What Andrew Sullivan's exit says about the future of blogging

Post by visakanv » Sun, Feb 01, 2015, 10:39 AM UTC

spyspy wrote: post #36

julianpye wrote: post #4

The emergence of blogging allowed individual voices outside of control of the larger media to reach their own audiences. Because of this 10 years ago noone wanted to have AOL as their walled garden. Everyone wanted to search and discover themselves. Google brought an algorithm that allowed voices to emerge, but it also spawned the SEO industry to manipulate that distribution channel and make it more difficult. Today…

Sure, let's blame all of society's problems on Facebook some more. That's a new idea. I hate how much this idea get's promoted here. That fact is that 99% of blogs are complete shit. Along with the democratization of opinions came a lot of crud. Of courses there are good quality ones commenters will be frothing to post about, but expecting an ecosystem of junk to remain consistently successful is purely utopian.

Post by Yhippa » Sun, Feb 01, 2015, 5:15 PM UTC

kingmanaz wrote: post #43

graeme wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>That fact is that 99% of blogs are complete shit. Along with the democratization of opinions came a lot of crud. But good stuff came out of that crud. Now people do their writing on Facebook and Reddit. Those have much lower or no placement in Google. I find google results impoverished compared to 6-10 years ago. You used to get commentary from people, and it wasn't half bad. Now most searches return commercial resu…

Agreed. The web seemed far more sincere in the days of Deja News. Today's search results carry all the candidness of a car lot teeming with felony-convicted-used-minivan-salesmen. Somewhere, somehow, a switch was flipped and "discourse?" became "discounts!".