Why blog?

Antony Loewenstein's The Blogging Revolution

A few years back, around the beginning of 2006, I began reading blogs by friends and family as a way of keeping in touch with them. From there I realised how many people across the world are actually utilising this form of communication and expression. I began looking for blogs by people in the arts industry – namely film, television and theatre. When I started regularly reading Stargate:Atlantis executive producer Joseph Mallozzi’s blog in the first half of last year, I also found another purpose for blogging.

Joe not only writes about what’s going on for the show he executive produces and writes for, but also about the film and television industry, about writing for screen, about the crew and cast, and also about other things which interest him – books and food spring to mind. He does an almost-daily “mailbag” question and answer session, effectively cutting out the middleman (media) and giving his responses directly and eloquently. While a lot of the questions are about Stargate (I believe he’s worked on all the Stargate projects save the original movie), a lot are about his other interests and the industry he’s working in.

What struck me then (and still does) is the fact that blogging can put a personality to a name and face that people may know. It’s also a great way to give people answers to questions they may have that the mainstream media won’t ask. Science fiction is a good example of this lack of media attention because is general it is not deemed “mainstream entertainment” (and why is a whole new topic which I won’t go into here). Being able to read blogs by people directly involved in the film and television industry can provide information that the relevant media parties may miss or be unable to report on.

Before I move on, I’d like to mention Joe’s book club. Every month or so he picks, or asks readers to choose, three books people can read and then discuss. It started towards the end of last year and has been a great success. Joe’s even been able to get authors like Lou Anders (also a prolific scifi editor), Jeffrey Ford and K.J. Bishop to drop by and answer questions from him and the other readers about their relevant books. Each book is given a week’s worth of discussion before moving on to the next. In itself, I think this book club not only gives readers a chance to ask well-known authors about their work, but has also created a great community of intelligent, interested speculative fiction (scifi, fantasy, horror) readers. It seems blogging can be more interesting and useful than I first thought.

One of the main discourses on blogging that I’ve heard about recently is the apparent threat it might pose to mainstream forms of journalism. I’ve often seen it referred to as a form of “citizen journalism” or, as the ABC might say “a type of User Generated Content”. Axel Bruns, a “casual observer” of journalism, says in this article that traditional forms of journalism are being overtaken by new forms like news blogs and other websites offering “citizen journalism”. Bruns’ thoughts shed some light on the fear many media organisations have when it comes to the internet and blogging.

As I’ve said here and here, I don’t necessarily think traditional forms of media are necessarily threatened by blogging or at risk of being lost, however, blogging does need to be looked at more closely by the media.

A good place to start might be the recently published book by Australian journalist and author Antony Loewenstein, aptly titled The Blogging Revolution. Based on two years worth of travel and research, Loewenstein’s book investigates the democratising processes blogging can provide, especially for countries often viewed as politically repressed. Focusing on dissidents and bloggers in Iran, Egypt, Syria, Saudi Arabia, Cuba and China, the book provides and in-depth look at how citizens, or perhaps more aptly “netizens” in these countries use blogging.

In his introduction to the book, Loewenstein expresses a frustration at the mainstream, Western media’s lack of interest in blogging as a way of providing voices for these countries. He writes that very few Western countries have had coverage of the Iraqi war without a “Western journalist’s filter”. It seems despite a journalistic obsession with balance, much of the Western media has not looked further than “official” statements, while blogs from citizens in these countries, experiencing these events first hand, lay forgotten in the online world.

His book highlights the importance of blogging for countries that don’t get a lot of Western media attention. It can be a way of showing the world what people experience, and how they feel about their countries. Western society may often make assumptions about countries seen as repressed or oppressed but, without hearing from people there, how do we really know? Loewenstein’s book provided insights and information into not only blogging, but also the way citizens in Iran, Egypt, Syria, Saudi Arabia, Cuba and China feel about their countries and their leaders – what life is like living in these countries. It’s more than food for thought, The Blogging Revolution is essential reading for anyone interested in the opportunities the internet can provide and the state of the world today.

There may be no definite way to define the purpose of blogs, but it’s apparent they can be invaluable tools in providing insights, forums and context globally. Maybe that’s enough.

I am the water

I am the water
Without me you die
I rush along through a world unknown
I laugh, I sing, I dance along
Belonging to all,
But always alone.
I quench your thirst
Give gifts of rainfall
And majestically journey
Past the great and the small.

Why then do you hurt me
The substance you need?
Giving poisonous gifts
To support all your greed.
Hiding sewery secrets
Below shores of my seas,
Spilling venomous rainbows
On reflections of trees.

Is it selfishness that helped spawn this seed
In the minds I help most,
In humanity?
This plant does not thrive on all of your need
It survives to hurt and kill purity.
The thing you call money,
I call it a weed
It suffocates animals that live around me
It wraps us in darkness
Until we can’t breathe
And hides all the treasures of nature’s beauty.

I am the water
Without me you die
I rush along through a world unknown
Sometimes I laugh at the joys that I pass
Sometimes I see all the damage and cry
But remember, while it is pain that you cast,
I am the water
Without me you die.

I wrote this poem for an environmental awareness exhibition when I was 12 years old. I found it again this year and was surprised by the depth and relevance of it.

The photo is one I took last year of the Bellinger River on the mid-north coast of NSW. It’s the river I wrote this poem about.

Uncertainty

Return from afar to find an old place
Stand on familiar ground
Trying to find some saving grace,
Within or without the truth has no sound
But surety and comforting relief.

All that has gone is all that will come
In a different form to be to you translated.
Rising up from the earth,
Chasing after the sun,
Bending in the wind as resolve is created.
Peace within hope and hope within dreams
Sense does not work
When worlds collide and the future lies
Amidst chaos and conflict.
Return to the ties of the past
Find new, enlightened edict.

Shared thoughts are twice blessed
By a double-mind’s care
New views on concerns
Bring perspectives refreshed.
For as we are taught to share
That sharing can good prospects bring
And brush away the burrs and spurns
Which plague all our uncertainty.
True friendship stands through all the storms
And lives to see the changes
That come when decisions bring about new dawns.

Assurance will stray
From the foundations you make
Yet the sun will rise every day
And set without mistake
Think on this, therein lies such comfort as relief.

On essays

The first word is hard. The document will stare back at you, white background and flashing cursor until eventually you hazard a common, generic word like “the”. Delete. Try something else. It takes a while before the first word starts to feel like it will make more sense once you write a sentence.

The first sentence is always the hardest. You can sit in front of a computer all day and still be unhappy with that fateful first sentence. It’s the one they read first (whoever “they” may be), the hook, the lead, the silver lining on a topical cloud you may not even want to cross paths with. Never fear, once done you probably won’t have to fly past it again.

A paragraph is an achievement. The first is, again, the hardest. ‘It’s important,’ they tell us, ‘to get the introductory paragraph right. You need to explain your argument, and outline the entire essay.’ They also tell us a paragraph can be three sentences long. Clearly they don’t write introductions very often.

Each paragraph is a formula. Some people write because they don’t like maths, but it’s more about numbers than you’d think. The number of words to a sentence, the number of sentences to a paragraph, the number of paragraphs to an essay, the total number of words (including or excluding in-text references depending on them, and they like to change their minds about that). And the formula.

‘Start with a topic sentence,’ they tell us over and over as if we never learn. ‘This should be what the paragraph will be about.’ Is it that simple? Maybe, but go one further and they’ll be so surprised you could get a better judgement from them.

‘The body of the paragraph should elaborate on your topic sentence.‘ That makes sense, follow on from what you last said and all will be well in the world of Essayform. But don’t elaborate too much or they may say: ‘You went off topic!”

‘The last sentence of a paragraph should sum up the topic sentence and body of the paragraph,’ they say. What they really mean is “sum up the paragraph, draw any conclusions relevant, relate back to the topic of the essay and lead into the next paragraph either with the last sentence or the first sentence of the next par.” They don’t say what they mean.

Their formula works. It works better if you use it to your own purpose. Customise it here and there with segues and clarification of the overarching topic. They don’t tell you that, but they expect it and they like it. Note that the formula for sentences is also very similar to the formula for an essay.

They may tell you: ‘The conclusion should sum up the entire essay, relating each topic back to the original question or argument and summarising it.’ They also want you to reach a final conclusion which supports your argument and leads to a greater revelation about the topic. Unlike maths, this formula can be manipulated into an artificial revelation. ‘There is no right or wrong‘ as long as you support your argument, follow the formula and come up with an acceptable revelation.

Writers block for essays is an obstacle you have to overcome during formal studies. You can’t just wait for it to go away, you have to get around it and make the essay flow. How? It all depends. Sometimes reading other non-fiction for inspiration and “voice” can help. Writing on a topic that interests you first may also counter the block. Personally, I write about essays to get in the mood to write an essay. Maybe that works too.

…Maybe not.

Language update – the irony

Just days after my last post about our “dieing language”, I stumbled across even more published mistakes. An Australian news website I occasionally visit had posted an article which used the word organization. While I don’t have anything against legitimate reasons for spelling it with a “z” (zed), there is no legitimate reason I can conceive of if the author is Australian and has grown up in Australia. Australia’s contemporary society was founded by Europeans, primarily from English-speaking countries (to begin with), and the English way to spell the word in question is with an “s”.

Whose to blame? The author? The editors? The education systum? At a loss on where to lie the blame (and questioning whether blame is the correct approach at this stage), I simply published a comment noting the mistake. And no word. I have previously noticed mistakes on the site and made comments, resulting in prompt changes. Rather than continue to post annoying comments on the site about how the “z” does not belong in an Australian article, I thought I would post an update on my language lamentations.

Some people might be wondering why I’m making such a big deal about a simple mistake like using a “z” instead of an “s”, but to be honest, it comes down to concern for the English language. Where does the buck stop? If people can make one mistake, and publish it for the whole world to see, then they can make more, and the whole idea of language is to use it correctly and/or selectively. The pen (or keyboard) is only mightier than the sword if there’s credibility in the words. Plus, if software companies, like Microsoft, are going to go to the trouble of having several English spell-check options (18 different English options in my version of Microsoft Word), we the writers could at least use them to show our appreciation.

Sure, everyone makes mistakes. In my last entry a friend noticed several mistakes which were unintended, and I made the appropriate changes. But to leave a mistake there? That just seems a bit slack.

This talk of language reminds me of an ad I saw once which read something like: “Wanted, a legal secretary. Must be friendly, reliable, apathetic.”

Sounds too good to be true, doesn’t it? Then again, who cares?*

*If anyone knows of businesses looking for more “apathetic” workers, I believe that demonstrates my apatheticism completely.

The Dieing Language

Over the weekend I like to read newspapers. I perused three between Saturday and Sunday of the weekend just passed. And I was disappointed by the (mis)use of language I found.

People saying “a historic shift”, when “an” is the correct word, changing tense halfway through, as in “the journalist was sitting at his desk when he used the wrong word, but it would be weeks before he realises the mistake” and simply using the wrong words or misspelling things. It may seem petty to you, but many people read newspapers and, as published writers, journalists have a responsibility to check their spelling and grammar. They should, in theory, set a good example for us all.

That is, of course, unless we want to forget the joys of good grammar and spelling. We could all start writing about how it is hard labor to write good and that it is a specialized skill these days. “U dont need good word skills to talk or right”, we might say. And some will agree with that, but I do not.

Simple mistakes are ok, everyone makes them. I constantly have to go through everything I write to check for mistyped words, poor grammar or bad syntax. But I do actually check, and I think that’s part of the problem.

The Australian Labor (note the lack of a “u”) Party is apparently called so because it was, for a while, run by an American who wrote with American spelling (and rightly so for him). Someone, somewhere, saw “Labor” written by this American and thought “Oh, so that’s how the party writes it to differentiate itself from the labour unions*.

Teachers I’ve had in the past, at school and university, have written globalisation with a “z”, suggesting Americanization of Australia is definitely in progress. It would be different if they had grown up somewhere where the “z” was used, but most of them were born in Australia and grew up in Australia.

Why does this matter? After all, doing a google search for “odours” only yeilds 26.7 per cent of the results “odors” does (based on reliable academic research using the advanced methodology of a “google” search). It is part of our culture. And I believe that stands for something.

Also, it’s pretty annoying to the people who notice it. So we should all try and appease this whingey minority at the expense of our own time. Because stopping people whingeing would also stop people posting annoyingly long, ranty opinions like this.

*The Australian “Labor” Party information is based partly on an urban legend which few people I have asked (including members of the Labor Party) know of. Most say they aren’t sure why there is no “u”. The rest of that story is based on my own, clearly educated assumptions.

The Media and the Writers

Paige Smith* is a journalist who works in Australia. Where she works doesn’t really matter, because she knows who her real bosses are (“their are only two of them”, she says in her professional, trained newsreaderspeak). She likes the current political system and what it does (to) for the fourth estate. “The anti-terror legislation is good for journalists…and we know we don’t have to concern ourselfs with Freedom of Information requests because what we get back is generally similar to what we start with – a blank page,” she reports.

I could go on about Paige, she’s certainly an interesting character with her strong support of the current system (the ‘fourth estate’ didn’t get it’s name from agreeing with governments, I promise), but the crux of the matter is safety, which these days often gets overlooked outside of an individual’s own safety. Paige is looking out for Number One, but in theory is that what the law should be doing? If you follow the code of ethics, set out by the Media Entertainment and Arts Alliance, if you stand by those twelve short points, you should be a decent journalist. But under the current laws, following at least one of these principals (“Where confidences are accepted, respect them in all circumstances.”) can get you put in (contempt) gaol. Is that fair? Is that allowing journalists to do their jobs properly? With the threat of personal safety so close to journalists, it’s no wonder Paige Smith feels the way she does.

In other news and on a completely unrelated train of thought, I am still thinking of all the Writers Guild of America members who are on strike. It seems as though (especially in film) producers and directors and actors get the most respect from the general (not that word) public. I can understand their cause, and I make a point of appreciating the writers of both films and television shows I enjoy (more so with tv shows as you’re more likely to become familiar with a writer). I hope it ends soon though, for the sake of the writers and all the other skilled professionals like costume designers who are currently out of work.

At least we can write about it for them.

*Paige Smith is a character created for the forum theatre satire show, John Howard on Trial