Sad Excuse for a Weblog Summit II
Note: Queensryche’s Operation: Mindcrime blares loudly through my speakers. Perfect music to launch into an angry diatribe. This is your only warning.
Some people never learn. Last year, the initial lineup for the WisPolitics.com “Blog Summit” read like a typical political panel. WisPolitics.com took a lot of heat and made positive changes. You’d think the same mistakes wouldn’t happen again. Let’s take a look at the “Wisconsin Blog Summit II” participants:
- Ed Garvey
- Charlie Sykes
- John Kraus (who?)
- Brian Fraley
It looks like your typical Sunday morning talking head panel except they weblog as a sidelight.
Next, we have the “What is blogging doing to journalism?” panel:
- Jessica McBride
- Tim Cuprisin
- Steve Jagler
- Andy Tarnoff
The third panel has these participants:
- Eugene Kane
- Jennifer Morales
- Dasha Kelly
This one is slightly better. Kelly is a writer with a weblog integrated into her website. Morales has written a few posts on OnMilwaukee.com. Kane is like most of the other panelists: weblogs are a derivative to what he is. If he didn’t have his weblog Kane would still be as obnoxious and annoying.
Finally there’s the token “average guy” weblog panel, and it has the same people as last year, Owen Robinson and Jay Bullock. These are the webloggers who must be the only ones in the MSM’s rolodexes. Anytime a weblog angle is needed reporters run to these two for a quote. I’m sure Owen would be the first to deny he’s the conservative weblogger in Wisconsin. But if you got your understanding of the Badger blogosphere from radio and television you’d think otherwise.
Before this rant goes any longer let me state I don’t have anything against these participants–well except for Eugene Kane. Here’s what I wrote last year on the first Blog Summit:
I do not blame the participants one bit for attending. If WisPolitics invited me to speak I would have jumped at the chance. My gripe isn’t with the webloggers. It’s with a mentality that can’t see new, unique voices beyond what’s in front of your face or who you’re talking to on a daily basis.
That mindset hasn’t changed.
Seth Zlotocha sums up well the problem with these panelists:
But I do think a difference can be drawn between those whose sole (or primary) avenue into the state political discourse is their blog and those who use their blog as more of a supplement to their engagement in state-level politics.
The blur comes in when you consider those whose blog was the main catalyst in catapulting their voice into more traditional media formats like TV, radio, and print, or their influence into areas such as political consulting or high level campaign work (I should add that not every blogger wants to be catapulted).
But, for the most part, a pretty clear divide could be found from asking the simple question: If blogging was outlawed tomorrow, whose voice or influence would be left?
Suppose there was a “Newspaper Columnist Summit” would the panelists be Owen Robinson and James Wigderson over Eugene Kane? Would Aaron Kreel get the nod over Charlie Sykes at a “Audio Talk Show Summit?”
Does WisPolitics.com want a weblog summit or a primer to what weblogs are all about? Why would a weblogger want to come to this? What weblogger needs to be talked at by mostly-part-timers about the effects of weblogs when they’re witnessing it first-hand? If we want to talk about weblogs and weblogging we need hardcore webloggers to talk about what they go through, what they do, where they want to go.
It’s obvious WisPolitics.com doesn’t give a damn about weblogging experience. They aren’t interested in a weblogger who’s followed a governor candidate during the last days of a campaign outlasting professional reporters. They must figure annually covering a conservative confab in Washington, D.C. wouldn’t add value to a Mike Gousha-led discussion. As for newsworthiness, WisPolitics.com doesn’t care about the view of a conservative weblogger who led a revolt against prominent talking head Ann Coulter.
I’ve been on the front lines of weblogging for over seven years. Before the word “blog” was invented I was tapping away into a text file and manually uploading my posts. I’ve seen the blogosphere transform from a tech geek wonderland into the beautiful monstrosity we have today. There’s knowledge and wisdom to be had from that history. This Blog Summit, like last year’s, pretends the blogosphere plopped down on us in its present state.
I don’t want to toot my own horn. There are plenty of webloggers out there who would add immensely to the summit. Aaron Kreel could talk about podcasting. Fred Dooley could talk about running for office while weblogging. Kevin Binversie, since he’s quitting weblogging soon to take a job in Washington, D.C. could offer a unique view of the blogosphere. From the panelists named WisPolitics.com didn’t want to expand from the typical sphere of politics and media.
My initial solution is to have a non-professional on every panel. Weblogging was started by amateurs. We gave life to this lightning-fast medium that caught the interest of politicians, media, and businesses. People outside those worlds continue to shape the blogosphere and make it damn interesting. Like last year, let’s see if changes will be made. More telling is how (if) they put together a summit next year. Will they finally learn from history?
[via Musings of a Thoughtful Conservative]
What else should I expect from an outfit that still links to the Blogspot version of NRE? I left Blogger over a year ago, and I’ve bitched to them every so often.