Blogging: The New Social Club

The more I blog, the more I am reminded of one of the greatest and most ironic scenes in all of cinema, as Charles Foster Kane, his face in shadow in the publication rooms of the Examiner pens his "Declaration of Principles" for the front page of the morning edition.  As he is scrawling it, he emphazies that "no special interests will be allowed to interfere with the truth of that news".  I'm sure you believed it at the time, Charlie.

In the real world, The San Francisco Examiner began operating in 1865.  Just 7 years later, tired and bored of what the news world had become, five Examiner news reporters started a social club to promote a lively fellowship of jouralism and help "elevate journalism to that place in the popular estimation to which it is entitled".

That club is the "Bohemian Club" in San Francisco, the most exclusive and talked about men's club in the world.  Every Republican President since Herbert Hoover has belonged and the coveted roster of members reads like a Who's Who of Washtingon politics and West Coast elite.  To many socially-aware bloggers, clubs like this are the antithesis of what open media and politics should be about.

Ironically, at the Bohemian Club today, journalists are denied membership.

As one of the original founders of the blogging phenomenon, Doc Searls might as well have been one of those five Examiner reporters.  Today, in his post he says

To me this is a world where the only success that fully counts is in helping move good ideas along, in helping make this new world a bigger, better and more open place. And in helping others enjoy the privilege of participating in it.

At the same time, his post is full of melancholy reconsiderations.  It's a response to an excellent post by Seth Finkelstein called New Gatekeepers Are Still Gatekeepers in which Seth tells Doc in no uncertain terms that there is hierarchy, there is an A-list and a Z-list, and that the long-tail of online journalism does not spell democracy of media, but rather the same as media has always been, dominated by exclusivity.  I think Doc is feeling it too, even though he seems reluctant to admit it.

Seth is right.  Today's blogging world is a world of complex rhetoric, lightening-fast replies and discussion, and advanced search tools like Memeorandum that hone-in on exactly the kind of "converstaions" A-list bloggers have.  It's tough to keep up with the A-list crowd, and even tougher to engage in conversation.   There are myriads of new buzzwords: bloggers talk of "the edge", and of a new media economy based upon attention scarcity.  New economic thinkers like Umair Haque are creating a new lexicon of economics, media and technology, and a word coined only yesterday becomes mainstream discussion after 10 minutes of exposure to the "blogosphere".

Joining the Bohemian club involves an interrogation that one member said "would satisfy the KGB".  Thousands are on the waiting list eager to pay several thousand dollars to "get in".  For A-list bloggers, the price is the mastery of technology, terminology, rhetoric, and the discipline to dedicate hours of your day to reading, researching, and posting insightful new postings and replies.  To be on the A-list, people need to believe you matter, and the currency of the medium is intelligence and literacy.

I think bloggers should embrace this.  Rather than fearing that their idealistic vision of democratic media is crumbling, they should rejoice that a currency of intelligence and literacy is a breath of fresh air.  Scott Karp, whose posts I always enjoy, says it better than I can in his response posting There's Nothing Wrong With Gatekeepers.   Unlike many new media bloggers, Scott knows that the similarities between old and new media are just as important as the differences.

I'd rather start thinking of the A-list bloggers as Gate Openers.  Because in today's blogging world, that's just the way it works.  Scoble allows anybody to post comments.  So does Doc, Scott, Fred Wilson.  The A-list of truly good debaters and thinkers have the gate open wide, and anybody can truly join in.  I think the A-list needs to keep taking this responsibility seriously.  There is nothing wrong with a pecking order.  There is nothing wrong about having to prove that what is said is worthwhile, and to forcing people to practice their writing, their thinking, and self-analysis skills.  One thing we have far too much of on the net today is spurious, unresearched and unreliable information.  The A-list is raising the bar.

One thing though about human nature.  It hasn't changed.  And history does indeed repeat itself.  Don't think that new media is inherently impervious to corruption.  Quite the opposite, all the clichés are true.  Power does corrupt.  And the power of the A-list blogger is very, very real.

One of the most important tasks at hand is to scrutinize how this magical thing has happened, and figure out how to prevent the blogosphere of today from becoming the Bohemian Club of tomorrow.  Because unchecked, that's just what will happen, just like it did to Charlie Kane.

[tags: blogging]

Comments

[Matt]

Have you tried Megite at http://www.megite.com, it is a memeorandum like service.

[John Dowdell]

"For A-list bloggers, the price is the mastery of technology, terminology, rhetoric, and the discipline to dedicate hours of your day to reading, researching, and posting insightful new postings and replies. To be on the A-list, people need to believe you matter, and the currency of the medium is intelligence and literacy."

I'm not sure of this part... the currency is the link, isn't it? It's natural that more links go to personal acquaintances than to unknown writers found through a search engine. The connections among the original magazine/conference social circuit were cemented in pagerank years back with things like blogrolls. These connections change over time, sure, but they tend to stay the same too.

I'm with you on "people need to believe you matter", but suspect that the criteria for this is the normal human mix of social and intellectual attractions.

"One thing we have far too much of on the net today is spurious, unresearched and unreliable information. The A-list is raising the bar."

I'm not sure of this, either, because highly-viewed bloggers have published under-researched stories in the past, to the detriment of others. The discovery of contrary evidence seems to be the antidote to false news, and our systems aren't quite there yet....

[Gary Wisniewski]

"The currency is the link..."

Well, maybe in the most literal way, yes. But, if the A-list is a club, the price of admission is a bit more complex. One of the things that sets Memeorandum apart is that it analyzes relationships between blogs, attempting to go beyond simple linking. In fairness, any comment or post which grabs attention probably pushes one up the ladder. I suppose you can get on the A-list by being the worst possible writer with the most detestable rhetoric. Even the A-list needs court jesters.

"The A-list is raising the bar..."

I see this all the time! Scoble posted something idiotic the other day and within 1 hour he had about 20 comments pointing out how ludicicrous it was. There is a lot of pressure to work harder to be more accurate, research your work better, and write well. Sure there are mistakes, but lately, I'm noticing more and more mistakes in mainstream journalism as the sub-editors step aside and let the writers indulge in "direct access". Blogging integrity is, I believe, getting better, and mainstream media is, though still on top, NOT getting better.

Sadly, I think this is a short-term phenomenon. Scott Karp and others pointed out just how "niche" the blogging world really is. I am so impressed with the quality of comments and posts across many, many tech blogs. For a seemingly "public forum", bloggers appear to me to be more well educated, more literate, more focused. Yet, everybody is hoping it will go mainstream. When it does, my "comments keep the A-listers working hard" theory is history. Imagine Scoble's posts jammed with unsolicited comments from average MS Office users asking about the preferences toolbar. Even Scoble might throw in the towel!

[hugh macleod]

Ummm... who is this "A-List", exactly? Fred Wilson has a lower Technorati ranking than me... does that make me an "A-Lister"?

At least if you're a member of the Bohemian Club, you have a certificate to say that you belong. But who hands out the membership certificates in the blogosphere? It's rather vague.

[Gary Wisniewski]

"It's rather vague"....

You bet it is vague. However, the A-list is a useful metaphor for where things seem to be heading. The notion of who is "on the A-list" is just forming in the blogosphere, which may be why this whole thread of discussion has raised a bit more attention than prior threads.

But, it IS forming. Technorati ranks aren't very useful because they don't, in and of themselves, create visibility and engagement. It may be that their ranking algorithm isn't great, but more likely it's because Technorati doesn't choose to create "new content" from their rankings in the way Memeorandum does. Technorati is about measuring, reporting, organizing. Memorandum is about emulating conventional media. It's the kind of technology bridge needed to solve visibility problems, but it also is one of the prime types of technologies that will create the metphorical A-list.

Who knows, if the masses ever throng to the blogs, maybe the only way to solve the pecking order problems will be to issue certificates to those allowed to make comments. That will close the loop. :-)