Tina Joins the "Stasi"; Blue Opinions to Follow
Less than two weeks after writing "Bloggers are the new Stasi," Tina Brown is about to become one herself. Not that consistency should be expected from someone with the talent for turning America's most famed literary magazine into a glossy-paged version of Page Six (with apologies to the Post).
Greg Lindsay writes that he's "been keeping an eye open for the announcement that would signal blogging's entry into the mainstream and the end of its subversive, outsider reputation. As a canary-in-the-coal-mine sign, Tina Brown is the perfect bird."
More interesting than Tina's decision to become a "smaller rat," as she also called bloggers, is the outfit she's joining in order to find an outlet for her pent-up thoughts. It seems that another woman known for changing her mind, Arianna Huffington, is launching the Huffington Report (will folks think this is an undertaking of her former husband of the same name?), an invitation-only cyber event at which beautiful people -- that's blue beautiful people, too -- will contribute to a group blog. The Huffingtonians are here.
The list of worthies is long. Very long.
Her business partner is Ken Lerer, the head of AOL Time Warner corporate communications until Bob Pittman lost and Dick Parsons won. (Lerer left the company before "AOL" disappeared from the name.) Huffington declined to comment on the Huffington Report, citing timing issues, as the site's soft launch is apparently set for April.
But wait -- there's more!
Lindsay quotes part of an "eyes only" email sent by Huffington to the potentials. At the very least, she recognizes the key role blogs have assumed in forming opinion.
And the best part is you're actually already doing the hardest work of a blogger: having interesting opinions and fresh takes on the hot stories of the day. We'll just provide a megaphone for the thoughts you're already thinking, the conversations you're already having, the e-mails and instant messages you're already exchanging with your friends.
The idea is that the members of our blog will weigh in whenever the spirit moves them: when a news story makes you mad, when you see a movie or read a book that turns you on, or when you have a cause that you don't think is getting the coverage it deserves. And we're not just talking about politics -- this blog will be about politics and entertainment and money and sports and religion. Anything and everything.
This is all very impressive, and it's a model that others will surely follow. But I wonder how well-read such a blog could be. It may face the same cultural limitations we've seen with liberal talk radio, which, although seemingly given a new life, is still miniscule when compared to its conservative counterpart. Perhaps it won't need the audience many of the big blogs enjoy.
But those blogs, and even smaller ones, are usually written by people whose qualifications goes beyond being merely "in the know," as that cliché used to be understood. Blogs have thrived precisely because people like Tina Brown, Norman Lear, and Arthur Schlessinger have had far too much to say about what is news, who is right, what makes America great (or not), and how we should conduct ourselves in a post-9/11 world. Will a group blog of such people bring their MSM and cultural dominance into the blogosphere? Somehow, I doubt it.
That's not because we shouldn't welcome the competition and added voices. Nor the increased population of rats looking over one another's shoulders. It's because I can't see them matching the bloggers in their determination to fact-check big media and politicians. That's because, day in and day out, the opinions and interests of the elites whom bloggers investigate are identical to those of the Huffington Report. GOP or no, MSM, Hollywood, academe, the biggest foundations -- all will agree with most of what the Huffingtonians will write.
One question, though, on an issue that could unite us: how will they react to McCain-Feingold as it applies to the Net? Stay tuned.
| Mar. 30, 2005 | 1:40 PM