RSS feedIt seems like a simple formula, discover why people blog, then develop the tools to satisfy their needs and desires. The key of course, which many seem to miss, is the differentiation between need and technology. Is blogging part of the reason, or just a cool technology which facilitates those needs?
Either way, the 4.6 million pages already discussing the question all seem to be looking for a single definitive reason, when it is more likely that weblogs just happen to be a useful and rather timely facilitating technology which satisfies a vast range of social and technical needs. Timing is everything.
Those who’ve tried to answer the question Why do people blog?, usually end up brainstorming a list of things which blogging provides or achieves, such as ego, communication, mass publishing etc. What they’re really answering is “What does blogging technology give to the individual?”, which is not exactly “Why do people blog?”
Blog patterns are a more interesting and significant technique for identifying why bloggers blog. Some work has been done on this in the blogosphere already, including some nice definitions by Edward Lee, but there is more to do.
With patterns, we can identify the types of information, the source, the value, and the value-add provided by bloggers. From this, amongst other uses, we’re able to categorise the A-List bloggers into those who are inventing, pontificating, simply reiterating, or a mix of each. This also quite nicely links with Gladwell’s Tipping Point theories of connectors and mavens.
As an example, the two most important bloggers for my work, are connector/mavens, which direct me to a multitude of sources for information. They provide their own limited embellishments or political bent, but in most cases they are simply a conduit to the original item, which then provides the real value. From these major starting points, lesser known bloggers, typically the inventors, appear and disappear from my reader as they intersect with my current interests and needs.
Subsequently, the A-Listers are mainly collectors of content. That’s not to say they’re not valuable, relevant or not inventing, but by their nature they tend to invent less or add less value to individual entries. The sum of the parts is the value, not so much their embellishments.
Coincidentally, Wired’s recent article on exactly this, came from a cronological analysis of weblog cross links. Different data, same conclusion. Although now it looks like we simply ripped them off, and by linking to it, I’ve perhaps, somewhat ironically, contributed to their results.
Oh well, at least we know we’re on the right track.
(Originally posted to Synop weblog.)