Many blogs are lousy, and many bloggers are whiners

Yesterday I linked to my friend Andy's CL cover story on local bloggers. It's a well-written, informative piece. But that doesn't matter to an assortment of sore losers whose biggest complaint seems to be they weren't included.

From Grayson:

Making lists is not journalism Andy. It's just pretty bullshit, and it has nothing to do with the state of social media community in Atlanta. You're a snotty little dipshit reporter who can't tell a story without layers of baby snot blown all over his silly copy, to disguise the fact that there was simply nothing newsworthy in that cover story.

From Rusty:

I cannot comprehend what compels "journalists" to "compile" "lists." To each their own, I suppose, but the point you're missing is that you and others in the MSM are no longer the arbiters of what is and isn't important to people. And you never will be again. Get used to it.

From thebrotherlove.com:

The problem with these types of lists is that feelings always get hurt because it's impossible to be inclusive. To Andy's credit, each blogger he lists is worthy of attention (although listing a former CL editor and columnist is specious). However damning the overall Atlanta blogging community (labeling it "dim") and treating the city as if it has some sort of lock on navel-gazing blogs is lazy and pathetic.

(You're right -- journalists should never hurt anyone's feelings.)

Others are angry that Andy dare criticize fellow bloggers.

From Amber:

That's the both good and bad thing about blogging. You might think reading about someone's lunch is crap and a waste of time - someone else might think the exact opposite. Neither opinion is more or less valid than the other. We each decide what has value for us, and why.

Naturally, Duane was offended:

I didn't realize that there was a specific rule of thumb regarding blogs, and I especially didn't realize that those of us that dare use our own personal websites to discuss things about ourselves made us neurotic or self-obsessed; in fact, I kind of thought that was the fucking point of having the personal blog in the first place. I guess that little jab was at all of us that dare use our blogs as personal weblogs, to ponder our own things. Perhaps we should be doing that which the "upper crust" does; sit around and poke fun at everyone else.

Addressing the second point first -- taste is not always subjective. If you like PT Cruisers, or think Lindsay Lohan rocks, that's certainly your prerogative. Just as it's mine to say you have crappy taste. That's a big problem in our PC society: no judgments, no criticism. I encountered this at film school; our professors were way too positive. No matter how listless the script, we were showered with adulation. Better to tell me "your script is shit" than have me waste nine months on yet another pointless inside Hollywoood parable.

And where's the love for the bloggers mentioned in the story? All were deserving. Instead of sour grapes, why not be happy that some neighbors in the blogosphere received some pub?

It's instructive that many of these whiners found it necessary to rag on Andy, insulting his work and deriding him as a member of the dreaded MSM, which in blogspeak is like calling someone a faggot. It's now clear he made the right choice in excluding them.

Comments

[griftdrift]

Ummmmm, I never complained. But thanks for the link!

[atlmalcontent]

I know, but many of the complaints were lodged within your comments. Note I didn't include you among the whiny.

[griftdrift]

Too true! Too true! I just provided the sandbox for all the children to poop in.

[Rich]

I just stayed out of the comments over there. I don't think I take any of this seriously enough to bother arguing.

[AtlPaddy]

wow, who knew those people were that $#%&! bitchy? What a turn off - screw their websites. waaaaaaahhhhhhhhh!

[ThatGuy]

I still think he is gorgeous. I do I tell you.

[james]

c'mon, don't play like andy put out some insightful criticism of personal blogging. what he did was take some egregious potshots using very loaded language, ala "neurotic, self-obsessed people to cram their heads even farther up their own asses."

that's not criticism its name calling, and it was also a good opportunity for him to take another shot in yours and his ongoing blogfight with duane.

of course, people who put themseleves out there should be able to take it. you get called names all the time and roll right along. i would never suggest that you or andy shouldn't post whatever you want or in andy's case whatever the editors of cl will let him get away with.

my personal opinion, it would have been a much better piece and stayed true to it;s intent if andy had left that out of there.

whatever, it's his platform and yours to do with whatever you all deem fit, but please don't play like he was offering insightful critique of the media.

as for your other comments, i don't give a shit whether my personal blog gets any accolades at all. it exists primarly because i like to experiment with the medium and also to keep far-flung friends and family in the loop on what i am doing.

and the two blogs among andy;s five that i read are great, as i mentioned in my metroblogging post.

[AtlPaddy]

A stuck pig squeals, James.

[Seth]

Oink?

Wait, no.

Squeal?

[james]

well, paddy. i'm just offering my OPINION and that seems to be the most sacrosanct thing around here.

btw - i have no axe to grind in this fight, other than i just think that what andy wrote should be called what it is and not be papered over as some form on 'intelligent criticism.'

i'm a fan of all these guys generally. don't believe me, check out this link:

http://atlanta.metblogs.com/archives/2006/11/content_to_be_m.phtml

[Andisheh Nouraee]

James, thank you for weighing in.

I called the blogosphere dim, with some bright lights.

Clearly that irritates some people. Nevertheless, none of the people expressing irritation at me (and CL) for saying it have actually asserted that it's untrue.

Read Amber's comments on GriftDrift. She agrees that most blogs are crap. Her objection is that I put the words in print.

I asked her to elaborate a bit on her blog and responded that her problem with my story is that I expressed a negative opinion.

Without a trace of irony, someone actually said that they had a negative opinion of me for having a negative opinion.

[SpaceyG]

What a bunch of candy ass little mommas boys you sissy pants really are! You should hear what the ladies at the club call me when I miss an easy volley in doubles tournament play. Would make your candy-ass lips curl back double over your shrunk-up little weenies! And I know those ladies were all raised right. You sissy blog boys... well, let's just say the jury's out on that bunch.

Can't hang around here long though. Off to the courts for me. No lazy-ass MySpacey-y list-makers trying to pass themselves off as real journalists allowed over there. We'd kick your butts six ways to Sunday, or 'til cocktails or served. Whichever comes first.

Ta

[Amber]

Read Amber's comments on GriftDrift. She agrees that most blogs are crap. Her objection is that I put the words in print.

I asked her to elaborate a bit on her blog and responded that her problem with my story is that I expressed a negative opinion.

Once again, Andy, you are not hearing me. Sorry.

[Some Other Mike]

This squabble has made my week. +4.5 troll points for Andy. (2 pts. base, x1.5 for print-online crossover, x1.5 for inline.)