"Do I contradict myself? ...

...Very well then I contradict myself."

It was thoroughly difficult to choose which blog post I wanted to revise and contradict. There have just been too many. I finally decided to put some logic into the decision making process and chose the very first post I wrote for this class. Where better to start then from the beginning?

 When I first reread this post I noticed the length difference when compared to my more recent posts. It seems I was definitely striving for no more then what was required. That has of course changed, I now find myself attempting to put a personal cap on my posts so I do not end up boring everyone who happens to read them. I have to say that I still agree with most of my "Blogs In the World" post, but I have a new found respect for bloggers everywhere.

Within the very first thought of this post I seem to imply that the actual writing aspect of the blog is not as difficult as generating a creative and attention-grabbing title or headline. WRONG. After the seemingly countless numbers of posts we have written I have come to realize that although the headline usually caught the attention of the reader, it is what is written in the blog, itself, that holds the reader's attention and inspires them to show others your blog. And what is the point of blogging if you do not have followers to share your opinion with? There really isn't one.

I completely agree with a statement I made in that first post, so long ago:

Blogging is more of a means of spreading information. Blogs tend to contain current event type information that pertains more to communities as a whole instead of just a certain small group of individuals. Blogs are synonymous to writing in that they are a means of putting ideas into society but through a webpage instead of paper.  

 I would only have to expand on this by adding that the current event information that blogs discuss and spread depends on what news means to the blogger and their blogging community. If it is not important to the readers there is no sense in wasting time reporting it.

Countering

Harris presents "countering" as an aspect to writing, along with his many other ideas. The idea of countering can be summarized fairly easily. Countering does not necessarily mean to disagree with an author's work, but offers three key points that can be used to counter a piece that you may still agree with. The first point is arguing the other side to show possible flaws in what the author is arguing for. The second point is uncovering values by analyzing an idea that was left unexplained to help bring better meaning to the argument as a whole. The final point is dissenting, or noting limits on a shared idea. Once these points are understood it becomes clear that countering does not have to be a disagreement, but a way to bring new perspective to a text.

A blog I follow, The Ville Voice, does not often use countering to convey a point, as forwarding articles they agree completely with seems to be more their forte. I was, however, able to find an article where countering was used to show the blogger, Jake's, opinion. The blog post, Told Ya So: Berman Wasting Your Money, discusses the Jefferson County Public School Superintendent, Sheldon Berman, wasting Louisville's tax money for personal use, such as travel. The original article from WHAS only mentions that Berman seems to be traveling more often, and discuss possible reasons for this sudden travel increase. Jake puts a personal spin on this article and argues all of the negative aspects of Berman's travel. He points out all of the places he has been traveling to, and how the only explanation is for personal reasons. I believe countering is a useful tool. It does not cause an article to lose or gain anything. When used properly, countering should really only be seen as a way of putting a new perspective on a semi-controversial article or topic.

Forwarding

Joseph Harris mentions the idea of forwarding in his book, "Rewriting: How to Do Things With Texts". What this means is an author putting thier own spin on another's work. Anything can be forwarded, from the traditional texts that have been rewritten for various purposes, such as plays or for new understanding, to the modern, and fairly annoying, forwarded email.

Both of the blogs I am following constantly use forwarding as a way to spread thier news. My personal choice of blog, The Ville Voice, uses forwarding to convey news updates. Most of the time, when on of The Ville Voice contributers links a story they will add their own personal touch. Each day this blog opens with multiple headlines from the latest news updates, adding, a normally witty line, to make the story appealing. For example, on Wednesday, the title was "Wednesday Morning of Wasteful Spending and Such" one of the headlines, and custom leads, was, "Don’t let your kids trick-or-treat in Shively. Cause some dude may snatch them and pull them inside his house. You never know." This was in reference to the Courier Journal blog about how to keep safe when trick or treating on Halloween.

Almost all blogs use stories that have come from other references in order to insure the news will be spread to as many people as possible. If we were not allowed to use this idea of forwarding we would all have to be first hand witnesses to events that occur all across the globe everyday. It would also be much more difficult to develop our own ideas based on previous text and convey them through papers and such.

When In Doubt: Venn Diagram.

I have been considering how to answer this post all day. I have spent most of that time attempting to find a deeper relationship between the New York Times, The Ville Voice, and Instapundit than the obvious; they all help in the dissemination of news. I soon realized that once you got down to the basic core of this relationship, the spread of news was the strongest bond. All three of these sites focus on news updates, most commonly about politics, be it state or national level, and contribute the occasional, slightly off topic yet informative story. Each of the three news gatherings offers a collaboration from several different authors or sources so readers receive a variety of opinions instead of the constant lean towards one side or the other.

How the three sites are related to press spheres and news ecologies depends entirely on who is interpreting the information. All of these news sources could be considered an integral aspect to the "me sphere", each site having a certain level of influence over the individual. All three use a form of the "new news sphere" to write, or follow-up, on a story. The consistency of each individual aspect, however, cannot easily be determined. Each story that is written using that sort of time line will use certain characteristics of the "new news sphere" model, depending on the popularity and audience of the topic. While all three sites evaluate similar topics, the way they use the press sphere models and the news ecology differs immensely. Each news outlet is constantly changing the way the press sphere is used in the spread of their information, as the press' effect on the public changes on, what seems a daily basis.

Jarvis and Sullivan

In my opinion, Sullivan's ideas of blogging in his article "Why I Blog", help support Jarvis' models, and vice versa. Sullivan uses blogging as a way to escape the uptight pressures of the press and to share his thoughts directly with the public. This coincides with Jarvis' model "The Me Sphere" because it, too, puts the public in the center with  influences from many news source outlets surrounding it. Both Jarvis and Sullivan convey to their audiences that the discourse of news has changed as we enter the technological age.

Jarvis' models, particularly "The New News Model", are able to support Sullivan's ideas of blogging because they convey a similar story line to that which Sullivan describes in his blog. Many of the same characteristics of blogs, mentioned by Sullivan, are key in the makeup of the news model. One of Sullivan's favorite features of the blogging world is the ability to hyperlink additional information to your blog topic. Jarvis mentions this as an aspect to story writing. A major aspect both writers have in common is the belief that stories, especially those related to the news, no longer have a clear cut beginning and end. Stories are now expounded on after additional information is found. Jarvis mentions, "Now a story never begins and it never ends." The same can be said for blogs. Andrew Sullivan has the ability to return to any of his blog posts and revise them with new information, or even write a new post discussing new leads, follow-up, and corrections, all traits mentioned by Jarvis in the new way of writing a news story.

Press Charts and Jarvis

 Jeff Jarvis's blog post, The Press Becomes the Press-sphere, does an excellent job at shedding light on the current means of civil discourse. He is not afraid to say that print news is becoming a news spreading tool of the past. He makes his opinions on the topic obvious, and wants to make it clear that the public should be the center of the news and all forms of discourse. Without the public there would be no reason for the news, and for that reason the news should be spread by means that are convenient to all interested members of society.

I did not find Jarvis's models confusing by any means. This could be attributed to the fact that I was in a journalism class in high school and understand the basics of news writing. I believe his models were fairly cut and dry. You hardly needed the added explanation to grasp basic concept. The only thing I found truly odd about them is that he took the time to sit down and draw up these models to prove a point. But, I would not consider that completely unusual; I find it creative and useful in getting his point across.

Jarvis seems to truly understand how quickly and easily the technological world is changing the way we view even the simplest things, such as print newspapers. I agree that the world of news and discourse must change its ways if it ever hopes to keep up with the ideas of the modern citizen.

Times are Certainly Changing.

I will be the first to admit that I do not pick up a newspaper on a daily basis. I won't even glance at it unless I am guaranteed to find an interesting story. Most of what I read in the newspaper is found in the sports and features sections. I realize that I should make an effort to be more involved in current events but I sometimes have no time for it.

Needless to say, the transition to reading the paper everyday was a huge step. The first time I attempted to read the New York Times was a complete disaster. I found myself reading headlines and telling myself how uninteresting it all seemed. Finally, after searching through a few of the topics in the sidebar, I found my stride. Under the health topic I found a story with a headline that really grabbed my attention. After reading the lead I decided this story just might be worth a little bit of patience. It turns out the story, though not exactly a typical current event update, helped me gain a new perspective about becoming an avid news reader.

Though my comfort zone remains in health and sports (anything about the Giants) topics, I find myself reaching out and giving other, not so interesting stories a second chance.  I think this is the biggest part of the process I have missed. I should have been more open from the start and been less concerned about spending time on a story that held no interest to me. As of right now, I cannot honestly say I have noticed a change in my habits since beginning following the New York Times; it may be too early on for that. The only differnce may be that the Times is one of the first places I go when I get on the internet, so I do not forget to read up on that day's news.