblogs lack editorial input, which is why the aforementioned open forum is necessary. Newspapers still have inaccuracies, which is why they have retractions, and in the case of the [New York Times and Judith Miller](http://www.editorandpublisher.com/eandp/news/article_display.jsp?vnu_content_id=1001658562) (follow the link if you want a scathing review of how editors and publishers handled the situation) or [Jayson Blair](http://www.slate.com/id/2082741/), consequences for gross misrepresentations are [controversy](http://www.nytimes.com/2005/12/04/opinion/04publiceditor.html?ex=1134536400&en=28827ed625a38a99&ei=5070) and [job](http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/4423422.stm) [loss.](http://www.newyorkmetro.com/nymetro/news/media/features/n_8723/)
The absence of an editor doesn’t insure inaccuracy, but the more readership a weblog possesses, the more difficult it is to publish inaccuracies, deliberate or accidental. A popular weblog’s audience, with their various backgrounds and opinions, tend to police the accuracy of a post. This is not blind trust, however, and most experienced readers know how easy it is to be taken in by a story that isn’t one-hundred percent true.
#### Diversity of Opinions, Authors and Readership
Not all weblogs are written by seventeen-year-old mouthbreathers in their mothers’ basements. Weblogs have been tools in [political](http://archive.deanforamerica.com/) [campaigns](http://peirceforohio.com/blog/), they’ve been used as instruments for [social](http://www.jeffooi.com/) [change](http://journalism.nyu.edu/pubzone/weblogs/pressthink/). Many bloggers are just telling their stories, but some put their lives at risk to tell those stories.
They’re serious and they’re light-hearted, but they’re out there. There are weblogs about [infertility](http://www.alittlepregnant.com), weblogs about [parenthood](http://www.dooce.com), blogs about [dogs](http://dogblog.textamerica.com/), and blogs about heavy topics like [life in Iraq](http://riverbendblog.blogspot.com/). Bloggers may not all be paid reporters with an editorial board to back them, but the absence of that safety net makes the act of blogging that much riskier. Blogging can be a creative outlet, an act of civil disobedience, or just a way to spend some time, but no weblog is the same as another. All weblogs are not created equal, not all blogs are about “the news,” but all tell a story to anyone who cares to read them.
