3 ms·
I'm just as tired of "X isn't dead" posts that take the phrase too literally. Sure, blogging still exists... but blogging was the "thing" for a while, and now
by micromacrofoot 5y ago
I'm just as tired of "X isn't dead" posts that take the phrase too literally.
Sure, blogging still exists... but blogging was the "thing" for a while, and now it's not the "thing." Even with any sort of revival, everyone already knows what it is, so it will never hit a peak with the same energy. No one's going to explain what blogging is during prime time on CNN.
Blogging is dead. Just like punk and disco are dead. They peaked and were co-opted by corporate interests to make profit (and that peaked too). "Real" blogging still exists, but relatively speaking, no one cares (and that's ok).
- jolmg 5y ago> I'm just as tired of "X isn't dead" posts that take the phrase too literally. I think the main irritation from the side that's tired of premature "X is dead" posts is that one feels that voicing such things hastens its true death. "X isn't dead" posts are to counterbalance. I don't know what the prevalent interpretation of "is dead" is, but I would consider it to be when something can't easily be found in existence. I don't think things are dead simply because they're no longer on CNN. If we're to keep the metaphor, blogging is no longer in its prime years. It's more like in its middle-age, and being middle-aged is not being dead.
- dsr_ 5y ago"no one cares" Ah, that's the key issue. As long as whoever is doing it is continuing, it's still alive. The key lesson of the Internet, learned from the punks, is reified in Rule 34: You're Not The Only One. There are an infinite number of long tails. Can you make infinitely scalable money at it? If that's the only thing that concerns you, no. Go away. Every community is better off without you. If you love it, can you make some money at it? Maybe, but you're likely to love it less if it becomes your livelihood.