How Blogs Reflect Society
Posted on Mon May 07, 2007 at 09:38:51 AM EST
Tags: (all tags)
Chris Bowers writes a couple of posts that seem to argue against striving for diversity in the progressive blogosphere. Chris writes:
[T]he famous and thoughtful Kid Oakland . . . wrote the following:Of course we want diversity in the blogosphere. We want the blogs to reflect the party and the nation...not perfectly...but as much as possible.I have to seriously ask--why? Since when is blogging such an incredibly important public institution, ala our education system, government or business world, that the entire public needs to be represented in it? I'd like to think blogging is that important, but it just isn't.
As Chris himself notes, he has not always been so dismissive of the importance of the progressive blogs, but let's leave that aside. For Chris goes further. Chris argues that striving for diversity in the progressive blogosphere would actually be harmful:
I could not more strongly disagree with Kid Oakland's statement that this is something we would even want. If every individual subset of the larger institution were equally diverse as the institution as a whole, then all of the niches and different functions that each subset fills would be entirely erased. . . .
Come again? Diversity in the progressive blogosphere would erase its function? Wow!
Why in heavens would it do that? Is it Chris' surmise that a non-white male blogger will not focus on the issues the progressive blogosphere focuses on? Because if it is, then I agree with him on that. What I do not agree with is the notion that this would erase the function of the progressive blogosphere. Rather it would enhance it. Chris simply misunderstands one of the purposes for striving for diversity. He writes:
[S]triving for any of the following frankly does not seem either moral or useful to me: . . . Making certain that the progressive, political blogosphere as a whole looks like America, or even all progressives. . . . With that said, here is what I believe is important when it comes to diversity in the progressive blogosphere, and in the progressive movement:
. . . Making certain that all groups within the progressive movement--and all American citizens--have equal access to "new media." . . .
Chris seems not to realize that the former helps achieve the latter. This is the central idea behind the diversity ethic. To inspire unrepresented groups and drive to insure access at ALL levels and all areas. Chris would exclude the progressive blogs from the progressive diversity imperative. This strikes me as bizarre. And in many ways, Chris seems not to really believe it. He writes:
Does MyDD need to be diverse in that we reach out to all people who are writing on the same topics on which we focus? Absolutely--we need to include a much more diverse set of progressive voices who also focus on our topic areas. Do blogs like MyDD need to do a better job of reaching out to make certain that happens? Almost certainly--and expect more on this over the next two months. . . .
Why would MYDD do that if it believes striving for diversity is unimportant, even harmful? I do not get it.
I really cannot understand what Chris is trying to do in this post. But I do not like it. In the end it comes down to this succinct thought from a MYDD commenter:
Is diversity a progressive value?
I think it is. And it seems to me that if you accept that, you would strive to see diversity in all areas, including, maybe even especially, the progressive blogosphere.
| < Waiting For The Godot Republicans: Boehner Edition | ACLU Files Objections to Real I.D. Regulations > |
