Videoblogging, etc. 

Videoblogging, etc.

OK, so far I'm not buying videoblogging--the one experiement I've seen is Kaus and his friends. I have no interest in podcasting, and particularly not the Glenn and Helen show linked by Instapundit.

Let's get this straight. Bloggers are interesting and enjoyable when they say what they have to say, fairly quickly, in text format. The headings and opening sentences should give you some idea whether you want to read on or not. This is different from the Main Stream whatever--not necessarily an alternative, or something that is going to take over, but different. You can read different posts during the day--not long, and maybe not all that thoughtful, but something. With old media, you are often waiting for the big shot to get around to writing another column--and with all that waiting, it is not necessarily better than a short and snappy post by a bright person who has studied a new story closely.

The Internet in general, including newspapers and magazines on line, is fantastic in that you can search a lot of stuff quickly, and read only what really interests you. We may have to pay for more and more as we go along, but now I pay for virtually nothing. (I have paid to subscribe to the Globe and Mail on-line--basically to catch up on the new government in Ottawa). This is a super-fast way to go through a lot of information, delivered from a lot of different points of view, quickly, and in a way that is of maximum use to me, the user.

So now bloggers want to be on TV? This is too pathetic for words. They're mostly ugly, or let's say disappointing-looking (except for Instapundit's lovely wife, of course); they have whiny, nasal voices; and they take their bloody time getting to the point. This is some kind of improvement over TV, or whatever? Because they will present bloggy-type interviews and debates that the MSM is not touching, but are way interesting none the less?

I'm not convinced. Somehow bloggers have fallen for the fallacy that they are a whole new medium, if not a replacement for old stuff. So this is a new way of discussing news that we still get from the NYT or whatever. It just seems like self-indulgent puffery to me. Kaus is truly a great blogger. As a video guy? A solid F.

I guess it might appeal to people who do comments, and read through Slate's Fray and all that--which I don't, with very rare exceptions. So the video thing presents a civilized version of comments, unfolding in real time. Still boring, as far as I'm concerned.