| The Declarer (Floyd McWilliams' Blog) |
|
Mostly political; some random geekery.
Floyd McWilliams' home page
Weblog Links -- Hover for Description
Ace of Spades
Baseball Blogs:
Baseball Musings
6-4-2
Online Publications:
The New York Press
Usenet: James Donald's recent Usenet posts.
|
Sunday, July 20, 2003
The big buzz in the blogosphere last week was presidential candidate Howard Dean's guest blog stint at Lawrence Lessig's site. Lessig was on vacation and handed the keys over to Dean. Lessig's blog has comments, and you can imagine the free-for-all that erupted therein. (I believe it was on Thursday that the first reference was made to Godwin's Law.)
The week is over and presumably Dean is finished. How did he do? I'm afraid the answer is that Dean was a pretty poor guest blogger. Now while I am a libertarian and I don't have much use for a lot of Dean's ideas, this has nothing to do with politics and everything to do with blogging. Before I criticize Dean for not being a good blogger, I should define what blogging means. In my opinion the activity of blogging has three characteristics that distinguish it from the personal web pages that have been around since time immemorial (i.e., since I was 27):
So how did Dean rate? As for frequency, he posted articles on Monday, Tuesday, Wednesday, and Friday. That's not an Instapundit-style torrent but it's enough to keep people coming back every day. The topical aspect barely existed in Dean's posts. Here's the meat of his first post:
Dean alludes to a ruling that occurred six weeks ago, and uses it as an introduction to his vague concerns about "media ownership deregulation." This is a longstanding complaint of the Democrats ever since Rush Limbaugh and Fox News became popular. (One pro-Dean commenter advocated a return to the "Fairness Doctrine". Just like "Defense of Marriage" is a noble-sounding cover for religious Republicans' desire to bash homos, "Fairness Doctrine" is a high-minded way for Democrats to advocate suppressing their political opponents' speech. End of gratuitous swipe #1.) It's not a good way for Dean to have started his blogging. "I have to write a blog next week? Well, let me poke around and see what I got here. Okay, take this file I wrote in 1997 and cut and paste it." Dean's first post was bracketed by informational posts from his campaign; for instance, the "after" posting:
Now we all know that presidential candidates have staff to assist them -- Michael Lewis called them "pissboys" in his book on the 1996 election (Trail Fever). But while staff might need to disassemble and move the set between acts, they shouldn't be given costumes and dialogue. In the first place, a blogger should be a guy typing into his computer. I don't have my friends or my wife write posts that say "The previous posting was by Floyd McWilliams!" Second, one starts to wonder if Howard Dean really posted anything at all. How would we know if Matt, or Zephyr, or Nicco wrote the words attributed to Dean? Or if Dean dictated them and one of the staff typed them in? As the week went on, Dean improved ... a little. He was aware that there was a lot of activity in the comments section:
But then he blew us off with boilerplate politico-speak:
Awful! Even the politicians that Disney paid for could honestly say the same thing. Next was another awkward segue to a completely different subject:
So what is the link encoded in the phrase "the facts were not there"? Debate about the decision to attack Iraq is all over the blogosphere. Was Dean is linking to a juicy news tidbit about how Bush exaggerated the threat posed by Saddam? No, actually it was a link to this content-free petition:
It looks like Dean has a lot of learning to do before he understands the purpose of hyperlinks. Either that or he's just mendacious. Another reason why Dean's blogging fell flat had nothing to do with blogging. Dean could not articulate any specific policies or ideas. No one can write well when dealing with platitudes. I already made mocked "I'm here to listen" above. Here's more wishy-washy statements:
There's not many cases you could point to where American media censors information. (Will Dean shut down Indymedia?) And it's a bold statement to say that "we should repeal those parts that violate our constitution". The Supreme Court has been doing this for exactly two hundred years now. To be fair, Dean did get a little more specific on Wednesday:
Finally, I note that Dean did not do a good job of engaging people personally. There was the slightest hint of a personal glimpse on the Wednesday posting:
But nothing more than that. Politicians are supposed to be good at engaging people. I remember how whenever I listed to Bill Clinton, I would forget how much I disliked his policies and his tactics. He had a gift for getting people to like him. Nobody is going to come away from Dean's blogging experience thinking he is the next Instapundit, but they should feel more favorable toward him than the week before. I don't think he accomplished that.
|