Random Thoughts on Blogging

I have a favorite new line I like throwing around:  The blogosphere is a dangerous place--enter it at your own risk, ignore it to your own peril. 

The blogging phenomenon impacted the '04 presidential election cycle in ways unimaginable just four years previous during the '00 fiasco.  It brought television news anchors, the main stream media, political pundits, and even candidates to their knees.  We happen to have two politicos as members of our congregation (one the political/communications director for the Ohio GOP, and another the communications director for a member of the US House).  They both have expressed the opinion that the '06 and '08 election cycles will be hugely, and I do mean hugely, impacted by the online community.  If you doubt this initial assertion, please take the time to read Hugh Hewitt's latest, Blog: Understanding the Information Reformation That's Changing Your World.

This same phenomenon is also changing the way churches, and those who have relationships with churches do business.  The blogging medium embraces many of the values this generation esteems.  It can be:  immediate, personal, individual, informal, transparent, authentic, accountable, accessible, communal, and direct, to name a few.  However, it can also be:  impersonal, anonymous, a facade, unaccountable, deceptive, radically individual, and destructive. 

The beauty of the blogging community is those blogs that consistently demonstrate irresponsible behavior, or make wildly inaccurate assertions, are quickly relegated to the bottom of the blog heap where they die an ignominious death or plod along with few readers.  However, those blogs that gain a reputation for quality posts and stimulating conversation become entry portals to the blogosphere. 

The blogosphere is a grassroots community.  Just as blogs like Instapundit or Powerline have the ability to circumvent the institutions of the main stream media, so blogs in other circles will be able to circumvent the normal institutional channels to communicate with core constituencies.  One no longer waits for the paper to hit the new stands, the e-mail to make its rounds, the magazine to fall in the mailbox, or even for the sermon to be preached on Sunday.  The blogosphere provides instant access to a number of posters and linkers who are communicating 24/7 about the latest fact, fiction, or fantasy. 

Conferences, papers, sermons, and tidbits are accessible almost as soon as (if not before) they are published, read, spoken, or heard.  Conversations about key topics take place online where they can be read by whoever has the time to peruse the posts and comments.  A few bloggers who link to such conversations can cause an avalanche of views and responses.  All of this takes place in a forum open quite literally to the planet.  It is breathtaking and dangerous.

Blogs are about de-institutionalization and independency.  I do like the idea of independency, but in the context of the community of faith. Somehow, the blogworld captures this--each blog in independent, yet they do not survive without accountability and affirmation. One can speak freely without fear of recrimination, especially if one is not trying to keep a constituency happy. We take a step away from educational institutions as hubs, or large churches as hubs, or hubs altogether, and toward a satellite community of individuals--pastors, theologians, educators, elders, congregants, etc., who together carry orthodoxy, orthopathy, and orthopraxy forward.

Is this a revolution?  a reformation?  or simply a new form of communication that challenges us to do what we do better?  Will we be able to live out a Christian ethic in the blogworld?  Will institutions in the Christian community be able to make the adjustment those in the mainstream seem incapable of making?  Can we stand up to the kind of transparency the blogworld demands?  Are we willing to be held accountable in real time for what we say and do? 

I value the blog (though it will never replace a conversation over coffee).  It makes me accessible to my congregation and them to me.  I view it as a stream of consciousness into which they may plunge or not.  Here, they can read what I read, see how I respond to various social, moral, ethical, theological, and personal dilemmas, and engage other believers (and non) in rigorous (or not so rigorous) conversation.  I value pastors and congregants who take the time to read and engage in conversation.  I value leaders who embrace the blogosphere and take the plunge for better or worse to shepherd, warn, encourage, and instruct others.  We learn from their thoughtful and spontaneous dialogue. 

Just this note here: the blogosphere is a forgiving place.  There is, hopefully, a mutual understanding that words are sometimes typed "on the fly."  One can take them back, provide nuance, restate, or even ask for forgiveness.  Blogs aren't written in stone, like books are written in stone.  However, blogs are published and public, howbeit electronically, and censorship is a cardinal sin.

Though there are already close to 10 million blogs, it is still a brave new world in its infancy.  Let us hope and pray that this will be a tool used in God's grace for His glory and our betterment.  Blog on.

Comments

[Scott Aniol]

I, too, benefit from the blogspere. The one concern I have concerns the plethora of pooled ignorance rampant in some blogs/forums . . .

[Donald C S Johnson]

Pooled ignorance is part of the times, I think. In spite of this difficulty, immediate mass communication is here to stay (whether blogs are or not), so we will have to put up with the pool. I think we will have to adjust our thinking in order to use the medium effectively.

In some ways, blogging increases accountability, especially of institutionalized anything. The media examples over the last six months are fairly well known, and I believe that online communication may have that effect on institutionalized fundamentalism as well.

We do need to learn to be judicious in our own participation, but I think we should participate. I got my first computer 12 years ago (it seems longer!) and was soon involved in on-line communication. We have come a long way since. I am still surprised, however, at how technically challenged many of my peers in the ministry are. I don't expect that we all should necessarily become geeks, but the generations we are most trying to reach are computer literate. We need to be too.

Regards,
Don Johnson
Jer 33.3

[jon]

I am afraid you splash into pooled ignorance anywhere you go, Scott. Do not cast your pearls before swine, or answer a fool according to his folly. The trick is knowing when not to wade into the fray, for all your swordplay may be in vain.

Don, it is worth thinking about the de-institutionalization of the movement. I do like the idea of independency, but in the context of the community of faith. Somehow, the blogworld captures this--each blog in independent, yet they do not survive without accountability and affirmation. One can speak freely without fear of recrimination, especially if one is not trying to keep a constituency happy. We take a step away from educational institutions as hubs, or large churches as hubs, or hubs altogether, and toward a satellite community of individuals--pastors, theologians, educators, elders, etc., who together carry orthodoxy, orthopathy, and orthopraxy forward.

[Donald C S Johnson]

Jon, your last paragraph is quite enlightening. It is almost Baptist!! Autonomy of the local church and all that...

It might be interesting to consider how institutions gain power over a constituency. Perhaps if we could examine it in some world outside of fundamentalism, we could get some insight into strengths/weaknesses in fundamentalism. Can you think of similar structures in other groups?

As I think about, perhaps feminism would be an example. There is a party line, there are some powerful institutions among them, (NOW, etc.) and they are quite merciless to those who step out of line. I don't think fundamentalism is as merciless... well... maybe not..., but there are some parallels.

Anyway, I really appreciate your paragraph there. It makes me think of this in a different light.

Regards,
Don Johnson
Jer 33.3

[jon]

I liked that paragraph enough that I made it a part of the original post.

[Jeff]

Why do most bloggers have limited or absent "About Me" pages...no pictures, bios, etc.?

[jon]

I believe there is a genuine concern about privacy issues. During the "King of the Blogs" competition I was admonished by one of the judges to make my identity fairly clear to a first time visitor. He thought they should be able to know a little about the blog owner with just a click or two.

[Doug]

RE: "I value the blog (though it will never replace a conversation over coffee)"!

STARBUCKS...Yes, Don, say it with me...STARBUCKS!!!

I must be feeling better! :)

[Scott Aniol]

Wow, jon, you've made it big. You've actually risen to the position of Contributing Author at SharperIron.org! Congratulations!

[Jeremy Pierce]

You don't even have to be fundamentalist to be as merciless as the feminists are with those who step out of line. Just look at the TNIV debate. One of the most popular Christian news publications had a comment about how those who are publishing the TNIV are serving an anti-Christian agenda, even though the fundamental disagreement is over the nature of inclusive language in the English language and not over anything related to the gospel. I emailed them about this, and they never responded. I mentioned it on my blog and asked for a clarification or an apology, and they never did anything. This is mainstream evangelicalism, not Fred Phelps.

As for the blogs at the top, I guess I have a very different view of most of them. I'd say that at least 3-4 of the top ten do "consistently demonstrate irresponsible behavior, or make wildly inaccurate assertions". It's when you move down the list that you get those who are much more fair to their opponents and willing to engage in real dialogue. There are exceptions (e.g. Instapundit, Captain's Quarters), but I don't think most of the top bloggers are very fair to the other side or even have an inkling of what motivates them.