Battle For The Blogosphere:

How The Lefty Blogs Can Win The Blogosphere, Revive Their Party, And Save Our Country (And Why They Won't)

The recent drama in the blogosphere, with righty blogs ostensibly forcing the resignation of CNN Executive Eason Jordan while lefty blogs forced the resignation of lightly credentialed White House journalist "Jeff Gannon", has prompted a spate of "where do the blogs go from here" punditry.

Howard Kurtz rounds up the action.

Michael Barone of USN&WR opines that "The left blogosphere has moved the Democrats off to the left, and the right blogosphere has undermined the credibility of the Republicans' adversaries in Old Media. Both changes help Bush and the Republicans."

Jonah Goldberg observes that, when the blogosphere play media watchdog, "The Left must either focus entirely on the conservative media or it must move even further to the left so it can get out of its clinch with the mainstream media. You can't punch the New York Times if you're hugging it. So far it's done both."

And Kevin Drum wrings his hands, worrying that "it might be time for liberals to realize that even if we manage to collect a few scalps of our own along the way, conservatives gain strength from promoting this brand of warfare far more than liberals do. I hope we're not just being useful idiots by joining in this game."

Well.  This is a battle in which the lefties have some interesting advantages, and which they can win.  I will explain how in a moment.

First, a brief digression into the structure of the blogosphere.  The largest Lefty blog is the Daily Kos. One must register to enlist there; members can leave comments, or write "diaries", which function as blogs within a blog.  In addition to leaving their own comments on other blogs, members can vote on diary entries, to move them up the in-house rankings and call them to other people's attention.  So, for a member, the hours can be whiled away, and there is always plenty to do in Kos World.

But it is a separate world.  Having casually observed them in action on the Gannon hunt, it is clear that they can summon tremendous energy, manpower, and talent to a particular task.  However, I would suggest that a tendency toward groupthink, and a weakness in gathering information from blogs outside of KosWorld, are significant weaknesses which, with experience, may be overcome.  Because the folks there spend so much time in their own world, but can still generate significant buzz, we will call them The Hive.

And who stands against them on the right?  Essentially, an almost totally disorganized pack of hungry bloggers led by the hypercaffeinated Glenn Reynolds, the InstaPundit. Do people on the right "vote" a blog post into popularity?  No.  Are research tasks assigned, or project volunteers sought?  No.  Glenn Reynolds provides a link to a blog, an Instalanche results, and whatever message was there is widely dispersed.  Of course, there are plenty of other large blogs directing traffic, so readers and ideas certainly move independently of Glenn, but he is a major hub.  And since Glenn does not have a comments section, there is no reason to linger at his site- people stop by, and head off into the blogosphere.

So, the Hive versus the Pack - which organizational structure is better at influencing the national debate?

For righties, the answer is important, because we have demonstrated neither the temperament nor the talent to form a useful hive.

But lefties have a significant advantage, because they don't need to choose - although their largest blog is a successful Hive, there are hundreds of lefty blogs out there that could form a powerful Pack.

So how might they improve?  Here are a few specific suggestions:

It is unlikely that a major new hub could simply emerge, so one of the big, established lefty bloggers would need to decide that to beat Glenn, he was going to be Glenn.  Atrios is already a prolific linker, so let's nominate him for the role.  He should do two things.

(1)  Link, link, link to other blogs.  Yes, even more than currently.  And this is your big opportunity to promote moderate voices in the left blogosphere, if that is also a goal ( I think it should be, but who am I?).

(2)  Turn off the comments: they are too numerous to be useful, and if your readers are commenting at your site, they are not out in the blogosphere, are they?  Send those readers out to meet new lefty bloggers, and let them comment there - new blogs will develop, new channels for ideas will develop, and more ideas will be shared.

Now, Kevin Drum frets that hunting media scalps may be a fool's game for the left.  Well, if you can't win on the battlefield in front of you, pick a different battlefield!

- promote new Democratic faces.  Philip Bredesen is being touted for President; Eliot Spitzer may run for Governor of NY; maybe the Left should talk about Spitzer and Bredesen rather than Guckert/"Gannon".  I'm just thinking out loud, here.

- promote Democratic issues.  The left blogosphere has done a good job of driving the debate on Social Security.  For example, Kevin Drum's "Crisis?  What Crisis" theme migrated to the LA Times, and is now the CW.

- promote the Democratic agenda.  What do Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid hope to accomplish this legislative session?  I don't want to know, but lefty bloggers might be intrigued.

- promote new Democratic ideas.  Are there any?  Give some oxygen to lefty think tanks, or any university professor, all of whom are lefty - there must be something more interesting to talk about than Jonah Goldberg's paycheck, or the minimum wage.

Other than turning off the comments (And a few of the other large blogs should follow suit on this), none of this is different or difficult. The change would be emphasis.  And the result could be an invigorated left blogosphere with a deeper bench covering more issues.

So, does the Right need to start drafting its concession speech? Hardly.  First, the changes I mentioned won't happen - turning off the comments would be the single most important step, and now that a righty has suggested it, they can't.  And if they do, I want to head to Jeff Goldstein's site to savor the brutal mocking.

We also have obvious countermeasures that we ought to be taking anyway - for starters, each of us could probably do a bit more to promote the well-done but not well-known blogs on our side.

And I believe there is a specific burden on Kathryn Lopez of the NRO.  My thought - she could increase the readership of the NRO and improve the blogosphere if, through a combination of great personal charm, whip-cracking, and editorial edict, she exhorted the Corner Crew to look for and link to more blogs.

The NRO will win because (my guess) bloggers will be more likely to read and link to NRO articles if they think the payoff might include being Cornered.  I recall the legendary Steven Den Beste saying that his early blogging days were given a big boost by a Corner link.  Well, the next Den Beste is out there today!  (The Left trembles.  What are you waiting for, K-Lo?)

The right blogosphere wins because the many eyes of the NRO will be out looking for blogs to which they can link in order to placate K-Lo. Smart people will find smart blogs, and we will all benefit.

So.  If the left blogosphere decides to rouse itself for a march towards the center, it may well revive a similar instinct in the Democratic Party.  That would, in my humble opinion, be good for the country.

Or, if the Left simply rallies towards a broader range of issues, we on the right will find ourselves with more to do.

Can the Left do this?  Probably not.  By all appearances, the energy, ad revenue, and readership is all on the far left.  Lefties who march to the center will march alone.

But can the Right continue to do its thing?  Stalking the MSM should provide years of value and entertainment, so we are the favorites in the ongoing tussle.  My advice to the Right - stay humble, stay hungry, and smile when you say, "Bring It On."

Comments

[Blue]

"Daily kos may alianate rightwingers but Instapundit alienates leftwiongers. Same thing."

What a claim, GT. If it is true, then it only goes to show that "leftwiongers" are much easier to "alianate" then their ideological counterparts. I don't for instance, recall Glenn chortling at the execution and burning of Americans, as Kos did when the contractors were killed in Fallujah.

[Cliffie]

You forgot one important reason why the Lefty blogs will not link to more diverse blogs - groupthink, which requires censorship. You've seen how Righty blogs link to or even reproduce dissenting views in order to critique them - something noticeably lacking on the Left.

The only way for the Left to survive is, strangely, isolation. They cannot allow their members to be exposed to other ideas or views, or the groupthink might be broken. To the Left, reason is an unpredictable enemy, the enemy of the emotion that sustains them. See what happened to Bernard Goldberg, for example, or the hundreds of callers into conservative talk shows who claim to be former liberals.

Thus the Lefty blogs will remain in their bubble.

[SteveL]

Cliffie, that's certainly the prevailing view on the right, but is it accurate? I'm not sure. I want to know if there is any resistance to the group think. Do all the left bloggers have the completely mindless, robotic responses of so many DU commenters?

In moving through the right blogosphere, I come across those who do and don't support the war in Iraq, criticize and defend the President on a number of issues and who have religious and irreligious views on a wide range of subjects. Dean's World for example, pro Iraq war, but also liberal on many social points and atheist. There's a wide wide range of views. There are many so called "conservative" sites where the primary topic is music, movies or humor, where politics plays a secondary role.

Does a similar dynamic exist at all on the left? I admit I've never seen it, but I haven't looked very hard either.

[Cecil Turner]

"Cliffie, that's certainly the prevailing view on the right, but is it accurate? I'm not sure."

I'm sure part of any comparison would be subjective, but I'm having a hard time finding a comparable Instapundit post to either of the ones I linked above at DKos (the "I'm a Republican so f*** you" post, or the one calling for the death of war supporters)--and those are in the last couple of weeks. I suspect any reasonably middle-of-the-roader would find far more to object to at Kos, but perhaps that's my own bias. (But I think there's little doubt about the relative level of profanity, which strikes me as indefensibly self-defeating.)

"I want to know if there is any resistance to the group think. Do all the left bloggers have the completely mindless, robotic responses of so many DU commenters?"

ISTM that's more a function of the gatekeepers at the particular blog. In the case of Kos, there appears to be a rather rabid response to any commenter challenging the groupthink, no matter how respectfully, whilst orthodoxical excesses are generally cheered. (And obviously that couldn't continue without Kos's forbearance.) That would tend to reinforce the trend and drive it farther from the center, which from my limited observation it appears to've done.

[GT]

Blue,

You are another good example of the one-sided cocoon.

[John Cole]

Groupthink and rapid responses shouting down dissent appears to be the explicit goal at Kos, and that makes it unlike other websites. Kos is even on record stating that his website is intended to be a liberal site for liberals.

I have not even bothered to register there- I am not a liberal and thus do not belong there, not that disagreement do any good. As soon as you disgaree with anything, however so slight, you will be denounced as a jackbooted thug, a brownshirt, or a Rove operative.

If you pay attention, you will notice that what disagreements do take place are almost always procedural in nature. There is never any reflections on the relative merit of an idea- instead, what is discussed is how to implement the already agreed upon agenda. This is along the lines of a recurring theme among Democrats- they haven't lost in recent years because their ideas are unpalatable. They have only lost because the media is against them, Republicans don;t play fair, Republicans have more money, Republicans suppress the vote, Democrats are afraid to show their true beliefs... Those who are interested in cognitive dissonance can have a field day watching the Democrats.

For example- you will not find any discussion whether or not Bush judges should be opposed on an individual basis. It is just assumed that all Bush judges should be blocked, and the group decides which judges deserve more than others to be blocked, and how best to mobilize to do the blocking.

This was not intended as a criticism- just my observation on how things work over there.

[stop zionchimpcorporateneocons]

stop chimpy neocons selected not elected stole election corporate rule bushco haliburton coke-head fascist warmonger PNAC imperialism racist stupid uneducated no blood for oil bush lied pax americana stole ohio mccarthyism censorhip lockbox illegal war leo struass police state stop chimpy neocons selected not elected stole election corporate rule bushco haliburton coke-head fascist warmonger PNAC imperialism racist stupid uneducated no blood for oil bush lied pax americana stole ohio mccarthyism censorhip lockbox illegal war leo struass police state stop chimpy neocons selected not elected stole election corporate rule bushco haliburton coke-head fascist warmonger PNAC imperialism racist stupid uneducated no blood for oil bush lied pax americana stole ohio mccarthyism censorhip lockbox illegal war leo struass police state stop chimpy neocons selected not elected stole election corporate rule bushco haliburton coke-head fascist warmonger PNAC imperialism racist stupid uneducated no blood for oil bush lied pax americana stole ohio mccarthyism censorhip lockbox illegal war leo struass police state stop chimpy neocons selected not elected stole election corporate rule bushco haliburton coke-head fascist warmonger PNAC imperialism racist stupid uneducated no blood for oil bush lied pax americana stole ohio mccarthyism censorhip lockbox illegal war leo struass police state stop chimpy neocons selected not elected stole election corporate rule bushco haliburton coke-head fascist warmonger PNAC imperialism racist stupid uneducated no blood for oil bush lied pax americana stole ohio mccarthyism censorhip lockbox illegal war leo struass police state stop chimpy neocons selected not elected stole election corporate rule bushco haliburton coke-head fascist warmonger PNAC imperialism racist stupid uneducated no blood for oil bush lied pax americana stole ohio mccarthyism censorhip lockbox illegal war leo struass police state stop chimpy neocons selected not elected stole election corporate rule bushco haliburton coke-head fascist warmonger PNAC imperialism racist stupid uneducated no blood for oil bush lied pax americana stole ohio mccarthyism censorhip lockbox illegal war leo struass police state stop chimpy neocons selected not elected stole election corporate rule bushco haliburton coke-head fascist warmonger PNAC imperialism racist stupid uneducated no blood for oil bush lied pax americana stole ohio mccarthyism censorhip lockbox illegal war leo struass police state stop chimpy neocons selected not elected stole election corporate rule bushco haliburton coke-head fascist warmonger PNAC imperialism racist stupid uneducated no blood for oil bush lied pax americana stole ohio mccarthyism censorhip lockbox illegal war leo struass police state stop chimpy neocons selected not elected stole election corporate rule bushco haliburton coke-head fascist warmonger PNAC imperialism racist stupid uneducated no blood for oil bush lied pax americana stole ohio mccarthyism censorhip lockbox illegal war leo struass police state stop chimpy neocons selected not elected stole election corporate rule bushco haliburton coke-head fascist warmonger PNAC imperialism racist stupid uneducated no blood for oil bush lied pax americana stole ohio mccarthyism censorhip lockbox illegal war leo struass police state stop chimpy neocons selected not elected stole election corporate rule bushco haliburton coke-head fascist warmonger PNAC imperialism racist stupid uneducated no blood for oil bush lied pax americana stole ohio mccarthyism censorhip lockbox illegal war leo struass police state stop chimpy neocons selected not elected stole election corporate rule bushco haliburton coke-head fascist warmonger PNAC imperialism racist stupid uneducated no blood for oil bush lied pax americana stole ohio mccarthyism censorhip lockbox illegal war leo struass police state stop chimpy neocons selected not elected stole election corporate rule bushco haliburton coke-head fascist warmonger PNAC imperialism racist stupid uneducated no blood for oil bush lied pax americana stole ohio mccarthyism censorhip lockbox illegal war leo struass police state stop chimpy neocons selected not elected stole election corporate rule bushco haliburton coke-head fascist warmonger PNAC imperialism racist stupid uneducated no blood for oil bush lied pax americana stole ohio mccarthyism censorhip lockbox illegal war leo struass police state stop chimpy neocons selected not elected stole election corporate rule bushco haliburton coke-head fascist warmonger PNAC imperialism racist stupid uneducated no blood for oil bush lied pax americana stole ohio mccarthyism censorhip lockbox illegal war leo struass police state stop chimpy neocons selected not elected stole election corporate rule bushco haliburton coke-head fascist warmonger PNAC imperialism racist stupid uneducated no blood for oil bush lied pax americana stole ohio mccarthyism censorhip lockbox illegal war leo struass police state stop chimpy neocons selected not elected stole election corporate rule bushco haliburton coke-head fascist warmonger PNAC imperialism racist stupid uneducated no blood for oil bush lied pax americana stole ohio mccarthyism censorhip lockbox illegal war leo struass police state stop chimpy neocons selected not elected stole election corporate rule bushco haliburton coke-head fascist warmonger PNAC imperialism racist stupid uneducated no blood for oil bush lied pax americana stole ohio mccarthyism censorhip lockbox illegal war leo struass police state stop chimpy neocons selected not elected stole election corporate rule bushco haliburton coke-head fascist warmonger PNAC imperialism racist stupid uneducated no blood for oil bush lied pax americana stole ohio mccarthyism censorhip lockbox illegal war leo struass police state stop chimpy neocons selected not elected stole election corporate rule bushco haliburton coke-head fascist warmonger PNAC imperialism racist stupid uneducated no blood for oil bush lied pax americana stole ohio mccarthyism censorhip lockbox illegal war leo struass police state stop chimpy neocons selected not elected stole election corporate rule bushco haliburton coke-head fascist warmonger PNAC imperialism racist stupid uneducated no blood for oil bush lied pax americana stole ohio mccarthyism censorhip lockbox illegal war leo struass police state stop chimpy neocons selected not elected stole election corporate rule bushco haliburton coke-head fascist warmonger PNAC imperialism racist stupid uneducated no blood for oil bush lied pax americana stole ohio mccarthyism censorhip lockbox illegal war leo struass police state stop chimpy neocons selected not elected stole election corporate rule bushco haliburton coke-head fascist warmonger PNAC imperialism racist stupid uneducated no blood for oil bush lied pax americana stole ohio mccarthyism censorhip lockbox illegal war leo struass police state stop chimpy neocons selected not elected stole election corporate rule bushco haliburton coke-head fascist warmonger PNAC imperialism racist stupid uneducated no blood for oil bush lied pax americana stole ohio mccarthyism censorhip lockbox illegal war leo struass police state

[Paul Zrimsek]

The last time GT flogged this pet theory, as I recall, the American public's awakening to Reality was supposed to issue in a sure Kerry victory. Anyone else might start to wonder whether Reality is self-interpreting to quite that degree.

Regardless of all that, the argumentum ad populum always works a bit better when you haven't just got done losing an election.

[Myopist]

It's not the clumsy attempts at home spambotting (if that's what the above was) that bug me so much - it's the bad spelling.

I mean, 'censorhip'? 'struass'? They actually want the kooks who think that spell-checkers are some sort of bourgeois plot?

[BumperStickerist]

It's worth noting that geek, esq. and the inestimable Mr. Yglesias fail to note the date on which the Powerline post about Carter was made.

Or take into account the specifics about which Hindrocket was refering.

But they feel better for having mischaracterized the latter while not knowing the former.

[Cathy]

"Blue,

You are another good example of the one-sided cocoon."

Huh? I fail to see how pointing out the cheering the death of American contractors on DailyKos and lack of same on Instapundit is being in a one-sided cocoon. Am I missing something here?

--Cathy

[Geek, Esq.]

Bumperstickerist:

Yes, you are correct. "I personally do not believe they're going to be ready for the election in January ... because there's no security there," is the same as "May Allah strike down the infidels where they stand."

Are people really that deluded to think that expressing serious concerns about the security situation in Iraq is proof one is a traitor? Gawd.

[BumperStickerist]

taking into account the timeline for when the Hinderaker comment was made, and Carter's subsequent statements about the Iraqi elections, I would posit that Carter was simply wrong.

The equation of Carter to Traitor is being made by yourself, Yglesias, and most of the others on what passes for the left. Hinderaker puts Carter in the 'other side' which those who wish to see the US fail and Iraq as well. H

That terrorists share this wish with the UN (among others) is correct.

http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/archives/9225

[Matthew Ryan]

I'm no longer a subscriber but the Economist is a great source for Chavez-Venezuala info. My recollection is that Economist staffers deemed the election of Chaveze a total fraud. Of course Carter diffused the opposition protests when just 48/72? hours after the vote he declared the election legitimate (this prompted the NY Times to tell the right to 'move on'.....just like they told the left in 2000.....d'oh!).

The Euro-centric, Kerry backing Economist can hardly be called a tool of the right.

[GT]

Cathy,

Why yes, you are. Your opinions of Dkos are similar to opinions by those on the "other side" of Instapundit. The fact that Blue and many others here still don't get this shows how much of a cocoon they live in.

[Shana Barrow]

GT, you're making me laugh. If Cathy, Blue and others are purportedly in a cocoon, you must be too since disagreeing with you and not reading the same kind of blogs you do = "cocooned."

I am sure, however, that if they visit lefty blogs, they probably make much more intelligent comments instead of pointing out the obvious.

[GT]

Not at all Shana. If you had bothered to read the thread and folow the arguments you wouldn't have posted such nonsense.

It's very simple. Blue and others are unable to realize that everything they think of left wing blogs, like Dkos, is reciprocated on the other side.

Let's be clear. I am not trying to convince you or anyone else that Dkos is better or worse than Instapundit. I have my opinion about that and quite frankly couldn't care less what you or Blue thinks about that.

What I'm pointing out, is that the ONLY ones that think that right wing blogs are smarter or more logical or better argued than left wing blogs are, well, right wingers. It's a circular argument. People on the left, on the other hand, think the exact opposite. That's all.

Got it now?

You and Blue can believe whatever you want as to who is better. What is delusional however is to think that

[Geek, Esq.]

Matthew:

The Economist did no such thing, to my knowledge. They're not Chavez fans, but accepted his victory:
http://economist.com/displayStory.cfm?story_id=3157671
http://www.economist.com/agenda/PrinterFriendly.cfm?Story_ID=3102178

Note also that the Organization of American States signed off on this as well.

[Matthew Ryan]

Thanks, Geek. I stand corrected. And I guess I need to restore my Economist subscription.

The first link you provided was interesting as it was written by a Carter Center rep on the ground. I think she does a good job debunking the reasons the oppositions thought there was fraud. But her timeline makes it clear why so many still think there was fraud.

In a nutshell this is what the Carter Center found acceptable:
1) at the "last minute" the election authority approved a real time audit of what ended up being just 0.5% of the vote. I don't know what "last minute" means. The day before? The day of? If it's the day of, wouldn't the Carter Center already have their people in place at specific polling stations? It would hardly be a secret where they were if they were given permission at the "last minute".
2) THREE DAYS LATER the Carter Center asks to do a spot check of paper ballots to computer counts. They put observers outside the garrisons where the ballots were stored, then a sample was picked. So this, in their minds, indicates a clean election because the computer counts matched the paper ballots, though each were only secured THREE DAYS after the elections.

Absent any hard evidence there is no case that there was fraud. But the scenario above would not pass muster here. And since the Carter Center endorsed this election based on the above I don't see what credibility they could possibly have if they think this was acceptable behavior by the election authority. Clearly the article indicates they didn't find it acceptable because they asked for more than they got. But then they certified the results anyway. That may have been the best short term solution (a possibly fraudulent election is preferable to civil war) but long term they have set the bar very low for future democratic elections.

[Tom]

I linked to this site via a rightwing blog site because I wish to hear both sides of a story and thus gain a better, hopefully more informed perspective on a given subject. I have no idea if “HIVE” blogging is better than “PACK” blogging and neither do I care. What I do think is that blog sites will succeed when a comment box is provided and intelligent, informed and respectful dialogue is engaged.

On many right-wing sites threads are interrupted by left-wingers who show no Netiquette or even engage in the subject being discussed, they are often ignored and discussion resumes. What I find baffling is that on this site it is even worse.

I have just read the entire list of comments and one thing is very clear to me, that is if GEEK ESQ and GT continue in a childish, dismissive and petulant manner, anything they may have to say in the future of any value will be undermined. Why do pseudo intellectuals resort to insults when they feel they are losing the argument? I do not wish to live in a cocoon especially of my own making, why do you?

I have no axe to grind, I am neither Democrat nor Republican, I’m not even American but what ever your motives are you are doing your cause no favours.

[Geek, Esq.]

"if GEEK ESQ and GT continue in a childish, dismissive and petulant manner, anything they may have to say in the future of any value will be undermined. Why do pseudo intellectuals resort to insults when they feel they are losing the argument?"

Pure comedy gold.

[Julie]

You can't help who posts comments and who doesn't, Tom. Some of the blogs I read have civilized discussions, some don't allow comments, and some allow comments but never ever get any (despite being linked by the big guys on a regular basis.)

One thing about comments, though, that *this* blogger has absolutely right about, is that Glenn and Powerline and Althouse, by not allowing comments, send all of us who just *have* to have our say, out into the wider blogosphere to places just like this. It decentralizes the conversation.

Which was the point.

[Mr. Snitch]

Left/right ideology aside, InstaPundit simply offers the best functionality as a clearinghouse for a certain strata of information. Many pundits, trying to achieve a similar success, are too preoccupied with arguing their case and "being right" to support practical sites that simply work effectively. Reynolds generally posts a link, adds enough of his own spin on the link to place it within some sort of context, and moves on. It works for exactly the same reason BoingBoing works: the site has enough confidence in the quality of its links that it feels no need to grab the reader by the coat and evangelize. "Go ahead, follow any of these links off our site," BB & IP seem to say. "You'll be back for more." There is room for similar clearinghouses on the left, or for that matter on any number of subjects. The success of InstaPundit suggests that more sites like this are viable, but will probably not happen, as this blog's host suggests, on the left. When most people just aren't buying into the arguments being offered in certain quarters, the IP model fails. That failure leads to a retreat to a closed, 'Hive' model, shoring up the walls against invaders wielding blasphemous ideology, and seasoning talk with enough rhetoric (usually hateful) to keep the troops motivated, focused, and on the site. (The KKK, Nazis, flat-earthers, and religious cults are some well-known examples of groups that are obliged to follow this same approach. Lately, I guess you could throw many -though not all!- from MSM into this category as well.) Problem is, the closed model makes few converts - it preaches to the choir. It surely does generate noise and heat, but the sound and fury never spreads beyond those carefully-guarded walls.

[Just Passing Through]

"..the sound and fury never spreads beyond those carefully-guarded walls."

Sometimes it does and when it does it damages blogs as a whole. Continuing using dKos as an example, Kos had a certain amount of currency before his blog closed itself off. That currency is still allowing him a wider voice than an asylum director should by any rights have at this point. I used the analogy above that the dKos hive will occasionally vibrate a string that reaches other companion blogs and the mainstream. Unfortunatly, this brings scrutiny to the types of discussions, comments, and commenters at dKos that can be used to pillory blogs as a whole. That's happening right now. The extensive effort at dKos to make Gannon's sexual preferences an issue and link it to the WH in some fashion is reprehensible and at many levels ludicrous to folks used to the ethical and lifestyle posturing on the left blogs. But we're not the ones that count here. The blogosphere outsider, whether a first time visitor or an MSM person with an agenda, sees only the reprehensible facet, not the comic hypocrisy. The charge of hypocrisy requires a knowledge of prior history or inclinations to mean anything.

On top of that you have the atrios and americablog types who keep themselves in tune with the dKos hive's buzz and send their own clown cars out to spread the word more widely. All of this hurts the left, but it hurts blogs as a whole also.

dKos may be hapless, but it is not harmless.

[Lurking Observer]

In many ways, Commondreams.org used to serve as a counterpart to Instapundit.com

Both primarily served as a clearinghouse of links, although Commondreams was more consistently on the Left-side of the spectrum than Instapundit is (or perhaps Reynolds is simply less doctrinaire in what he links to).

Also, Commondreams didn't link to blogs, but mainly to the press (alternative and mainstream).

Unfortunately, about two years ago, the sorts of things that commondreams linked to steadily shifted from simply liberal to more and more strident Left, and sometimes went beyond.

While I sometimes peek in to see what's going on there, their tenor hasn't shifted back.

[JackStraw]

Just Passing Through,
Great post way up above somewhere. I enjoyed your off the cuff insight and thought it was a good follow up to the thread.

I don't read enough left blogs to have an opinion as to whether or not they cause harm. But I am less concerned at this time; I think that more dialogue brings more outsiders into contact with the blogosphere. And as you and others have described above, the moderate/libertarian/conservative voices are in large part more interesting, rationale, polite, and humorous.

Instituting democracy was a gamble 229 years ago that distributed power sharing could work, and even outperform top down control, blogging is taking advantage of the same dynamic. Although at much lower cost, etc.

[Macho_Nachos]

Tom, it might be time follow in the path of Instapundit and just eliminate the quotes section here.

Out of curiosity, I wonder if right-leaners go to dKos and post intelligent comments like "stop zionchimpcorporateneocons" and "STOP WAR AND BUSHCO NOW!" have thankfully done for us here.

I just wish that I knew enough HTML to INCLUDE a freakin' comments section on my blog.

[Rod Smith]

All of you out thee that think Bush is such a bad person maybe you should think about all of the stupid things that Kerry was affraid to do. not to mention the fact that you are stuck with Bush no mater how much you complain about him.

[Kelly Miller]

http://www.nextstudent.com/get_advice/get_advice.asp
Student loans, and student loan consolidation - Lock in the lowest rate with NextStudent. We also offer a scholarship search engine, private student loans and federal student loan applications.

[Kelly Miller]

http://www.nextstudent.com/get_advice/get_advice.asp
Student loans, and student loan consolidation - Lock in the lowest rate with NextStudent. We also offer a scholarship search engine, private student loans and federal student loan applications.

[Dan]

http://www.loantolearn.com has developed a suite of simple and affordable Education Loan programs that help students achieve their dreams.