A recent debate has surfaced among the pages of the Chicago Tribune calling into question the longevity of the blogging phenomenon. On one side we have the recent Chicago Tribune editorial, "Bloggy, We Hardly Knew Ye," citing dated 2004 data. Although numbers resound with our society, I have to question the credibility they provide in this case, as the blogosphere has doubled - several times - since then. According to a recent report the blogosphere doubles every 5 months.
"It wasn't exactly 'Dewey Defeats Truman,' but the cute valedictory, 'Bloggy, We Hardly Knew Ye,' in a headline atop a Tribune editorial Wednesday seems likely to take a place in history alongside such clouded crystal-ball pronouncements as 'Who the hell wants to hear actors talk?' 'Radio has no future' and 'There is not the slightest indication that nuclear energy will ever be obtainable.'"
Zorn uses an unexpected reverse method of persuasion to argue that blogging is more than a fad. Agreeing that, indeed, most people don't read blogs, Zorn postulates that the uncharted territory comprised by this group is actually up for grabs as opposed to inaccessible. In other words, blogging simply hasn't yet arrived as mainstream, but along those lines: what were your thoughts when you heard about the Internet for the very first time... and look where that is now.
Personally, I find it refreshing that blogging and its implications has moved beyond simply being acknowledged to actually being debated by and sometimes even influential over media outlets. It's yet another reassuring sign that blogging, citizen journalism, grass roots communications or whatever you want to call it, is here to stay.
What do you think?