TheNeedful

Bloggers (especially the successfull ones) tend use the growing number of blogs -- as well as the focus of the mainstream media on those blogs -- as proof that the form has reached a sort of tipping point. Blogs are mighty, in overwhelming numbers, and impossible to ignore. You'll get no argument from me on that point. At least not today. But lets ignore for a moment the impact of blogs in media as a whole. What can we say just by talking about the numbers? What does it mean to have so many different sources of information available to us simultaneously?

It is tempting to say that, with such a diversity of information out there, available to all, we will see an end to the notion of media as a whole having any bias. Individual biases, both explicit and implicit, will be balanced out by the simple fact that for every viewpoint, the opposing viewpoint has equal voice. On the whole, I think that is correct. But on the whole doesn't matter anymore. I believe that, on an individual level, we are seeing the exact opposite. If there is to be any concrete outcome, it is surely the balkanization of information. This is happening, and it is happening not despite the number of voices, but because of them.

In a very real sense, the web is shrinking. Certainly the number of websites is increasing, but the number of websites we visit on a regular basis, as individuals, must surely plateau. This is true if only because there are only so many hours in the day. We are forced, if by nothing else than by the amount of time we have on hand, to be selective when it comes to which sites we visit. So we pick our favorites -- the ones that we'll visit every day -- and a few more that we visit when we find ourselves with extra time. Through in the odd site binge now and again when we're digging for specific information, or just surfing around, and suddenly the boundaries of our web world are fixed. The list of sites will change, but beyond a certain point it will not grow.

This is not a new thought, and it is easily illustrated. Take the example of how often political blogs reference each other. Eszter Hargatti did a study on the the number of links between sites on various liberal and conservative blogs to see how many cross political lines. The results are as illuminating as, perhaps, they are unsurprising. Simply put, Red talks to Red, Blue talks to Blue, and if they point across at each other at all it's generally because they're picking a straw horse to take down.

By its nature, blogging is reactionary. Of course, so is journalism. If nothing is happening -- if there's nothing to react to -- then there's not much to talk about. But because blogs sit firmly in the realm of reporting news, as opposed to creating it, I believe that it is important for them to pay careful attention to where their attention lies. We all have our pet subjects. My only reason for putting anything online at all is to explore the subjects I find interesting. But there is no point in examining any subject in any detail if you're not going to be open to all of its possibilities. There is no point to having a conversation if you're only going to listen to one side.