 |
 |
 |
|
Re: Tuesday, October 15, 2002
I think there are assumptions being made here about why people read weblogs. The reasons why people read may be, and are likely to be, different than the reasons why people write weblogs. When it comes to trust, I am not sure money makes as much of a difference as one thinks. Kaycee's weblog didn't solicit money, but it did paint a picture of being something that it was not. Further, even if a person discloses that they are paid a certain amount for a certain thing, how do you know whether they are telling the whole truth? You say the division here is between professional and amateur, why? Perhaps we are trying to make more here than there really is. Why can't weblogs be viewed as nothing more than a form of software and a style of writing? Perhaps the problem is trying to define weblogging as a new verb, when it might not be a new verb at all.
|
