So this article came through in my EI feeds today: Finneran, Kevin. "To Blog, or Not to Blog." Issues in Science & Technology Vol. 22, Issue 2 (January 1, 2006). F/T in Academic Search Premier, but strangely, not on their web page.

Of course, blog lovers do not mind wasting a little time because even a mediocre blog might be entertaining. But you are reading Issues in Science and Technology, and I have come to the painful realization that our readers are, demographically speaking, not among the most fun-loving quartiles. It appears that conducting research, writing books and articles, managing companies, working in Congress, or trying to influence policy takes its toll on your impish, fun-loving spirit. In fact, much of the irreverence found in blogs is probably aimed at you. Besides, even if you do enjoy a little anarchic fun now and then, you don't have a lot of spare time to look for it.

With the pros and cons of blogging in mind, Issues is going to launch an experiment in its own form of blogging. Blogging 2.0 will be brief and timely, but it will come from experts who do not have the luxury of facile irreverence. Rather than having one person spout off on any and all topics, we will have a team of bloggers who will each focus on the areas they know best. Rather than writing numerous reports each day, our bloggers will post only once a week. There will be a fresh blog each day, but the blogger will differ from day to day during the week. The bloggers will have a recognizable point of view, but it will emerge from their knowledge rather than their attitude. They will be engaging writers, but they will win your attention with insights, not insults.

Ugh. So if you look at the three blogs (only 3, my week has 7 days, but it may be different in Texas), they're hosted on blogger... It's like the editor totally doesn't get it. So many involved in the sciences and technology do. Argh!

¶ 12:31 PM| |cites (technorati) |