Blogging on Blogs
Throughout the day I try to frequent a number of different blogs. Some are ones that others have directed me towards (such as Warren Kinsella's), one I have located myself through other blogs (Inkless Wells), and others are individuals I have followed in other areas that happen to have blogs (The View From Dubai).
As part of my morning routine, I often listen to the Q107 morning show. Two of the personalities of theshow (host JOhn derringer and "The Last Word"'s Maureen Holloway) also have station based blogs. Part of the premise of this show is a glimpse into and the attempt at a development of some sort of a tie between the personalities and the listeners, otherwise why would they talk frequently about their families and personal lives (or post photos that include their family).
In a recent blog post by Maureen she explains to readers that she had been approached by someone she knows about joining an exclusive T.O. club. She then proceeds to explain all the good things and then give a superficial explanation for not joining. The reasons were so superficial, and really disingenuous, that I felt compelled to respond point this out and why they were superficial reasons. This response actually got a response from Maureen (not all do) in which I was criticized for making it a "university debate". No, I pointed out the irrationality of the reasons. Why I should care was then questioned....in response....if we as listeners should not care, why bother both telling readers about the invite when it was being turned down. Interestingly, the real reasons for declining were pretty much rational reasons I gave in my response. As a result, what is gained by being disingenuous in this manner by giving the reasons as not being a "joiner"?
Not sure where this is going...but a lil honesty would have been preferred....blogs are not necessarily justramblings, especially professional ones. I think I will refrain from responding to the response....but really, professoinal blogs should not confuse themselves with personal ones.
As part of my morning routine, I often listen to the Q107 morning show. Two of the personalities of theshow (host JOhn derringer and "The Last Word"'s Maureen Holloway) also have station based blogs. Part of the premise of this show is a glimpse into and the attempt at a development of some sort of a tie between the personalities and the listeners, otherwise why would they talk frequently about their families and personal lives (or post photos that include their family).
In a recent blog post by Maureen she explains to readers that she had been approached by someone she knows about joining an exclusive T.O. club. She then proceeds to explain all the good things and then give a superficial explanation for not joining. The reasons were so superficial, and really disingenuous, that I felt compelled to respond point this out and why they were superficial reasons. This response actually got a response from Maureen (not all do) in which I was criticized for making it a "university debate". No, I pointed out the irrationality of the reasons. Why I should care was then questioned....in response....if we as listeners should not care, why bother both telling readers about the invite when it was being turned down. Interestingly, the real reasons for declining were pretty much rational reasons I gave in my response. As a result, what is gained by being disingenuous in this manner by giving the reasons as not being a "joiner"?
Not sure where this is going...but a lil honesty would have been preferred....blogs are not necessarily justramblings, especially professional ones. I think I will refrain from responding to the response....but really, professoinal blogs should not confuse themselves with personal ones.
posted by The Avatar | 9:47 p.m.
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home