The right to speak?
I've been doing this blogging thing fairly diligently so far, just to keep on top of it because it's worth marks and I have also started to find it really helpful as far as understanding course information is...
I have been reading through posts and responses and have come to a couple of startling (or not) conclusions. We have ourselves found ourselves inside an echo chamber of ideas and opinions, along with that, we talk like we want feedback on our ideas, but we really know that compliments on how good we said something would be mostly appreciated. We also stumble over questions of a right to speak.
I have nothing against blogging as I have found it an immensely helpful academic tool while the majority of blogs I see are opinions and experience, personally I prefer the academic tool model. Because you own a computer, you are in the top 5 percent of the richest people in the world. If you have one in your room, top 2 percent.This means that the 'opinions' of all bloggers are from a minority and wealthy few.
What blogging also gives is everyone their chance to speak (the death of newspapers as some call it), their chance to voice an opinion. My argument would be that most bloggers aren't that well informed on current affairs and don't have the proper gift of writing to express themselves, I still see a big place for newspapers and magazines in the modern world, where crafstman of our language can set up a persuading point of view from lots of research based analysis. (Ok, maybe not New Zealand papers).
So the 'world' comes to blogging with a view on every issue and decides everyone must hear it, like we have some 'right to speak' that others without computers or internet or cash don't. Journalists and researchers may have their own blogs, but I will say with much confidence that they are in the minority. There are arguments for the diverse range of viewpoints you can get on the blog, but really, how diverse are they?
I don't want to see blogging stopped, basically I'd be out of marks and wouldn't get other (slightly dissimilar) views on the topics, but it doesn't seem to me to be a form of legitimate and carefully planned rhetoric. As isn't this one, I'm going to spell check, but not proof read.
I have been reading through posts and responses and have come to a couple of startling (or not) conclusions. We have ourselves found ourselves inside an echo chamber of ideas and opinions, along with that, we talk like we want feedback on our ideas, but we really know that compliments on how good we said something would be mostly appreciated. We also stumble over questions of a right to speak.
I have nothing against blogging as I have found it an immensely helpful academic tool while the majority of blogs I see are opinions and experience, personally I prefer the academic tool model. Because you own a computer, you are in the top 5 percent of the richest people in the world. If you have one in your room, top 2 percent.This means that the 'opinions' of all bloggers are from a minority and wealthy few.
What blogging also gives is everyone their chance to speak (the death of newspapers as some call it), their chance to voice an opinion. My argument would be that most bloggers aren't that well informed on current affairs and don't have the proper gift of writing to express themselves, I still see a big place for newspapers and magazines in the modern world, where crafstman of our language can set up a persuading point of view from lots of research based analysis. (Ok, maybe not New Zealand papers).
So the 'world' comes to blogging with a view on every issue and decides everyone must hear it, like we have some 'right to speak' that others without computers or internet or cash don't. Journalists and researchers may have their own blogs, but I will say with much confidence that they are in the minority. There are arguments for the diverse range of viewpoints you can get on the blog, but really, how diverse are they?
I don't want to see blogging stopped, basically I'd be out of marks and wouldn't get other (slightly dissimilar) views on the topics, but it doesn't seem to me to be a form of legitimate and carefully planned rhetoric. As isn't this one, I'm going to spell check, but not proof read.
posted by Ben McMahon at 8:34 am
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home