Winds of Change linked to this rather forceful notch-dropping on blogging, its impact and its longevity.
As an argument, I'd say that it's a bit over the top and in some places needlessly pejorative. The author, I'm sure, didn't mean to denigrate the medium - but truly, blogging has matured, and as Glenn Reynolds explained recently, quite positively so. That can't be overlooked. If blogging has a societal problem, it is, as the essay similarly describes, when bloggers become laptop rappers; blogging seriously about how hip they are, how hopelessly "yesterday" non-blogging media is, and how URL-hatin', sucka HTTPs are stealing game and gots to go down. Even while political weblogs burst daily with for-keeps debate and heated rhetoric on the most controversial, explosive topics, I have yet to stumble upon one and read about the latest developments in some extended, pointless, private feud. Strictly personal weblogs seem to be far more vulnerable to this abuse and, unfortunately, their exploits help paint the picture.
Not that it's unexpected. Like it or not, blogs are extensions of ourselves and most are competitive: if people can't battle for ideas they'll battle for attention, or space, or even the will to continue showing up in the form of snarky hypertext. A few months ago, on a bit of a bad day, I almost made the mistake of falling deep into one of these awful pits of pride and vanity. I scrambled out, literally within minutes, but not without making myself look like a part-time lout (complete with apology e-mail and corrected entry).
However, it's not unfair to say that every human endeavor is at the risk of becoming a chess board or rugby field. Even if you think the loss of innocence is a 20th-Century thing, consider Bill Buckley's verbal scuffle with Gore Vidal in 1968 a very large chomp into a certain apple.
In that sense, the essay in question underestimates not only the staying power of blogging but its eventual place in journalism, commentary and newsmaking. The colossi, print and television, have taken notice and, held by their own ponderous hulk, now reluctantly acknowledge the hirundine bloggers as both pioneers and archaelogists. Thoroughly decentralized, yet wholly and frighteningly focused when great matters arise and the like-minded chatter. Thousands upon thousands have been exposed to authors and other creators who might have remained the sole acquaintance of politico-mag wonks; the wonks still rule in online politics, of course - most people I know who aren't web-savvy haven't the slightest idea who Andrew Sullivan or Glenn Reynolds are - but the stages of separation are evaporating. And the more people go online, the more likely it is they'll inevitably bump into a reference, an article, or a homepage itself.
All this suggests that the endurance of the weblog, particularly the newsworthy weblog, is remarkable. How is it unreasonable, then, for the author of even a modestly attended weblog to feel obligated to his readers? Music, art, writing: a following is a following is a following. It's a blessing, not a nag. To blow an audience off would certainly not be an act of humility.
Natalie, the author, believes that the "the blogging 'community' as it were...is preparing to implode on itself." No, it's inward reflection that we should expect over the coming years: the sieve will come out to separate the dead, failed, and impugned blogs from time to time. A regular molting.
Style, technology and necessity will alter its look and feel, but blogging is established as a concept - so its next challenge is to prove itself through trial, error and success. Fads die out within a few years; is the weblog flashy, creampuff ephemera? Ask Trent Lott and Howell Raines.