Mike’s Points

The topics for some of my posts come from stories found via Google’s Alerts. Not a lot mind you, but enough. I saw an interesting column Monday that struck a nerve in me. Or, at least a thought.

Why do you blog? The world wants to know. (No really, we want to know. Read the below, and then let us know why you blog.)

Is it to make money? If so, how’s that coming? I doubt very — VERY — few bloggers make a significant amount of income blogging. (Not ghost blogging, but genuine blogging.)

Pól Ó Muirí’s “Silly bloggers” in the “Belfast Telegraph” is an interesting and quick read.

“Blogging is usually done without a fee. The love of the blog is reward enough for the blogger.

I follow the older rules of print journalism. The First Rule is ‘Fill the space’ and the Second Rule is ‘Get paid for filling the space’.”

The “love of the blog” is not enough reward. (That’s why I work.) I enjoy the process, but there are other reasons why I blog. It’s definitely not for the money. That’s something that those who don’t blog probably don’t get. Why do it if you don’t get paid?!

I blog for on-the-job training (though it’s not specifically part of my job resonsibilities; I’ve just added it). It’s a new tool that can potentially be used by current and future clients. So, might as well dive in. By doing it, I (hopefully) bring value to clients, and to my employer.

I blog because I like the attention, the links, the comments, the traffic. I’m not as blunt about it as some, but I love it no less. Afterall, it really is all about the E.

I blog because it makes me think more about the issues of PR and branding, and about what I do and what my company does. Blogging makes you think.

I blog because I learn more about my profession, about my craft. Okay, I do that by reading other blogs, but I count that as “blogging.”

I blog because it keeps my journalist skills – my curiosity, my nosiness, my writing — honed.

One piece of commentary Pól Ó Muirí that offers is dead on in comparing journalists — paid journalists — and I would say many bloggers is the degree of professionalism, skill and having a thick skin:

“Professional journalists earn brass necks and thick skin and, unlike web-wasters, they put their names and faces to their material.

Most of the comments wouldn’t make the letters pages of any decent paper.

There is no doubt that the internet provides instant access and instant commentary, but it is instant access for those who can’t make it in real journalism.

It is a case of payment envy.”

Point to ponder: “[The Internet] is instant access for those who can’t make it in real journalism.” If that is so, what would Pól Ó Muirí say about so many journalists who now blog? Like journalism, in the coming years, unless you can write well and convey your thoughts, points and information clearly, you’ll be left adrift in the blogosphere. That’s why journalists and professional communications like those in PR will claim a signifcant voice in the blogosophere, one way or another.

– Mike

Technorati tags: Belfast Telegraph, Pól Ó Muirí, blogging

New Orleans, most courtesy of NOLA.com:

Remembering Katrina

Katrina Anniversary Events

Individuals’ reflections on/remembrances of Katrina

Photo Gallery

Hurricane Season 2006. Also see the NWS’s National Hurricane Center.

Mississippi
Thank You Party For Katrina Volunteers And First Responders

The Sun-Herald’s five-day series, remembering Katrina

Survivors’ stories

Before and After Photo Comparisons: Mainland Mississippi

In storm’s eye, Mississippi town recovers - slowly

Technorati tags: Katrina, New Orleans, Times-Picayune, Mississippi, Waveland

For your Friday afternoon and weekend browsing, I offer:

The Art of the Interview, ESPN-Style, David Folkenflik/NPR

Can’t We All Just Get Along?, Joe Strupp/E&P

Toronto and Ottawa PR meetups to discuss social media, Joseph Thornley/Thornley Fallis Group (You know, something like that should be started in Toledo. Anyone?)

Wanna be respected by executives? Talk less and listen more, John Wagner/On Message

More media, less news, The Economist (courtesty of Poynter’s Jim Romenesko)

Be careful…, Ed Lee/BloggingMeBloggingYou (Excellent advice, especially for entry-level and mid-level career people — before it’s too late.)

I don’t think people really trust the media — new or old.

Courtesy of Micro Persuasion, I found an interesting British study reported at E&P about the trustworthiness of media — traditional and new. In the study, “1000 respondents were asked what percentage of the information they received from various sources was accurate, true and unbiased.”

TV: Scored a 66 percent accuracy mark; this was on a line with information respondents received from friends.
Newspapers: 63 percent accurate.
Radio: 59 percent accurate.
Web sites: 35 percent accurate.
Web logs: 24 percent accurate.

I can understand the difference in the levels of trust between traditional media like TV and newspapers and Web sites and blogs. Blogs, for the most part, are not news-gathering media. They are opinion. Very rarely do you see any form of real journalism. And, for most people, b-l-o-g is a four-letter word, even in the U.S.

But, what that study says to me is that, on average, people only believe two-thirds — at the most — of what they see/hear/read from the traditional media.

One-third of what you see on the TV news is not accurate? Holy cow! That is discouraging, and very disheartening.

In addition to the staff reductions, competition from non-traditional media and labor strife, I think traditional media has a fourth problem to worry about.

– Mike

Technorati tags: media distrust, media, TV, newspapers, radio, blogs

If you assume that, when you write and publish a book, you are an expert. Are you also an expert if you write and publish a blog?

– Mike