Archive for the 'Blogs' Category
Open Letter: Andrew Sullivan’s Blog
Andrew,
Your essay “Why I Blog” was fantastic. I am a regular reader of your blog and was forced to reconsider your work from a new perspective. Are you representing an evolution of broadcast media? I love that question. I’m grateful to you for making me ask myself it. The short answer is still very long.
Like I said, I’m a regular reader – going on two years. It took me a while to understand the format of the Daily Dish. The rapid fire posts, the jump-links. The various awards and photos. You are right, this is a broadcast medium at heart and I climbed the learning-curve because you were constantly refreshing content and I was stimulated enough to endure. Now I’m on top, so to speak, and the view is a crystal clear vista of a brick wall.
I do not associate your content with the Atlantic Monthly. I think that’s important. I do not associate your content with anything other than yourself. Your friends, your enemies, your opinions, your arguments, your obsessions, your everything. For a while, I was satisfied with that. Your perspective offers readers your expertise on various DC goings on. Additionally your personal story is compelling enough to color several socio-political issues with a relevant point of view. But your POV is only valuable if it’s directed outward. But The Dish is an inward-facing organism. Hence, my shabby view. I only see you.
So…
This is all about you, Andrew. Isn’t that weird? Sit on that for a minute. As your reader, I’m tracking you in real time deal with too much information. I know you know that. You’ve said it before – this is what blogs do. But that doesn’t sit well with me. I don’t care that much about you. Should I?
I started reading Studs Terkel recently. I see meaningful connections between his work and yours. Our evolving society has meaning and texture. Essentially, you both strive to document and ponder our life in this place. Studs found meaning in the people – their fragments and stories – the things that they did, didn’t do – the fun stuff and boring stuff. Some of it meaningful and lots of it confusing. Studs took fragments out of the whole and weaved together a contextualized story. It took time and patience and editing. Studs was a hub of information. He organized it and provided that context. Your work is on the other end of the spectrum – the boring stuff, the fun stuff, the right stuff, the wrong stuff – the dissents, the back-pats – all of it is from you, about you.
Your expertise is valuable. It is lost on Chris Matthews’ rapid fire show where fellow pundits pass around a hot potato until the next issue. It is diluted by the wide-open valve that is the Daily Dish. It is hollowed out by an echo chamber unto itself, as represented by the blog roll on the bottom right of your page.
This is not an email where I tell you that I’m done reading your work. I’m trying to make a broader point. Why does your process matter? Patton Oswalt has a great bit about preventing George Lucas from making the prequels. The punchline (word for word): I don’t give a shit where the stuff I love comes from; I just love the stuff I love.
Well anyway, I’ll keep reading. This is getting interesting.
No comments