Sunday, February 4, 2007
Old dog re-learning old tricks
In When Neuts Attack, Part n, Richard Bennett says, Doc didn't bother reading the D & T report, he read a summary in a news article and drew wildly wrong conclusions from it. The bottom line here is simple: before calling somebody a liar, check your facts. Karl, Doc Searls, Mike Maslick, Paul Kapustka, and Om Malik couldn’t be bothered with that in this case, and they’re all supposed to be journalists.
He's right.
In an email yesterday, a friend complimented the post Richard corrected. Here's what I wrote back: Look at it again. I've changed it a bit to make the logic work better. But I did it in a hurry. Not sure I didn't lose something. Well, the problem wasn't what I lost, but what I didn't find in the first place, because I didn't take the time to look deep enough.
Blogging isn't the main thing I do. It's a side thing. I purposely spend as little time with it as I can, while still doing it. In this respect it isn't journalism. Yet I'm still "supposed to be a journalist".
That's right too.
So there's a corollary to "live and learn". The longer you live, the more you re-learn.
[Later...] Richard responds. Bottom line: Let’s all take a step back, cool off, and look for common ground.
Amen.
A walk past the park
Losers win
Holding Google battles between blog post titles is no different than Hollywood choosing movie endings by audience testing. To me that's not blogging. It's marketing. Unless you're doing it for fun.
Here's a non-secret. Nothing I write gets more praise and criticism than the titles of my posts. Some people say they only read my posts because of the titles. Others give me shit because so many of my post titles say nothing about the subjects of the posts.
Most people say nothing, of course. Which is approximately all this lesson means.
Meanwhile, bears vs. colts.
The Wholly Illustrated Bible
