Yet again? You mean, still .. and constantly. Such well connected men to be so transparent about their fear of the future. And it still looks like whining. Mr. Schickel and Mr. Dirda should read a book by a guy named Spenser Johnson, Who Moved My Cheese? Maybe then they can quit badmouthing the newbies and start concentrating on making themselves more comfortable with their new landscape. Make themselves more attractive to those of us who have given up on 'the same ol' story from the same ol' propagandists.'Yep, they've spent a lifetime learning how to prosper in a world that doesn't exist anymore.I feel for them, I do. Just not a whole bunch.They've never held thought one for me and mine. But that car parts guy? He's my brother-in-law.Those things I trained for as a young man? Technology killed every one of 'em as a viable way of making a living. Not once, along the way, was I permitted to belittle the 'new guys' and their new ways. But the men at the Times and the Post ... they have a different set of rules? Full of themselves? Well, full of something ... They're losing their war. 'Cause they're fighting their war with a strategy based on desire, not reality. A strategy based on lies will fail every time. Anyone with common sense knows that, right? -blue * * * "How come no one told Cheney that in 2002?" "Oh, they did, but he's got buddies at Halliburton, you know."
I dunno: I think Schickel has a good point, even if he's ticking off a legion of bloggers. Anyone can have an opinion, but an informed opinion carries a lot more weight. And, actually, anyone can have this too, but s/he has to do her homework. Example, I have a long essay on playwrights David Hare and Tom Stoppard coming out in the fall issue of a literary quarterly. I worked harder on that than almost anything I've ever written because I had to do my homework. I knew a few plays by these guys, but that wasn't enough. I had no intention of inflicting my opinion on people until I was sure it was informed: I read *all* their plays and saw productions of every one I could. I read interviews with these guys, and other material they had published.In the end, my labor will probably pay me about a penny an hour, but my mind has been much enriched and I think now I've written an essay worth reading.Bloggers can do the same thing, but most of them don't.
An informed opinion? A news and infotainment monopoly's opinion? More weight? More debt? More tickets to sell into a dwindling audience? If they're not worried why are they crying? I don't see a 'legion' of ticked off bloggers. I'm too ill-informed, I suppose? I see prominent men resentful of sharing a billion strong audience with 'pioneers'. It's .. greedy. It's not what I expected. -blue***"I thought he was a cynic." "A weak moment."
Well, I only read a few blogs regularly, but three of the four (this one, Random Jottings, and Bluestalking Reader) all have posts reacting to Schickel.And he is a really good writer -- I've been reading his stuff in "Time" for ages. His movie reviews are almost always right on, in my opinion.I don't think he's "crying" either; he's pointing out a fact: Anyone can write, anyone can have an opinion, but there's a huge difference between someone whose opinion is backed by knowledge and someone's who isn't. This has always been the complaint about research students do on the Internet: Are they getting it from a reliable site or "Joe Schmoe's Homepage and Rant Arena"?Some blogs are very, very good. Most are exercises in the blogger's need to bloviate and get attention. I don't usually visit more than once. That's my opinion, such as it is; I'm sure you've got a different one, Blue.