 |
 |
 |
|
Re: Thursday, February 24, 2005
Doc: Blogging [indeed] has a heritage of being about conversations. Word processing systems also have a heritage that [was] exclusive to legal firms. There was a time when word processors were only found in law firms; and there was a time when blogs were used only by individuals to create conversations. Word processing has emerged as a useful technology for many purposes. And like word processing, blog technologies are doing the same. The not-so-recent past when blogs were used only for one objective, (and zealots argued religiously about the 'true' definition of a blog), has now passed. Consider the telephone -- typically regarded as a "conversation" tool *exclusively* -- is now employed in many use cases as an effective broadcast tool; reverse-911 being a particularly valuable one. Bottom line - there are business requirements where blog technologies can be very effective in corporate settings with and without conversational aspects; and with and without public visibility. It's no surprise that some corporations will create ineffective and crappy blogs, but the greater injustice is ruling out valuable possibilities by over-generalizing and discriminating against blog use-cases under a label such as "corporate blogging". This is a broad, ambiguous term like "business blogging", and "enterprise RSS", and I think our "conversations" must better articulate these definitions and benefits.
|
