Alright. I’ve been puzzling over this question since I started blogging, and I still don’t have a definitive answer. After seening Eric’s creative definition of “blog”, I thought I’d take a crack at it myself.
The Bloggies define a weblog as “a page with dated entries that has a purpose (in whole or in part) of linking to other sites” and they exclude “personal journals”. That’s a start, alright, but it seems a little narrow for my tastes. By that definition, most blogs that I read aren’t actually “blogs”. Frankly, I wouldn’t read something that has the primary purpose of simply linking to other sites. I can’t imagine a more boring read.
To me, a blog can be any web-based form of creative expression in a format that uses dated entries. It can be commentary, it can be news, it can be a personal journal, and it can even be a cat-worship page with hundreds of high-resolution photos (although I wouldn’t read that either).
We can also define blogging by what it isn’t. As CNN is more than happy to report, blogs are — for the most part — an unreliable source of news. Feeling the pressure from bloggers, traditional media outlets love to trash bloggers on this basis. Even Wired.com isn’t beyond taking a shot, as illustrated by the article “Noted War Blogger Cops to Copying“. No, bloggers do not, in general, verify their sources or even credit their sources as thoroughly as they should, which leads me to believe that reporting the news is not for amateurs. Reporting opinion, on the other hand, is for every blogger and his highly photographed cat. Bloggers excel at expressing their reactions to current events and even mouldy, old non-current events.
What’s more of a mystery to me is why people become so easily addicted to reading and writing blogs. For example, why are you still reading this? Go outside and do something meaningful, for crying out loud! As for myself, I think I’ll lounge on some formed meat for a while.