elearnspace

Origin doesn't matter?

In a recent article, (The Art of Blogging - Part 1) I made the statement that: "Fostering the fringe - ideas are evaluated based on merit - not on source of origin". Azeem Azhar didn't quite agree...and sent me an email making a solid case why: blogging has developed its own leaders whose voices are heard more loudly than others...and "Right now the emerging social networks, and the commentary around them, is dominated by those who enjoy significant traffic and activity and connectedness. Blogging is one of these networks and is far from the case that the "source of origin" doesn't matter.
What is true is that if you can generate a lot of good ideas consistently and market it well, you can establish yourself as a hub. Once you are a hub, you are a hub, regardless of the quality that you provide. The blogosphere is still to young to establish how quickly a blog loses its reputation. (Especially as reputation is a function of frequency of posting and penetration of other people's blogrolls)."

I agree...and replied: "Ideas are still evaluated largely based on who says it. Perhaps it would be more accurate to say that blogging creates a forum where no one can shut out someone else. For example, with newspapers, you have to have a printing press to even compete in the field...rather cost prohibitive for most entrants. In blogging - anyone can start...everyone has the opportunity to have a voice. The only question is how many hear that voice."