What to blog, what not to blog...
... that is the question.
The Grand Canton's recent rant got me thinking. There's been no shortage of people losing jobs, destroying friendships and even being threatened because of what they put on their blogs.
On the other hand, I've had it drilled into my head on numerous occasions that the only truly effective writing, is that in which the writer is being completely honest. The most compelling blog posts I've read are unique because of the author's perspective, and honesty seems like a pre-requisite, or at least essential, to be able to do that.
But what is the cost of that honesty?
What the point of a blog is, even what constitutes a blog vs. a news/opinion website
is a pretty complicated issue, so I'll skip that. But let's assume that most personal blogs are used to communicate personal opinions and experiences. I've often heard the analogy made that a blog post is a one-way conversation, or a speech. Now, that to me is extremely dangerous, because this analogy assumes that
Right now reading the paragraph up above,
The WSJ had an article about how recruiters now use personal blogs: and how they can both help and hurt. Yikes...
So what's my point? As with most of my conversations I don't really have one :)
I think, like any unguarded comment you make, a blog a can make you seem more entertaining and more interesting to some people, and even more annoying to others. I don't know how to strike that balance, or even if its worth trying. I have my own reasons for starting to blog again, but is it better to be diplomatic on your blog vs. controversial, polite vs. honest; if you start censoring yourself too much should you bother blogging at all? Is it better to let people to just suspect you're a nutjob, versus providing them evidence confirming that, that is indeed the case....
questions, questions....
The Grand Canton's recent rant got me thinking. There's been no shortage of people losing jobs, destroying friendships and even being threatened because of what they put on their blogs.
On the other hand, I've had it drilled into my head on numerous occasions that the only truly effective writing, is that in which the writer is being completely honest. The most compelling blog posts I've read are unique because of the author's perspective, and honesty seems like a pre-requisite, or at least essential, to be able to do that.
But what is the cost of that honesty?
What the point of a blog is, even what constitutes a blog vs. a news/opinion website
is a pretty complicated issue, so I'll skip that. But let's assume that most personal blogs are used to communicate personal opinions and experiences. I've often heard the analogy made that a blog post is a one-way conversation, or a speech. Now, that to me is extremely dangerous, because this analogy assumes that
- you know your audience well
- you're speaking just to that audience
- your audience cares about what you say
Right now reading the paragraph up above,
- Some of you decided I'm trying to make insightful statements I'm not smart enough to make
- (Hopefully) some decided that I was thinking about something interesting
- Others decided I really should shut up
The WSJ had an article about how recruiters now use personal blogs: and how they can both help and hurt. Yikes...
So what's my point? As with most of my conversations I don't really have one :)
I think, like any unguarded comment you make, a blog a can make you seem more entertaining and more interesting to some people, and even more annoying to others. I don't know how to strike that balance, or even if its worth trying. I have my own reasons for starting to blog again, but is it better to be diplomatic on your blog vs. controversial, polite vs. honest; if you start censoring yourself too much should you bother blogging at all? Is it better to let people to just suspect you're a nutjob, versus providing them evidence confirming that, that is indeed the case....
questions, questions....
Comments
Oh well, that's how life goes, eh!?