Link Essay 1 - Rough Draft - Elvis Joseph

Here's the link to my rough draft.

http://docs.google.com/View?id=ddkxhw7r_1cm4vkbgw

I put all my thoughts down into this rough draft and finished making my points. After summing up the total number of words - it came up to 1501.

I confess that I cut down on one word to make it 1500!

Elvis

Backup: Essay 1 - Rough Draft

Elvis Joseph

Mr. Leake

English 105

28 September 2009

Revolutionary Literacy

We are changing. Stopping the relentless pull of time is impossible, but what we can do is see how we have changed during that period. We can look back into ancient days when man began putting down ideas and see the reactions society had to that new idea. Another one of these few literary inspiration is seen at the time of the Gutenberg’s printing press. Here we can examine people’s reaction to the change in writing and reading habits and we can compare that to our own (Carr).

Now we are at another one of these focal points of change where we can draw upon past human experiences and see how the future may turn out. Now is the age of quick, accessible information – where people can stop remembering information because they can find what they need without any hassle.

Various opinions have been made on how the internet is changing us and especially how it changes the way we think. Some of these opinions come from some notable writers such as Clive Thompson, Chris Hedges and Nicholas Carr. Carr tells of how the internet has totally transformed humans, and we have yet to realize it. “What if I do so much reading on the web not so much because the way I read has changed, i.e. I’m just seeking convenience, but because the way I THINK has changed” (Carr). In this simple statement, Carr summarizes his entire article and at the same time, expresses a profound concept and way of looking at this situation. Carr argues that humans are inevitably “not only what we read. We are how we read” (Carr).

Carr argues that the new web age has brought about a transformation not just in how we collect information, but also in how we read the material presented to us. Carr says that now we just “zip along the surface like a guy on a jet ski”. This quote effectively captures Carr’s point – we just “bounce” from webpage to webpage, lacking the patient to read anything in depth at all, while not thoroughly reading anything. This has apparently changed the way and the pace at which we absorb information and thus the way we think. Carr then goes onto to mention previous literary landmarks such as the invention and popularization of writing and the easy availability of books being made – both of which were frowned upon but ultimately ended up being the giant that the dwarf sat on to be taller than the giant (Carr).

I’ve seen the proof of Carr’s opinion in my own life. Before summer break, I usually spent my free time just cooped up near the fireplace, soaking up a good fantasy book – not browsing through social networking sites. Then when school was done, I put down the books and delved into the intricacies of the web (particularly facebook). This, I led myself to believe, was a radical change in myself, something I was proud of. That was until school started again and I brought the Devil’s Highway with the intent of immersing myself in it. It turned out that I couldn’t last 3 pages without either falling asleep or changing my facebook status.

Frantically, I ditched the new book for one of my long-time favorites - The Lord of the Rings. I can only describe the feeling as true horror as I learnt that I couldn’t read anymore. After the first few paragraphs, I would unintentionally start to skim and before long I would give up on my reading. That was about when I was brought Carr’s article as an assignment. I admit that even though I found the subject very interesting and pertaining to my situation, I skimmed the last few pages. In my own way, I’ve proven that what Carr talks about – the change in the way we think – is true and come to realize and accept this truth. I’ll confess that I changed my facebook status to “I HAVE TO DO THIS OR I WILL DIE” just as I was about to get this paragraph finished.

Chris Hedges, in his article Bad Days for Newsrooms—and Democracy, is overly pessimistic about the United States and the new generation. He starts out by stating that newspapers are on the rapid decline. Hedges then talks about how newspapers are very important to society. In Hedges’ words, “Newspapers, when well run, are a public trust. They provide, at their best, the means for citizens to examine themselves, to ferret out lies and the abuse of power by elected officials and corrupt businesses, to give a voice to those who would, without the press, have no voice, and to follow, in ways a private citizen cannot, the daily workings of local, state and federal government” (Hedges). These veritable facts shown in the print cannot be compared to the writings on the internet, especially those of bloggers according to Hedges. This, Hedges says, is because of the lack of credibility of the bloggers. No one fires the bloggers and they almost never acknowledge their own faults.

Hedges goes on to say that the Internet cannot take up the mantle of newspapers mainly because the internet is made for browsing not reading and according to Hedges, it shows. People spend much less time on newspaper sites than they do on newspaper themselves. Because of this, Hedges thinks that these days are bad days for newsrooms (Hedges).

William Badke follows Hedges line of thought. He too believes that the internet had degraded our critical thinking and research capability. Badke writes, “Encountering the library's information environment is like facing raging beast after raging beast until you pathetically retreat to the info desk, forced to explain your ignorance and raw fear to a stranger”(Badke). Badke uses this sentence to show the ignorance and lack of use of libraries by the youth today who instead use Google for all research if possible.

Badke then goes on to show how the “older” generation today has failed the younger generation. He says that his generation has “failed to explain to this generation what kind of information they were dealing with when they threw words into Google's search box. They were not terribly familiar with the mechanisms that were in place earlier to achieve quality control and to determine what could be viewed as scholarly, or even reliable, information. They had no means to distinguish the essential difference between traditional publications and the average website” (Badke). Badke then cuts down to the heart of the matter saying that there is a breakdown of knowledge and a sudden increase in inadequate research because students nowadays prefer using any website off Google over the scholarly paper written by the seasoned university professor.

As if to shed a positive light on this discussion, Clive Thompson’s article brings about it not just solid facts but hope for a better future. Thompson quotes, Andrea Lunsford, a professor of writing and rhetoric at Stanford University, whose opinion is based upon a study of college students between their academic and social writing. Clive Thompson pulls up a new idea that there is an ongoing “literacy revolution the likes of which we haven’t seen since Greek civilization”. Thompson is very optimistic in his piece compared to Hedges who is completely pessimistic of everything and everyone. Thompson writes that most students today write much more than students did fifty years back. Also, he writes that there is no destructive change in academic writing as a result of the new forms of short-hand typing such as texting or Twitter updates (Thompson).

In my opinion, the readers and writers of today are much different from those that lived a generation ago. We rely much more on the web than we thought and our dependence maybe our greatest achievement or our greatest undoing. We are becoming more impatient as both writers and readers and this is becoming readily apparent in our blog posts and in our inability to read from un-condensed passages. However, I think that there is a huge advantage here that isn’t readily visible. An advantage that may lead us into writing and reading into a whole new, radical way that is very benefiting to literacy as a whole (along with Thompson’s point). Even though a lot of people such as Badke, Carr and Hedges may not see the different and better path that writing and reading on the blog will show that helps literacy as a whole, I believe that there is benefit, like the benefits of previous literary landmarks that were put down at their time.

In my opinion, this new form of reading and writing (brought on with the dawn of the internet) is our greatest achievement, because in just the same way humans put thoughts into writing and made published writing more available through the Gutenberg’s printing press, we are now making our own great literary landmark – writing and reading on the internet – even though it may have its own short-term disadvantages the same way other literary landmarks had.

Works Cited

Badke, William. "How We Failed the Net Generation." Online 33.4 (July 2009): 47. MasterFILE Premier. EBSCO. [Library name], [City], [State abbreviation]. 28 Sep. 2009 .

Carr, Nicholas. "Is Google Making Us Stupid?." Atlantic Aug 2008. 28 Sep 2009. .

Hedges, Chris. "Bad Days for Newsrooms—and Democracy." 21 July 2008. Truthdig, Web. 28 Sep 2009. .

Thompson, Clive. "Clive Thompson on the New Literacy." 24 Aug 2009. Wired Magazine, Web. 28 Sep 2009. .

I picked this article http://docs.google.com/fileview?id=0B8zniGLMpAg4YmUwM2EyZTktOThiMi00YmNmLWEzM2YtMmEzOWQ3ZWY1NzI4&hl=en, because it talked about information on studies on the effect of electronic media on literacy - something relevant to what we did in class over the past couple of weeks.

My experiences ...

So far my experience in writing and responding to fellow peers has been a great one and one that was completely unexpected. As I mentioned in my first blog post, the word “blog” (before taking this course) was the complete stereotype associated with geeks (at least for me). It usually evoked a harsh, critical response from me – something that I now regret completely.

However, I’ve to say that during the one month that I’ve had English 105, I’ve come to really acknowledge blogging as a form of writing and accept that the most enjoyable part of the day for me was posting a blog up (though not making it). The most challenging aspect of this course for me was comparing and contrasting different authors’ pieces as well as carefully dissecting articles and blogs assigned to me. I’m a stickler for organization and this type of work hasn’t gone well with me. It may have been a great experience had it not been for the utter lack of organization shown by some of the authors’ works I was assigned to read – Hedges in particular. I also had a tough time forcing myself to deal with the pessimistic attitude conveyed by Hedges, being an optimist myself.

My attitude towards writing and reading on the web has changed drastically through this course. I now understand how important it is to pay attention to writings on the web – not just because it is crucial for literacy in the future but also because many opinions are being posted on the web – which offers the diversity in people’s views about certain topics. I have also come to appreciate the immediacy at which I can write on the web and I’ve come to realize that I can utilize this for my own literary pieces.

Thompson and Hedges

Hedges, in his article Bad Days for Newsrooms—and Democracy, is overly pessimistic about the United States and the new generation. He starts out by stating that newspapers are on the rapid decline. He spends a couple of paragraphs supporting his point that newspapers are on the decline by stating various statistics from various newspaper companies.

Hedges then talk about how newspapers are very important to society. In Hedges’ words, “Newspapers, when well run, are a public trust. They provide, at their best, the means for citizens to examine themselves, to ferret out lies and the abuse of power by elected officials and corrupt businesses, to give a voice to those who would, without the press, have no voice, and to follow, in ways a private citizen cannot, the daily workings of local, state and federal government”. These veritable facts shown in the print cannot be compared to the writings on the internet, especially those of bloggers according to Hedges. This, Hedges says, is because of the lack of credibility of the bloggers. No one fires the bloggers and they almost never acknowledge their own faults.

Hedges goes on to say that the Internet cannot take up the mantle of newspapers mainly because the internet is made for browsing not reading and according to Hedges, it shows. People spend much less time on newspaper sites than they do on newspaper themselves. Because of this, Hedges thinks that these days are bad days for newsrooms.

When I compare Clive Thompson piece on the New Literacy to the articles by Hedges, I see many differences and no similarities between them. Clive Thomson is very optimistic in his piece compared to Hedges who is completely pessimistic of everything and everyone. Clive Thompson pulls up a new idea that there is an ongoing “literacy revolution the likes of which we haven’t seen since Greek civilization” as compared to Hedged certainty that we are on the path to destruction. Thompson writes that most students today write much more than students did fifty years back. Also, he writes that there is no destructive change in academic writing as a result of the new forms of short-hand typing such as texting or Twitter updates.

Thompson piece, in my opinion, though very short, forms a view of the “New literacy” that is much more believable than Hedges views. This is because Hedges never does any serious research and most of his statements aren’t validated with proper sources. And even if Hedges did quote any sources, it would be validating information not critical to proving his point, but rather some statistics to prove what the obvious – such as the decline of newspapers. Thompson, on the other hand, reinforces his view completely with veritable facts such as the opinion of Andrea Lunsford, a professor of writing and rhetoric at Stanford University whose opinion is based upon a study of college students between their academic and social writing. This cited evidence is very strong and also addresses the main point Thompson is trying to make – we are in the midst of a literacy revolution.

Our brave new world

In "America the Illiterate", Chris Hedges critiques a great many things. He first defines the two sections of the American public today - those who read print-based texts - those people who live in the "literate world" and those who exist in a "non-reality based belief system". Hedges then goes on to quote some statistics about the second section, such as the fact that "eighty percent of the families in the United States last year did not buy a book."

Hedges then talks about the political campaigns today. How they conform to the laziness and ineptitude of the people today in order to be successful. Hedges then looks at the analysis of the Princeton Review to show how the American public have gotten stupider over time seeing that the political debates that happened before used a much higher range of vocabulary than debates do nowadays. Hedges finally hammers in the concept that America is becoming less intelligent rapidly - becoming a people with only entertainment as the objective rather than the outcome of work as shown by his phrase "Today the most famous person is Mickey Mouse". He ends by stating his view of the American people. He says that,

"The core values of our open society, the ability to think for oneself, to draw independent conclusions, to express dissent when judgment and common sense indicate something is wrong, to be self critical, to challenge authority, to understand historical facts, to separate truth from lies, to advocate for change and to acknowledge that there are other views, different ways of being, that are morally and socially acceptable, are dying".

Hedges defines literacy as the ability to function in a print-based, literate world which also includes the ability to cope with complexity and intellectual tools to separate illusion from truth. I don't find anything confusing in his article but I do find something a lot of troubling concepts about the way Hedges portrays the American people. Hedges insinuates that everyone is just plain stupid and can't do anything to save their life. Though, I believe that the society is degenerating rapidly, not everyone is stupid - something Hedges fails to point out. Another thing I don't like about this article is it's one-sidedness. Only one point is argued and that's it. This is one major difference I see between Hedges article and Carr's article. However, Hedges and Carr's portrayal of the American people are the same. They both mention the rapid decay of society due to various reasons and both of them back up their points with hard evidence, research and unforgettable phrases such as, "This is our brave new world".

The change in our way of thinking

“If I have seen further it is by standing on the shoulders of giants” said Sir Isaac Newton. This is a quote that has influenced me strongly throughout my childhood as I was learning such things as algebra. I find this expression particularly relevant to the question, “Is Google making us stupid?” Is it, we’ve been brought up learning about all the advantages of the internet or the so called information age. However, we’ve never exactly looked through the disadvantages of having the internet. I prefer to think that it is purely because there are not many of them other than stuff like facebook addictions but the fact remains that we think how we were brought up to think.


Though I was pretty sure of it, I’ve always been too lazy to do any research on my own. And suddenly, here is an 8 page research paper describing if and how Google is making idiots of us. Wonderfully written, Carr not just puts forward and backs up his point but also goes back through history and shows similar examples of pivotal change in the expression of thought and actually disproves his own arguments, saying that while he might be paranoid just like Aristotle once was, the possibility of it being true still exists.


Carr’s main point includes his observation of the decreased attention span of everyone around him, including himself. He points out that once he was content to simply sit and enter into a book for a lengthy period of time but now he doesn’t have the patience to read a 3 paragraph blog post – instead preferring to skim over it. He goes on to say that the net is “chipping away his capacity for concentration and contemplation”. Carr goes on to say that the way we think is related to the way we read. He asserts his statement with studies from various institutions that back him up. He also goes through history and looks at people’s reaction to such previous changes such as the Italian humanist’s thinking that the easy availability of books would make men less “studious” and bring about a weakening of their minds and Foreman’s theory of people being turned into “pancake people” – being spread wide and thin due to the vast amount of information accessed by the mere touch of a button. Ultimately, Carr’s point is that Google is making us stupid, even though past history shows otherwise – but the ability to have that much information without any effort was never available before.


From what I’ve learned of people’s internet reading and writing habits in English 105, I see that Carr was right on track. We barely do any writing on the internet seeing that we spend most of our time on it. As for reading, it seems as though we have been trained to be impatient due to the easy availability and access of resources today. We have largely stopped our abilities to read, comprehend and make “rich connections “of a lengthy text and have almost degenerated ourselves to skimming everything we come across.


“If I have seen further it is by standing on the shoulders of giants”. This expression has rung true from the start of the written component of human expression to the sudden availability of a wide range of books in the 15th century. These improvements in writing and reading have sparked a great flow of ideas that, if one looks back, comes mainly from the start of writing since actually writing down something is something you can build off on and each new betterment to “human expression” leads to more ideas. However, it seems we have run into a brick wall this time. Improvements to human expression that started out a whole new army of great ideas not seem to actually stop us since we have changed the “way we think” – something that has not happened before.

Writing, Reading, Blogging

Harris, in his book, is very detailed about how reading and writing is defined. Harris writes that the best approach to reading from his view is to first look at the aims (What is the writer trying to achieve? What position does he or she want to argue? What issues or problems does he or she explore?). Then look at the methods (How does a writer relate examples to ideas? How does he or she connect one claim to the next, build a sense of continuity and flow?). And finally the reader has to look at the material itself (Where does the writer go or examples and evidence? What texts are quoted and discussed? What experiences or events are described?), after actually going through what the author is saying in the text.

Harris writes that that the main purpose of writing is the “chance to engage with and rewrite the work of other thinkers” since all writing is basically adding upon to another person’s literary work. That’s the purpose of writing. Next, comes how writing should actually take place. He writes that one good way of coming to terms with a text would be to make a list of the key terms and concepts and then define them if your own words. Harris says writing is all about not just “re-presenting a text but incorporating it into your own project as a writer”, so that you need not only explain what you think it means but also to say something from the perspective from which you read the text. So, the writer will say much about who they are as a writer and about their own interests and values. Harris further breaks down the process of coming to a text with another writer by looking and some moves. Firstly, you have to define the project of the writer in your own terms and make it part of your own prose. Then, you have to note keywords or passages in the text and then assess the uses and limits of this approach.

Both Sullivan’s and Harris’ writing define writing in their own separate ways which can be condensed to form a theory of blogging as writing. Sullivan blogs mainly because it is spontaneous and without any editing which enables him to write down feelings and interests about something on the spot – something which normal writing can not do. What both Sullivan and Harris do when worked together is point out that even though writing should be highly organized and analyzed, writing can include the sending and receiving of personal and instant emotions and feelings along with events on a whim – something which is blogging.

After going through a few of my classmates’ blogs, I came to realize that we generally have the same tastes. There is so much that we do in common that we haven’t realized before. Going through the list, it seemed as if Entertainment made it to the top of the list. It appears that most of us are addicted to facebook, or other social networking sites, and sports. It seems funny but when I first heard of this assignment, I was extremely interested in knowing the internet log of my fellow peers (a very interesting topic) and I expected to see a lot of sites that I have never heard of before. Instead, I see what appears to be a list of sites that resembles my own internet log. I was initially taken aback as I had assumed that “others” go through many more links than I do though I spend a lot of time on the web.
Many similarities exist in this way about the reading habits among me and my fellow classmates. Another similarity I see among us is our internet writing habits (or should I say lack of internet writing). It seems that apart from status updates and wall posts on facebook, we basically ignore the keyboard on the internet. I didn’t see anyone go and make a blog post unrelated to this class or do any writing whatsoever on the web.
It seems most of us have some kind of personal connection to the web – as much as one loves his/her coffee (in my case tea). Overall, going through the internet logs of my peers was a good experience as it made me aware of the fact that we usually do the same thing on the internet. It was a very good activity and I hope there is many more of this sort.

Internet Log

Monday, September 7, 2009

1:58 PM

The Buzz Log - The Sad Story Behind Labor Day - Yahoo! Buzz

1:58 PM

Yahoo!

1:54 PM

Shock and caw: Pesky starlings still overwhelm - Yahoo! News

I visited the site to keep up with the News. Read news about those pesky little birds that haunt the U.S and the origins of Labor Day.

12:53 PM

neurosugreons getting sued - Yahoo! Search Results

I visited this site to prove to my brother that neurosurgeons do get sued.

12:52 PM

Gmail: Email from Google

12:51 PM

Gmail - Inbox (1) - elvisjoseph91@gmail.com

I checked my mail and got a free $10 Amazon gift card from University of Dayton.

12:50 PM

8 Fast-Growing, High-Paying Jobs

12:49 PM

Michael Jackson News - Yahoo! Music

12:48 PM

Space Sights and Smells Surprise Rookie Astronauts - Yahoo! News

I visited these sites just because it was interesting (space has a smell, Michael Jackson’s glove sold for $48,400 and plumbing is now considered to be a fast-growing and a high paying job).

12:48 PM

Welcome to Facebook! | Facebook

Again, I went to Facebook just to see if anything new was going on.

Saturday, September 5, 2009

11:51 PM

Welcome to Facebook! | Facebook

Again, I went to Facebook just to see if anything new was going on.

11:10 PM

HP Home & Home Office Store — free shipping details

11:00 PM

HP® Official Store — Buy an HP Laser Mobile Mouse (FQ983AA#ABA) from HP

10:59 PM

HP® Official Store — Buy Mice and keyboards direct from HP

10:55 PM

HP® Official Store — Buy an HP USB 3-Button Optical Mouse (KY619AA#ABA) direct from HP

10:55 PM

HP® Official Store — Buy Computer accessories direct from HP

10:54 PM

HP® Official Store — Buy Gaming accessories direct from HP

I went to HP’s site to find a good mouse to buy.

10:53 PM

Gmail - Labor Day Sale - STARTS NOW! - elvisjoseph91@gmail.com

10:52 PM

Gmail: Email from Google

I checked my Gmail mail – lots of labor day sales!

10:16 PM

17-year-old American upsets Sharapova at US Open - Yahoo! News

10:16 PM

Yahoo!

10:15 PM

Demand for electricity sputters and bills may fall - Yahoo! News

I went to Yahoo to look at some interesting news (electricity bills may fall since demand is down and a 17 year old beats Sharapova at US Open.)

10:04 PM

Memory upgrades from Crucial.com - Determine My Memory Needs

10:03 PM

Masonic Home - Kentucky Weather Forecast on Yahoo! Weather

9:49 PM

Memory upgrades from Crucial.com - Determine My Memory Needs

9:43 PM

RAM Memory Upgrade: Dell, Mac, Apple, HP, Compaq. USB drives, flash cards, SSD at Crucial.com

9:37 PM

Memory upgrades from Crucial.com - Determine My Memory Needs

9:30 PM

Memory upgrades from Crucial.com - Determine My Memory Needs

9:26 PM

Memory upgrades from Crucial.com - Determine My Memory Needs

8:45 PM

Memory upgrades from Crucial.com - Determine My Memory Needs

I wanted a better RAM for my 10 year old PC so I went to this site to see how much my ancient PC can handle.

7:18 PM

Playstation 1 and Playstation 2 Compatibility

7:18 PM

Google

I went to this site to get some info about compatibility issues between PS1 and PS2. Just might buy a PS2 for the first time!

7:06 PM

What kind of ram does my computer use? - Yahoo! Answers

7:06 PM

yahoo answers what kind of RAM for my computer - Google Search

7:05 PM

New Computer Memory RAM Finder Tool Helps Consumers Find The Correct Memory for Computer Model

I wanted a better RAM for my 10 year old PC so I went to this site to see how much my ancient PC can handle.

5:22 PM

Age of Empires III - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

5:21 PM

Age of Empires III: The Asian Dynasties - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

5:20 PM

wikipedia age of empires 3 - Google Search

5:20 PM

wikipedia age of empires 4 - Google Search

5:19 PM

wikipedia age of empires 3 - Google Search

Excellent Games (Age of Empires)! I am thinking of getting the third one.

1:25 AM

Man who called 911 charged with mobile home deaths - Yahoo! News

1:23 AM

Study: A "properly" calibrated HDTV = cheaper energy bills : Ben Patterson : Yahoo! Tech

I browsed really fast threw some interesting Yahoo News (Calibrate your HDTV folks).

1:23 AM

University of Louisville: It's Happening Here.™

I checked my Uofl GroupWise Email.

1:20 AM

T-mobile vs at&t - Google Search

1:20 AM

T-Mobile vs. AT&T Wireless/Cingular - T-Mobile Talk - Mobiledia

1:20 AM

T-mobile vs att - Google Search

1:17 AM

T-Mobile vs ATT - Mac Forums

1:17 AM

T mobile vs ATT? - Yahoo! Answers

I’m thinking of getting an at&t service – seems to be somewhat better.

Friday, September 4, 2009

9:40 PM

Age of Empires III: The Asian Dynasties - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

9:39 PM

Age of Empires II: The Age of Kings - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

9:33 PM

Age of Empires - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

9:25 PM

Age of Empires III - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

9:25 PM

Wikipedia

Read about some excellent Games (Age of Empires)! I am thinking of getting the third one.

8:18 PM

fabulous-freebies-2009.html: Personal Finance News from Yahoo! Finance

8:18 PM

Yahoo!

Browsed really fast through some Yahoo news (I like free stuff)

8:02 PM

Welcome to Facebook! | Facebook

Facebook is my life. Go through more of my internet log and you’ll see more of this coming up.

Response to Andrew Sullivan's blog post (2)

In Sullivan’s article “Why I Blog”, he gives many reasons for the value of blogging as a form of writing. He puts down both advantages and disadvantages of blogging clearly. Sullivan shows the negative side of blogging in detail. He writes, “No columnist or reporter or novelist will have his minute shifts or constant small contradictions exposed as mercilessly as a blogger’s are. A columnist can ignore or duck a subject less noticeably than a blogger committing thoughts to pixels several times a day.” He explains more of how every word of a blogger’s is dissected – even more than how an editor corrects a novel or a newspaper. Sullivan also talks about the negative side seen when bloggers publish posts that were done in a fit of rage and instantly regret doing something like that.

However, in spite of these and more negative aspects to blogging, Andrew Sullivan promotes blogging will all heart. He gives many reasons for doing so. He says that blogging a form of writing like no other. He emphasizes that blogging “is the spontaneous expression of instant thought” – something no edited newspaper or magazine can express. He says that blogging is “more free-form, more accident-prone, less formal, more alive. It is, in many ways, writing out loud”. Now, even though this written expression of thoughts and feelings lacks what a newspaper can give (a completely validated, objective view of events – something someone can trust as soon as they read it), Sullivan argues that blogging gives a reader something more – the instant feelings associated by the blogger (and any normal human) to specific events.

This is the crux of why Sullivan says he blogs. A blog can be extremely personal and yet give an accurate view of events – a view not seen in any other form of writing. For example, Sullivan writes, “On my blog, my readers and I experienced 9/11 together, in real time. I can look back and see not just how I responded to the event, but how I responded to it at 3:47 that afternoon. And at 9:46 that night. There is vividness to this immediacy that cannot be rivaled by print. The same goes for the 2000 recount, the Iraq War, the revelations of Abu Ghraib, the death of John Paul II, or any of the other history-making events of the past decade. There is simply no way to write about them in real time without revealing a huge amount about yourself. And the intimate bond this creates with readers is unlike the bond that the The Times, say, develops with its readers through the same events. Alone in front of a computer, at any moment, are two people: a blogger and a reader. The proximity is palpable, the moment human—whatever authority a blogger has is derived not from the institution he works for but from the humanness he conveys. This is writing with emotion not just under but always breaking through the surface. It renders a writer and a reader not just connected but linked in a visceral, personal way. The only term that really describes this is friendship. And it is a relatively new thing to write for thousands and thousands of friends.”

This is why Sullivan blogs. To receive and send personal and instant emotions and feelings along with events on a whim – without someone removing everything except the event – something that makes blogging a unique, revolutionary and great form of writing.