— IMHO Wrap-Up —

Posted by Sparky at August 31, 2004 10:35 PM

IMHO, our latest show — IMHO: Blogging, Politics, and Personal Voice — turned out even better than I'd hoped. (You the audience are heartily encouraged to support or contradict that in the comments.)

It was an ambitious assortment of luminaries for us to gather together, and I think our panelists all rose to the challenge. (Well, I guess I can't count John Perry Barlow, who probably would've been great but was apparently running from the police after some reckless protesting or dancing.) I really dig the fact that panelists and audience members hashed out a number of contradictory opinions in a thoughtful, respectful way. I wish it were as easy to debate politics on their own as it was to debate how we write and talk about politics (and, you know, life in general).

A great success of this event, IMHO (can you tell I'm not tired of that joke yet?), was that we got a bunch of people in the audience to get pretty involved in the discussion. That's always a goal of a good panel, but not so easily done. Not only were the panelists rocking the house, but folks in the audience (a pretty savvy bunch, it seemed) really added some great perspectives.

I'm still processing a lot of my reactions to what was said, and I hope we can get some reminiscing and further discussion going here in the comments, but one remark made by Douglas Rushkoff is sticking in my head for now (I can only paraphrase): "The blogosphere is an ecology, not an economy." I realize my sympathy with that idea places me one side of what could have erupted into a bigger debate, but it sums up what has kept me at this for so many years: the interactions more than the measurable results.

Also, a woman in the audience expressed some skepticism about blog culture replacing the kind of community activity she'd experienced as an activist in earlier decades. She worried that thousands of individuals at home, in the dark, by themselves couldn't be as great a force. I disagree with that concern, largely because it's always been my experience that blogging (by which I mean writing, reading, interacting online) has almost always led to more social activity, not less. After all, we got about a hundred people together to talk about this stuff tonight, right? Just like we consistently manage to get a crowd together once a month for our other shows. It''s just another way to get in touch with other people, not to push them away.

Anyway, if you were there, let us know what you thought. And if you're curious, we have some pictures. (Also, feel free to send us any you might have taken.)

Comments (3)

My two cents on IMHO: It was very interesting even to nonbloggers but Jeff Jarvis was a TERRIBLE moderator!!! He was NOT respectful to disenting opinions. He did NOT moderate - he spewed his ideas and opinions over and over and interupted those (a glaring example was Julian Sanchez) with whom he didn't agree.

I understand that bloggers don't want to call him on it because he is a person of some importance in your community. Maybe that's a huge problem with blogging. You're all so vulnerable how can you possibly be honest unless you're one of the IMPORTANT writers??

Posted by: Jen Rosenthal at September 2, 2004 01:05 PM

We asked Jeff Jarvis to participate because he would have opinions, not despite that. His role as moderator was to keep thngs moving along, not to be dispassionate. I actually wish everyone on the panel had more time to speak, but it's a compromise that goes with the set-up. I don't agree with everything Jeff said, either, but I think he did a good job of pulling in contrary views, even if he then chose to voice his own disagreements.

I don't quite understand what you mean by bloggers being too vulnerable to be honest. We're not a uniform community of people who blog, just lots of different people with lots of different ideas who happen to use some similar tools to say our bit now and then. It's a bit of a leap to assume everyone viewed things the way you did, or that we'd all be too starstruck to disagree. Besides, I think one of the most insightful points of the night is that notoriety often restricts your ability to say what you want rather than threatening it.

Posted by: Sparky at September 2, 2004 01:34 PM

Douglas Rushkoff talks a little about the event here:

http://rushkoff.com/2004_09_01_archive.php#109415347543929625

I know the moment he's talking about, and it was one of those moments where I began to cringe about the direction it was about to head in. I'm certainly with Rushkoff on this one, since this has always been stuff I do for intensely personal reasons, and the blog writing I've always preferred has been intensely personal. I know the economic question is a big one for a lot of people, but I know too many people who do it despite the economics rather than because of them, so I always feel a little dispirited when the blog-as-business-model starts being tossed around as the only option.

But, of course, that's just me. It was a valid topic as part of the whole conversation, but like at that big Calacanis/Denton Smackdown at the Apple Store, it just seems really alien to my experience of things.