With all the discussion of blogwars around the place recently, I thought it might be apposite to put a different perspective. I was inspired (as I often am) by a couple of comments by Pavlov’s Cat – on a thread here this morning and on one of the many recent threads elsewhere comparing journalism and blogging. Those thoughts meshed in with some work I’ve been doing recently for a couple of interlinked academic projects – one being my ongoing work on social media with Axel Bruns for the Smart Services CRC and the other being a paper for the upcoming ANZCA conference.
In the course of my research, I’ve been reading lots of net history. There are exceptions to the rule, but the same dichotomised themes tend to recur again and again without resolution, and as a number of authors, including the excellent Fred Turner, point out – too many concepts have been taken over from 90s style cyber-utopians and Californian boosters without much reflection on their adequacy. One of those is Howard Rheingold’s “virtual community” (and to be fair to Rheingold, he’s much more nuanced than some of his academic epigones!)… We seem to be stuck in a hermeneutic circle – of the bad kind – suspended between online writing as media substitute and online communication as pure public sphere. If what occurs online falls short of either (heavily) ideal(ised) type, then it appears to fall into the worthless category by default.
Let’s have a look at some antidotes.
Continue reading ‘Blogging as a technique for the cultivation of trust’

The Liberals, women and the Mad Monk
Pavlov’s Cat made a very incisive comment here recently, apropos of the silly push for Tony Abbott to be leader of the Liberal Party (which seems to have disappeared ever since Malcolm got ‘back on the front foot’, ‘muscled up’, ‘took the fight up to the government’ blah blah by banging on about debt and deficit – alliteration masks a multiplicity of sins in politics – and buying a debt truck):
Indeed. Women are nigh on invisible, or at least very radically under-represented in most public discussions of electoral politics. But, as Pavlov’s Cat points out, we constitute more than a majority of the electorate… and that’s reflected in the composition of samples taken for polls. So as Possum reveals (with one of his spiffy graphs), the Coalition trails much further behind where they were at the last election with women voters than with male:
[By the way, Possum also reveals with customary wonkiness and style, that the puzzle of why the PM is popular - so unintelligible to the press gallery and the Libs - might be explained by the fact that the PM is liked. Circular, I know, but there you have it...]
So, why, exactly, are the Libs so on the nose with women voters? Speculate away…