Mark McLuhan: “Blogs that come to be noticed are those which are cited, that is linked-to, interestingly mirroring the best academic tradition. This is the highest form of editorial oversight – peer review. Those bloggers who establish a reputation for themselves by virtue of their insight, wittiness and general wisdom gain attention, which, after all, is the most valuable commodity in a world of instantaneous communications. The community edits itself; those whose contributions merit mass distribution via the unique dynamic of the blogosphere will see such distribution. Those whose contribution remains in the realm of navel-gazing and news-about-their-cat will be ‘modded down’ in the best tradition of Slashdot, a site whose membership dynamics is a major archetype for community moderation.”
Mark also points to a story on Microdocs and says:
How does a story hit the big-time, and why aren’t I famous yet? The most interesting comment in the article is the conclusion: “Blogs cannot be read in isolation from each other. Blog stories are understood and appreciated in aggregate and not in isolation. On the other hand, mainstream media stories tend to be read in isolation rather than read and compared. This is the key to understanding why blogs provide the most appropriate form of journalism in a world of instantaneous communications, and the fundamental difference between conventional mass-media and a journalism formed of connectedness.
Blogs are part of an ecosystem, just like conversations. There is a symbiotic relationships between bloggers themsevles, and blogs and mainstream media.
