ePluribus Media Community || citizen journalism, for the people, by the people

I am no longer interested in blogs, bloggers or blogging

by Welshman

Mon Apr 17, 2006 at 05:48:45 PM EST

I have never liked the idea of "blogs" or the concept underlying it: "A frequent, chronological publication of personal thoughts - often a mixture of what is happening in a person's life and what is happening on the Web and in the world, a hybrid diary/guide/opinion/information source of uncertain quality.

It covers everything from a teenager's record of daily loves, hates, music and angst to sites that specialise in a huge spectrum of interests and preoccupations and sometimes mixes the two.

It is a weird world.

commentary :: :: :: buzz-it!

It has "diaries" and "opinion" interspersed with analysis and information by people most of whom you don't know with qualifications, experiences and backgrounds that are equally unknown. It has groups that can operate at times like true communities or behave like high school cliques.

It creates its own celebrities and defends them to the hilt and tears down the celebrities created outside its own sphere.

It has great writing and it has bad writing, informed opinion and badly assembled thoughts. It is used to communicate ideas and to intelligently inform and to spread rumours and conspiracy theories.

It encourages activism in the real world but is often self-absorbed. It demands respect but regards it as a sign of independence by offering none. It lives off the mainstream media and at the same time despises it - yet, it is enraptured if featured in it.

It demands absolute freedom and even the freedom to offend and abuse and by doing so limits that of others. It calls-out everything and everyone but has strict rules and a hysterical response about being called out itself.

It contains the very good and the very bad in a huge mess of both that has grown exponentially. You can regard its importance by being either a blogger enjoying, or obsessed by, its energy and its content or as someone outside valuing it for just its size as a communication resource. You can either engage in the mess as a blogger or you can use it as a member of congress uses it to disseminate information.

Last week, Jotter tells me that on Daily Kos:

I was top of the mess. I was top of five days in which I saw the best and the worst of what blogging is about.

I got the best from it in the form of 323 people recording support for the imprisoned Iraq war objector Flight Lieutenant Malcolm Kendall-Smith, the list of whom and the accompanying comments will go to a book-binder later this week before being sent to him in Colchester Prison.

I saw the worst of it with two of the people on that same list, one of whom posted a "news comment" that completely missed the real import of a story in the Scotsman and the other that accused scientists of bias in their clinical studies whilst preferring the evidence of his own opinion.

Then there came at the end of the week the events on Daily Kos and the whole celebrity issue.

No. I definitely don't want to be a blogger. I certainly don't want to be a "known name" blogger. I have tried various things to prevent it. I handed over ownership of New International Times to another. In January, I limited myself to one diary a month on DKos, a resolution that gradually weakened under the compulsion to write. I have wandered the blogosphere to find a home.

Do I want to give up writing? No. So what to do? It is dictated by two things that are in my diary commitments next week.

The first is to try and verify a story that appeared in only the rather obscure although excellent UK newspaper The Scotsman, which was picked up as being true by the Washington Post. This states that a Foreign Office contact says the UK will not provide troops for an invasion of Iran and, in somewhat vaguer terms, will not provide support to the USA for such an invasion. Confirmation of this can only come from the Downing Street and Foreign Office press offices. On Tuesday I shall try and contact them and get a statement out of them, as the traditional media does not appear to have done so.

The second item in my diary is that I need to contact representatives of Malcolm Kendall-Smith to obtain an address to which to send the bound copy of DKos comments of support. I shall also want to try and set up an interview with either his lawyer or the "friend" that has been quoted elsewhere, as he is not able to give interviews himself.

I shall choose and need to make these contacts in the name of the eMedia News Agency and, as a result, its output will not be in the name of Welshman but in that of the name of the agency. Welshman will cease to be known around the place as a frequent blogger but will become a news analyst and reporter for the electronic media.

The news agency will undertake news analysis with a centre-left bias, will operate to the high standards of ePluribus Media, will follow the guidance provided by its advice to citizen journalists, will find and not simply re-iterate news and will try to develop editorial management. It will try and enlist others after selection to join its effort, where fact is more important than opinion and where getting out accurate information on major issues in the name of the agency is more important than any by-line that is awarded to the individual.

If ever eventually accepted by the board of ePluribus Media, it will become known by a fuller title "ePluribus Media News Agency".

So that's it. Welshman as a blogger is slowly going to disappear as a habitual resider of blogs. eMedia News Agency will start supplying all blogs wishing to syndicate its output. Hooray!

I am no longer interested in blogs, bloggers or blogging | 29 comments (29 topical, 0 hidden)

your next in line.. (5.00 / 3) (#1)

You're next up for a article in WaPo or appearances on Sunday talkshows! But, seriously, I don't see why you can't do both, or why you think getting readership on dkos is bad.

I do like the sound of eMedia news.

by intranets on Mon Apr 17, 2006 at 06:12:45 PM EST

I guess its about objectivity and ... (5.00 / 3) (#2)

...issues about "self" not becoming more important than issues and about not writing to play to the audience and not being bound by the conventional wisdom of any particular site and.. Oh, I don't know. I want to be free of the mess and disciplined by the act of trying to become a good electronic media reporter and news analyst.

by Welshman on Mon Apr 17, 2006 at 06:23:06 PM EST
[ Parent ]

: If this is what you wish... (none / 0) (#24)

...then I'm a firm believer that this is what you'll create for yourself. If you don't want the writing to be about you, then you won't make it about you (although you'll always shine through). That goes for writing under the already-recognized Welshman label, or as you transition to your excellent eMedia News entity.
Although I admire certain writers who've become popular on the blogs, I don't get the cult of personality stuff; I'm a loner by nature (although I was a flight attendant for 15 years and surely never would have chosen that career had I not really liked people and socializing).
By being a loner, I mean that I've always marched to my own drumbeat (or at least tried to). I have an aversion to being just like everyone else -- and I would guess that most of us here are much the same. I want to get along with others, I just don't necessarily want to be just like them!
Writers. But we're a study in contrasts...
We want to share our work and, of course, have others read and be moved by it; attaining that requires that we actively move towards getting recognized in some form or another, doesn't it?
Ah, but writing is a solitary art, as is reading. People? We don't need no stinkin' people! Give us a glass a wine, some nice music if we so desire, and leave us alone to write! :o)
I've seen so many authors on C-Span's BookTV mention this nervousness they have in getting interviewed or having to go out and promote the book they've nurtured in their more preferred state of quiet and contemplative solitude. Some of them say it's a difficult shift. But, I guess as writing genearlly leans on a whole variety of interests and talents and experiences to pull off well, even the shyest of us can force ourselves to endure that public crush or intrusion into our contemplative world if it's something we care deeply enough about.
As you can see, this diary of yours is timely, Welshman. I've kind of gravitated from your original thesis, and have now moved to the one that I find myself struggling with presently: I'm beginning to get the requests for interviews trickle in on the PTSD work. My local work with The Bridge Home project tasked by the Mayor of Dixon also has me increasing my visibility here locally as well (I've been getting calls from local elected officials for help with data and research, for example; and we've a meeting with our state's Co-chair of the House Committee on Veteran's Affairs on Friday).
I can't say 'no' to any of this because the issue is such an important one...one that I've been working towards.
But I'm torn. I'm very happy to have the work move onto a broader plane; but, on the other hand, I don't yet know what that means as I type in the quiet of my room. I didn't begin this to be a 'spokesperson' per se. I'm no more of an expert on this issue than any interested citizen would be if they spent hours on end learning about it for the past 3 seasons. Yet, there's such a vacuum out there on this topic, that I've been sucked in by it and have had some solid success.
I can't say that I haven't worked towards it, or that I haven't marketed the issue; I've done both of those with goals that I set for myself in mind. Now that it's beginning to happen a bit (especially since I began my blog), it's just become such an interesting time.
I'm in this transitional period as what I've worked on the last few years slowly gets replaced by this more important -- and time-consuming -- work for a greater cause. I have my feet in both, however, and I've got so much going on, that I yearn for the day when I have only one version of myself to deal with. :o)
What I try to keep in the foreground is this: it's definitely not about me. What I write about is definitely not about me. I mean, for me that's easy to say: combat PTSD really isn't about me. It's about all of those military families that are struggling. I think that's my personal counterweight. I understand you don't naturally have that as you move forward with your plans; but, that same attitude can translate to your work, too.
I figure as long as we writers are doing the work to forward the enlightenment of others vs. the goal being what they can do for us, then I think we'll wind up on the right side of things.
Well! That was surely a marathon there wasn't it? And I didn't even stretch and warm up before I began; I'm going to have some major finger cramps tomorrow, Welshman -- or whatever you call yourself [wink]. Thanks for a really thought-provoking piece of writing as always.
And cheers to eMedia News Agency!
On PTSD Combat | Email list | Book
by ilona on Thu Apr 20, 2006 at 02:34:27 AM EST
[ Parent ]

With hand outstretched (5.00 / 2) (#3)

I'm stretching my hand out to you with the intent of extending a very firm grip and shaking yours. You have obviously moved to the next plane. We DO have business cards electronically, I believe, if the need should arise that incorporates our logo etc.

Please pursue both stories - I've read the Scotsman and come to the same conclusion as you have. I picked up on it via Google news and selecting the U.K. to narrow it down. The Scotsman has consistently shown it's face.

We both share the same questions - our targets are just on different sides of the ocean. Welshman, I'm excited for you and the adventure you are heading into! I'm sure we are all looking forward to the results.

Luck be with you!
Love
Mom a/k/a kfred

by kfred on Mon Apr 17, 2006 at 06:43:04 PM EST

I should make clear... (5.00 / 1) (#6)

..that eMedia has no/will not have any site other than this one.

Whether this site wants to own what it will try to become is up to the board of ePluribus Media to decide. I haven't asked in case I get a "No" - I'm just doing and will see what happens!

And it isn't UK centered. Third on my list to to telephone is +1 (703) 697-5131, your Department of Defense, to find out if it has a casualty list yet resulting from the co-ordinated attack by insurgents reported by AP:

U.S. troops repelled an attack Monday by Sunni Arab insurgents who used suicide car bombs, rocket-propelled grenades and automatic weapons in a coordinated assault against this city's main government building and two U.S. observation posts.
The fighting in Ramadi, the capital of Anbar province, provided fresh evidence that the insurgency is thriving in Sunni Arab-dominated areas despite last month's decline in U.S. deaths.

My interest in this story is that co-ordinated attacks of this type are infrequent. It could be a strong indicator of a renewed and changed initiative by insurgents.

Yikes, transatlantic phone costs! That is why I need to work with others. Do you know of any volunteers?

by Welshman on Mon Apr 17, 2006 at 07:23:32 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Welshman - some answers (5.00 / 1) (#7)

Do you know how to get to the Investigative site? At any given moment you could put requests over there. You'll have to register and be "cleared" by standingup (you may have already been cleared, I personally don't know).

Once cleared you would post a "tip". In that tip you'd explain what you are looking for and then folks would respond with their research, volunteering time, or whatever. It isn't public like this one which is why I suggest it. If that's not a viable plan, then we'll move to plan 'B' which would be for you to email your requests into the "tip" line which is up in the right hand corner: "Send us a Lead".

Does that help?

by kfred on Mon Apr 17, 2006 at 07:35:43 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Oh - and I'm one of the BoD Advisors (none / 0) (#8)

as is luapt down below. You've already been read by some of those Board members also. I'm sure it will be on the agenda for the next meeting<g>.

by kfred on Mon Apr 17, 2006 at 07:38:06 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Very much so (none / 0) (#9)

I must admit Cho suggested this some time back but I put it on the backburner. Like most things on my stove, it gets forgotten and burnt in the process!

I'll check. Thank you.

by Welshman on Mon Apr 17, 2006 at 07:39:48 PM EST
[ Parent ]

: Iran is on our radar on the investigative site.... (5.00 / 1) (#10)

Please do come on over and take a look. I put up some disturbing info just today...MEZ. We'll all be watching for you...
Welshman, always remember that "every day is a new day". And I really mean that........our world is just so very exciting and staff here the best!

by avahome on Mon Apr 17, 2006 at 07:51:20 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Skype (5.00 / 1) (#15)

Perhaps you should look into Skype and convince your collaborators to do likewise. Cheapest of fixes. We here at ePMedia are a long winded lot and our discourse ranges from the arcane to the obvious, from dry wit to Stooges slapstick. Over the past year we have evolved into a self regulating, supportive, cohesive group, having traversed the predictable,inevitable conflicts which beset any group process.

Your description of that which you find oppressive in the blogosphere struck me as an apt description of what oppresses my spirit about people in general-any place, any time. The blogworld is not immune to mental illness, posturing, indiscriminate cruelty, and the preposterous scrambling over one another to achieve some higher perch in the status tree. Just like the rest of life.

The answer? To seek out those who do not vex your spirit, rain on your parade, or throw poison into your enthusiasm. It is not always happy chocolate at ePMedia but we strive for reason and logic, knowing full well that "the sleep of reason produces monsters."

by DEFuning on Mon Apr 17, 2006 at 10:26:05 PM EST
[ Parent ]

: Amen. (5.00 / 2) (#16)

And... I have had hotlisted for ages this commentary at Booman, by Scribe, to read every once in a while as a reminder. On Community Conflicts

by Cho on Mon Apr 17, 2006 at 10:42:05 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Ditto Kred's comment. (5.00 / 2) (#4)

I see Kfred's beat me to the punch!
But Welshman! Wow!

Okay, I know saying that this is such an honor runs absolutely contrary to everything you just expressed in your commentary about celebrity cults, but really, it is an honor, partially because affirms the value in everything we've been trying to do with the research, the vetting of information, the timelines, the crossing our Ts and dotting our Is as best as we can... So thanks, and again, wow...

[grin]

So okay, was it the $250,000 microwave, the bluebird, avahome's daffodils, Thoreau, or wmtriallawyer's post?

[grin again]

by Cho on Mon Apr 17, 2006 at 07:00:19 PM EST

WM's diary made me feel.. (5.00 / 2) (#11)

..that I wasn't alone in some of my views.

But the bluebird convinced me where in the States I could find a nice place to cyberly hang out that was like my own beloved Wales!

by Welshman on Mon Apr 17, 2006 at 07:57:34 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Pics of Wales..................... (5.00 / 2) (#12)

Please if you have any, we'd love to see them. If you have any problems getting them posted ...give me a holler! It took me a while to get the hang of it all......but every day is a new day for me!

by avahome on Mon Apr 17, 2006 at 08:12:59 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Hmm... (none / 0) (#14)

..but if I am not to blog them, I will have to find a news story with which to associate them!

Drudge beat me to it the other day by publishing the story about the girl who was fined $396 for applying make-up whilst driving near Pwllheli, seven miles from my home village.

I was a bit shaken to find it publicised on an American site and by Drudge of all people. It has changed my mind about what is of world importance. I am sure the eMedia New Agency can find some local news on which to pin some piccies :)

In the meantime, could someone send me an email to remind me how to do the ePluribus Media logo without falling foul of Kos's rule. (Yes, I know I was give the html but, yes, I have forgotten it!)

by Welshman on Mon Apr 17, 2006 at 09:03:49 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Did someone do this? (none / 0) (#17)

If you don't have Welshman's email addy, send the instructions to me (sorry, I don't know either!) and I'll forward them on to him. Thanks!

by kfred on Tue Apr 18, 2006 at 09:10:28 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Two old commentaries on signature lines (none / 0) (#19)

How to add the logo to your signature line using graphics and without using graphics.
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
by wanderindiana on Tue Apr 18, 2006 at 12:25:29 PM EST
[ Parent ]

: Thanks Wander! What a guy! n/t (none / 0) (#20)

by kfred on Tue Apr 18, 2006 at 03:17:44 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Speaking of the same wavelength... (5.00 / 1) (#13)

I posted a diary on the big orange today entitled "Fatigue" that encapsulates the same feelings you are having in this commentary.

Ironic. Great minds must think alike...although I think your writing better captured my mood than I did.

by wmtriallawyer on Mon Apr 17, 2006 at 08:55:23 PM EST
[ Parent ]

I'm usually behind if I'm awake (5.00 / 3) (#5)

but this time I actually caught a post in near-realtime after having commented to wmtriallawyer's apology only two days late. It seems it applies here so I'll excerpt it and put you to the whole. First, non-status-oriented kudos to the wanting-to-remain=nameless author in proximity of this post :-)

we're not doing it...

We're not doing it for kudos.

We're not doing it for advertizers.

We're doing it cause we're {EXPLETIVE} angry that WaPo and Companies have joined the gang who they're supposed to watchdogging.

Following from ilona's lead, above, we're doing the work WaPo should be doing if they weren't {EXPLETIVE} married to {EXPLETIVE} #1.

by luaptifer on Mon Apr 17, 2006 at 07:18:37 PM EST

Whatever you do... (5.00 / 1) (#18)

...keep doing it, Welshman!

by Jeff Huber on Tue Apr 18, 2006 at 11:39:47 AM EST

However you choose... (none / 0) (#21)

...to do it, I will look forward to what you have to write.

And if you ever need something checked out in the Washington DC/Baltimore area, let me know.

by BarbinMD on Tue Apr 18, 2006 at 04:55:28 PM EST

Or me. (none / 0) (#22)

That is, if you need something checked out DC wise.

by wmtriallawyer on Tue Apr 18, 2006 at 08:14:48 PM EST
[ Parent ]

I have a DC question (5.00 / 1) (#23)

Dunno if either of you can help. Rep. Richard Pombo lives in a "Capitol Hill" apartment. Where (he tells a California reporter doing a profile) he likes to eat pizza and watch Fox News. Family's back in the District (son plays HS sports, etc.), and he reports no assets owned in DC area.

I'm curious what the apartment arrangements are. Is it a sweetheart deal? Who owns the building? And so on? What kinda rent does he pay, if any?

No idea how to find any of this out, but sure would like to know...

BTW, have you and/or Welshman joined up with Investigates yet? It's a different kind of world over on the other side. Somewhat over my head some of the time, but plenty of meat, and virtually no ego flare-ups in sight.

by Land of Enchantment on Thu Apr 20, 2006 at 12:01:19 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Property Owner in DC (none / 0) (#25)

Richard Pombo is listed as the owner of this property in DC. He took ownership of said property in April 2003.

This Google-cached report says the property sold for its full asking price and had been on the market for 144 days before the sale.
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
by wanderindiana on Thu Apr 20, 2006 at 08:34:47 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Dang, that was fast WI (none / 0) (#26)

I didn't even get a chance to look it up before you were all over it.

by wmtriallawyer on Thu Apr 20, 2006 at 10:33:37 AM EST
[ Parent ]

: Some of those folks... (none / 0) (#28)

...from the Investigates group are quite astonishing. I'm better at connecting serendipitous dots. wanderindiana's reply on Pombo's residence (parent to yours) raised new questions. So, hoping you'll see this, I refer you to my reply to same. Perhaps you could still do some DC research? Or know some answers to the 17 questions I asked? (Keeping in mind that when someone uses "17", it's almost always a made up number.)

by Land of Enchantment on Fri Apr 21, 2006 at 01:33:34 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Something's wrong with this picture (none / 0) (#27)

Your first link doesn't work. Perhaps it was an expiring search result? At any rate, I'm assuming that you're right about Pombo's ownership of this $479k property, probably and condo or coop of some sort. Though it seems a bit odd to be paying full asking price for anything that's been on the market nearly 5 months. But I'll leave that aside.

It wouldn't be that remarkable for a Congressman to own real estate in DC. What I don't understand is why it wouldn't appear on his financial disclosure statements. Is there something more in here worth looking at? Other Congress critters report real estate owned in the DC area. Why not Pombo? What are the legalities of "failure to report"? Is it an ethical lapse, illegal to a more significant degree, or is it entirely voluntary?

I recall reading, but can't now seem to find, a profile article on Pombo that talked about his wife moving back to California with their kids. IIRC, it said it was so his son (the oldest of 3 kids) could go to high school "back home". That's the part I'm going from memory on.

In looking for that, I noted the following snippets from my files:

10/2/01, a profile in the Contra Costa Times (newspaper in Pombo's district) said that Pombo:

added a four-car garage to his home outside Washington
It's reasonable to assume that one wouldn't build a four-car garage for a rental, so presumably he purchased that home. (Wherever it was, in MD or VA...)
In Oct 2001, the three kids were 13,8, and 5
In 2002, Pombo, Sr. transferred 10.4% interest in 500 acre ranch to each of four sons, including the Congressman. Pombo reports its value in financial disclosures as between $250-500k (according to San Francisco Chronicle)
There's two business partnerships for that ranch. One for ownership and the other for operations? The operation includes a feed lot. Pombo's stake in the operations partnership dates from 1995. Haven't come across any indication what his percentage stake in that partnership is.
By fall 2003, the family's already moved back to California. The eldest would be 15 by then, and in high school. He plays baseball and is on the wrestling team, both of which activities are regularly reported on in the hometown paper, the Tracy Press (as are the various activities of dozens of other Pombos in town, and police reports on crimes committed at addresses on streets named Pombo)
January, 2003, Congressman Pombo gets a promotion. In addition to getting more power and staff, he also gets a salary increase upon being chosen House Resources Chair.
Pombo's wife has been paid roughly $50k per year salary from campaign funds at least since 2001. So combined family gross income is well over $200k.
The California residence does not carry a mortgage - at least none is reported (but who knows what's buried in the two ranch partnership agreements?) Financial disclosure shows only assets, no liabilities associated with ranch partnerships. Perhaps he's reporting a net value; value of equity? Might be interesting to look at those agreements - but are such things filed as public record? We need someone looking stuff up in the San Joaquin County Courthouse as well as in DC!!!
Pombo's income from ranch partnerships reported in 2004 as 15-50k, but in 2004 as $6-17.5k. Quite likely low end of 15-50 in '04. Perhaps difference reflects nothing more than changes in reporting categories.
$479k mortgage (extrapolating from my own refinance from same time period) might carry a mortgage in the ballpark of 400k, monthly payment perhaps $3000, very roughly. Perhaps less, depending on equity carried over from sale of that home with the four-car garage. Affordable on his family income. No idea what kind of place $479k would buy on Capitol Hill three years ago.
Meanwhile, back at the "ranch": Pombo's father owns a another "ranch" on Altamount Pass back in California, from which he derives annual income from wind power leases around $125k. Pombo raised a few eyebrows by intervening at Interior regarding regulations on bird kills at wind farms. Claims no knowledge of letter about same which bears his signature. He (unlike Rumsfeld) personally signs his own letters to constituent families of Iraq casualties; not indicated whether the Interior correspondence for favors on wind farms was autopen or actually signed.

This leaves me wondering: Pombo's financial disclosure statements show no assets or mortgage in the DC area. Only back in the district in California. Why??? Where was that previous home "outside Washington"? What kind of numbers have been attached to real estate transactions? The outlines seem unremarkable (aside from the 4-car garage): So why has none of this been reported on financial disclosures?

I recall after the Cunningham story broke, someone advised that investigators should be looking at real estate transactions of members. That was, after all, exactly what brought the Duke-Stir's scandal to light.

All I know about these disclosures is what the San Francisco Chronicle has reported. I've been through EVERY article mentioning Pombo that I could find through Lexis Nexis. Have his reports via that source from 2004 and 2005. In 2003, the published the info on other members of the northern California Congressional delegation, but Pombo's wasn't available when they went to press. Didn't find reports before '03, though search on other terms than Richard Pombo will be necessary to confirm.

by Land of Enchantment on Fri Apr 21, 2006 at 01:17:33 AM EST
[ Parent ]

: Replied to your post on the Investigates site. (none / 0) (#29)

What I already posted is a dead giveaway (the links still work for me), but I laid out all the details on the Investigates site (I had posted them all here but thought better of making it so available).
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
by wanderindiana on Fri Apr 21, 2006 at 05:03:49 AM EST
[ Parent ]