From Jacob Weisberg, editor of Slate:

The great cacophony of voices in the blogosphere means that more views are being represented, that more subjects are being examined in detail, and that more sunlight shines into institutions of all kinds. Thousands of bloggers ranting from their soapboxes mean that our political culture encompasses bracing debate about everything people disagree about. If you don’t like this raucous clamor emanating from cyberspace, you’re not really comfortable with democracy.

It’s exciting to be part of the growing Virginia “raucous clamor.”

Share this article


(comments below)


(comments below)


  1. Jim Bacon Avatar
    Jim Bacon

    Reminds me of a conference on the Media in the Middle East I saw on C-Span the other day. One speaker was describing the blogs that are popping up in Arab countries–speaking out in favor of Democracy when no one else will. Blogs do give a voice to the voiceless.

  2. What about outright blogging for a political candidate? Paid campaign consultants are excessively blogging. Don’t read me wrong, I’m all for free speech …

    What I’m saying is, candidates are using blogging as a campaign tool. According to a GOP Blog, the DPVA held classes on setting up campaign blogs.

    Internet Blogflogging has replaced telephone push polling.

    If Democrats and Republicans are connected with a candidate, shouldn’t the blog pages have the SBOE disclaimer for the candidate?

    And if we’re blogging anonymously for a candidate, that’s a problem.

    It’s a fact, 80-percent of today’s younger generation receives their news from the Internet.

    Is Print Dead? ‘The Washington Post’ Ponders It (2-22-05)

    In the case of several new web logs, the blog is nothing more than an extension of the candidate’s campaign web page. For an upcoming column, I’ve interviewed two campaign media directors that have recently set up blogs.

    Maybe it’s time to call Chris Piper with the State Board of Elections.

  3. Will Vehrs Avatar
    Will Vehrs

    You can’t tell a push poll they’re full of it and have any effect. You can link to a faux-news candidate blog and let them have it. You can fill their comments section with contrary information.

    If there’s a problem with blogging, it’s that there’s too much affinity aggregation, i.e., too many liberals only read leftist blogs and too many conservatives only read right wing blogs.

    Looking forward to your blogflogging expose!

  4. From (go to site for links):

    March 10
    Making the sale
    More bad news for Brad Armstrong et al. on the theoretical front: a new study by the RAND corporation raises serious questions about arts groups’ economic impact. The report, much like us, is not advocating less public funding of arts. It just calls on arts group to tap the brakes on the economic arguments for public funding. And if you want to know what’s wrong with what I guess you could call the public-private-partnership vision of downtown Richmond’s economic future, this study, as well as the Brookings Institution’s recent study that demonstrates the shaky economics of convention centers, is required reading. (There’s a story on Morning Edition that goes into some depth on the RAND study.)

  5. Anonymous Avatar

    I guess if you only listen to what you want to hear, it is a sign of a) insecurity b) intellectual laziness or c) a paid interest.

    The nice thing about a blog is that you can’t take back or deny what you said – there it is in print.

    It is hard enough to sort through all the various slants on the facts and come to a halfway rational conclusion, and it’s even harder if you have to drag the anchor of a preconceived position.

    Blogs make so much information available that they become a kind of e-bay for ideas and positions. The most popular ideas are picked up and repeated and pretty soon you have a fairly well agreed upon market for beenie babies (ideas).

    The argument for support of the arts (just like Metro) is not an economic one. Trying to make one just confuses and cheapens the issue. However, deciding what to spend and on what is a different matter entirely.

    Ray Hyde

  6. Anonymous Avatar

    Abraham Lincoln said that “Democracy is the government of the people, by the people, for the people.” If the people in the system are not enjyoing their due power and liberty then such a society can’t considered to be purely democratic.

Leave a Reply