Ghost Blogs and a Lack of Common Sense

Speaking of ghosts, I'm not dead. Still here. Yup. Miss me? Didn't think so.

Have you ever started a blog only to abandon it within a few months? Of course you have. But why? Either you got bored, got busy, or your (ex) BFF misinterpreted one particular post? In order to solve this grand mystery, the folks over at the NY Times (discovered here) have asked a few people to reveal why they've left all of these blogs to waste away on the internets.

The reasons for neglect boil down to:

1) Procrastination and, you know, life

2) Attempts at fame, money, and an established audience have failed

3) Distractions and new forms of expressing one's ideas such as Twitter and Facebook (What do you mean distractions? I always pay atten...what's that?)

My problem with the piece is that Douglas Quenqua, the article's author, as well as the bloggers he interviewed, all seem to overestimate the power of blogs. The last few years have made us question the value of print media and forced us to reassess whether we still need to print and bind books or whether we should digitize anything and everything. It's the new way andeveryone wants in.

Quenqua writes, "Getting started is easy, since all it takes to maintain a blog is a little time and inspiration. So why do blogs have a higher failure rate than restaurants?" He answers his own question here. Something that takes "little time and inspiration" to "maintain" will hopefully be more readily abandoned than something which costs someone's lifeblood and savings to establish. A restaurant owner needs to find investors, staff, a chef, a location, and must have good business sense in order to succeed. Not just anyone can set one up. However, Teeny McTweeneyson can set a blog up for free within five minutes on many different sites. Now let's say that Teeny has a blog about her cat and her crush (Hottie o'Dreamyguy) but gets frustrated after a few months because no one ever comments and it just hasn't taken off. Maybe she'll come back to it every so often to rant about her life but it's no longer that vehicle she hopes will transport her to SuccessTown.

Why on earth would something like Teeny's blog fail? Is it the fact that she can't spell? Or the fact that she uses too many !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!? Or perhaps because there are approximately 8 gazillion blogs already devoted to cats? Maybe. But there were probably about 8 gazillion minus one blogs devoted to cats before Lolcats came along. Teeny simply failed to do her research or put any creative effort into her blog. There are many Italian restaurants in the States, but that doesn't mean that new Italian restaurants will automatically fail. Americans will always love Italian food and surfers of the internet will always love reading about cats. But one day even Lolcats will bore us and we'll have to come up with a new feline sensation.

The point is, being a blogger will not lead to automatic success. In fact, the likelihood of a blog doing well is probably slimmer these days than that of a book getting published. Our thoughts are summarized in 500 words or less, we demand images and instant updates, and our hands shake when we hold a pen to paper for more than 15 minutes. The digital age, as awesome as it may be, should not signify the end of skill, talent, or perspicacity.

Social networking sites will destroy the universe

If we don't continue checking Facetweetikrspace every 108 minutes, the world will deconstruct...oh wait, that might be the island from Lost, my bad (I'm only on season 2, don't say anything!). 

I'll admit, I do check Facebook more than I should. I'd quit it, but I don't want to right now...YOU CAN'T TAKE IT AWAY FROM ME!

How else will I know when my friends have headaches, have a paper due, or are happy such and such football/baseball/basketball/rugy team won? How? How will I survive without seeing pictures of so and so's new dog or one of my former bosses getting completely wasted at a wedding? 

My anxiety related neurodermatitis is acting up simply at the thought at not receiving at least one Mafia Wars invitation every day or knowing how many people might be attending the "Find the Penguin" event at the LSE or being able to read 25 "random" facts about each of my friends. 

Do you remember a time when we didn't need to know every single detail of our friends' lives? When we could remember a friend without associating them with their overy glittery Myspace page (which also played the same stupid indie song over and over again)? Remember when contacting a new friend or a crush was a challenge? A guy I liked in high school found my AIM* screen name through a friend of a friend and I was ecstatic! The lengths he had to go to just to send me, "Hey wut's up? How's your summer?" My initial reaction of, "Holy crap, who is this person? Do I know him or her?" And then when I find out, "OMG!!!!" 

Now just imagine if this same event had gone down over Facebook. 

10:15am: OMG! Crushface just friended me!

10:16am: Oh, he also just friended like 10 other people

10:30am: Why is he writing on her wall? He hasn't written on my wall yet. 

11:15am: Who is that girl that tagged him in this photo? Why is he having so much fun with her? He just added me, that means he likes me right? Or that he at least thought of me? Right? Right? 

11:17am: So I deduced from the friends that they have in common, this mysterious girl is really his cousin. 

1:29pm: Oh no! Crushface is now listed as being in a relationship! Tenth grade is ruined!

1:31pm: Oh, he's in one of those fake relationships with his best guy friend. *Sigh.* 

2:00pm: He likes that band? Wow, I just lost a lot of respect for him. But, whoah, we have, like, all the same favorite TV shows!

The next day at school: 

Me to friend while Crushface walks past: Wow, I can't believe that happened on such and such show last night!

Crushface: You watch that show? That is my favorite!

Me: Really? I had NO idea! That is cool! 

CF: Yeah, my cousin introduced it to me over the summer. We went to the beach for a week, but it rained.

Me: I know, I saw the pics..I mean, crap, oh really? That's cool. 

And this is how the world will end. People such as myself, who are already prone to anxiety, will become even more so until we all pull out our hair and go Why did that person defriend me?!! No!! I want to be in your top 8!!! Why would she update her status but not respond to my message?

Social network sites destroy hope and real curiosity. In high school I never knew all the top gossip, mostly because I didn't care. I'd find out months later that people were dating, had broken up, etc. Now I know everything and still don't really care but find myself learning more and more. It was great thinking that Crushface had a crush on me too. The only crazy thoughts I could get were created by me, and not his status updates or comments on his wall. It was awesome. 

Oh, and people can get famous for doing absolutely nothing, like this girl in Argentina. I tried to figure out why this 17 year old is famous and discovered that she didn't really do much. She just got a ton of comments on her fotolog page. This is just nuts. The NY Times article explains that she gets paid to show up to events and promote products. She gets to stay in 5 star hotels and travels everywhere for free. Okay, I wonder if I could become world famous if I update my Facebook status every minute of every day? No? 

In another news, Follow Rageoline on twitter!

*For those too old to know, (or too young and hip) AIM stands for AOL (America Online) Instant Messenger

If anyone can get mad about the inauguration, it's me

Yup, sure can. Don't believe it? Here goes:

1) Okay, so maybe this first one isn't really about the inauguration, per se, but it does have to do with Fox News coverage of the day before the inauguration. I normally attempt to block out what most of the Fox News correspondents say, but yesterday I actually put down whatever I was doing and looked up in shock at the screen. One of the correspondents had said, "We're starting to get a lot of Facebook twitters at the moment." I'm sorry, but if you don't know how the internet works, please don't try to pretend like you do. I've heard stories of professors who've referred to "Myface," and this is equally bad. For the record, Facebook and Twitter are two different websites. And it's called a "tweet" or "tweat" not "a twitter."

2) Fox News coverage in general. I wouldn't normally choose Fox over other (more technologically advanced) channels, but it's what my mom watches and I was too lazy to go anywhere else. For the most part, it wasn't all that bad. There was a lot of cheer going around and there was no bitterness about Obama becoming the president. However, I sometimes wonder how these people make it on to television. Other students in my program offer more thoughtful commentary over a 15 minute coffee break than these people do over the course of 4 hours. Here are some examples:

a) While Obama's family was walking onto the main platform, the correspondents were blithering about how finally there was a black role model for young black people. They actually stated that he was one of the first non-thug/gangsta role models around for people to look up to Wow, that is so true. If only I could think of someone young black people could have looked up to before Obama. Nope, can't think of one. None, whatsoever.

b) They went on, incessantly, about what Obama said in his speech immediately after it was over. They harped on how nothing he said was worthy of being engraved in granite. They then referenced famous speeches by previous presidents and how what Obama said didn't hold up to that. Leave it alone! The speech was powerful, it said what it needed to, and compared to who was giving the speeches before him, it was a freakin' masterpiece. Don't give him a hard time, when you use the word "misunderstimate" in your programming.

c) While Obama's limo was moving towards the White House, the announcers continually went on about Jimmy Carter getting out of the car to walk by the people all those years ago. "When will Obama get out of that car?" Guess what. He's America's first black president in a time when terrorism is a pretty large threat. Any nutjob could have a gun. Unless you've got the time and patience to frisk 2 million plus people, you never know what might happen. So the chances of him getting out of the car, slim to none.


3) This whole issue over Biden's wife slipping up to Oprah. Honestly, who cares? Hillary was Obama's opponent. Unless everyone has forgotten, the two weren't always buddy buddy. Obama didn't have to offer Hillary a position at all, why should we be that surprised that he didn't necessarily think of her first when going through his list? So stop mentioning it every time the camera focuses on her!

4) Chief Justice Roberts messing up the oath. Seriously dude? Although, Obama smiled so this is more funny than anything else.

5) Ted Kennedy. Way to steal Obama's thunder. KIDDING!!!! I'm just impressed he was able to be out and about with all the trouble he's had lately.

6) Yo Yo Ma and the rest of his quartet. It was less than 20 degrees in D.C. today. And yet, the man was sitting there, playing his cello in a suit. No jacket, no gloves, no hat...and yet he had a big grin on his face. I've always been the type of person, even as a kid, to wonder when the main character of a book goes to the bathroom. I'm always able to predict the end of movies with twisted plots because I pay attention to stuff like "He forgot that thing in the kitchen." So I can't believe that Yo Yo Ma is really doing okay in less than 20 degree weather without at least a neck gater. And no, I'm not your grandma. Take a look at this cheery (and yet talented) bugger.



7) The Redcoats. Come on guys, we all know you're still a bit bitter about that whole "no taxation without representation" thing back in the 18th century, but don't you think it's time to leave well enough alone? Sure Aretha sang "My Country 'Tis of Thee," which you claim we "stole." Just because we made your national anthem better doesn't mean you have to get all huffy about it.

8) Stinkerton is not a true American. He was too "busy" doing "work for his PhD" and "teaching" to actually watch the inauguration. He even told me, "I missed the part where Obama got slimed."

9) Spellchecker on Blogger, for still not accepting "Barack" or "Obama" as correct spelling.

Zuckerberg's Law of Useless Information

Now that the election is finally over, it is safe for people in the media to talk about other things, even though there are a few stragglers who think they can still turn heads by trying to call the hotly contested race for first dog. Normally this would be the sort of thing to set me on an acid spewing rant, but I am really sick of politics, so I shall refrain.

Instead I draw your attention the Web 2.0 Summit, or as I like to call it, the meeting of the G2.0 (that's a foreign relations joke, if you are wondering why you are not laughing). There Mark Zuckerberg, president of the illustrious nation of The Facebook, has made a feeble bid for a place in real-people history by positing a defining law for the stalwart science of social networking. "Zuckerberg's law," as the coinage goes, states that every year from now on people, in the general sense, are going to be willing to share twice as much about themselves as the year before.

Despite the fact that this is a terrifying revelation, this statement has been met with a surprising reverence. There is the slight criticism, that this law bares some similarity to Gordon Moore's Law which points out that the number of transistors in a micro chip roughly doubles every two years. This is not to be confused with the Dalton/Moore hypothesis that the plot gets twice as dumb every two Bond movies. Aside from this, all across the Blog-o-sphere, people are bowing down to this chip of "wisdom" from the mother-of-all bloggers, the person who reincentivized staying in on a Saturday night, Mark Zuckerberg.

Now, in the tradition of Einstein, let us perform a thought experiment —Think of everyone you know, not just your friends, everyone. Now ask yourself how many of them do you want to know twice as well? Take a second.

Exactly.

What Mark doesn't seem to ask "is there a point when we just cannot share any more about ourselves?" Some have claimed that we will be stuck in a Zeno's Paradox style loop of never quite making it all the way to total disclosure. However, I believe, which is corroborated by the existence of catbook, that Zuckerberg is wrong about the information we share on the internet.

While it may be true, that we will post/share/twitterize exponentially more information each year, it won't be information about ourselves. Instead we will make up information to feed into the ever-growing social network system, in a "keeping up with the Joneses" fashion. For example, a couple of years ago, someone might not have even thought about their cat's favorite movie, but today we post, for all the world to see, that Wall-E really changed the way the Snuggles thinks about his carbon paw-print.

I will end by noting that Google's spellcheck offers "bloodsucker" as an option for correcting Zuckerberg's name, touché.