Blog reading explodes in America

[DoYouEverWonder]

4 January, 2005

Americans are becoming avid blog readers, with 32 million getting hooked in 2004, according to new research.

The survey, conducted by the Pew Internet and American Life Project, showed that blog readership has shot up by 58% in the last year.

Some of this growth is attributable to political blogs written and read during the US presidential campaign.

<snip>

Blog creators were likely to be young, well-educated, net-savvy males with good incomes and college educations, the survey found.

This was also true of the average blog reader, although the survey found there was a greater than average growth in blog readership among women and those in minorities.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/technology/4145191.stm


Hey MSM, guess what? You're about to go the way of the dinosaur. RIP.

[The Backlash Cometh]

1. It's their own fault for creating niche news. We just figured out

that the more stingier the US media gets on real news, the less appetizing they are as a news source. But they shouldn't worry. I'm sure that the one article a month they print which has anything of substance will make it into someone's blog eventually.

[rodeodance]

2. Bloggers need their own TV news show(s)!

an evening news show would be grand! also would be competition for the networks and cable "news" shows!!

[henslee]

3. Inevitable. What a refreshing idea that would be. Wonder who's got the

sense to do it? PBS? I doubt anyone else would touch it. Though if CNBC had half a brain they would go for it.

[itzamirakul]

8. The only problem is...

that they would more than likely feature only right wing bloggers....

[goforit]

17. I though John Stewart's show was a blog show.

[forintegrity]

4. And so the MSM should die

since they have all sold out! I want the truth about what is happening in the world, especially in my own country!

There's enough dysfunction in my life...I don't need theirs!

Bye-bye!

[leesa]

5. No. They will get their greedy buddy Powell at the FCC to shut it down

terrorists, you know.

[DoYouEverWonder]

7. I think at this point that will be a difficult thing

seem the cat is already of the bag and it will be very very difficult to put it back in.

Beside, shutting down the internet is not a simple matter. The system itself is incredibly robust. Plus almost all business and commerce not depends upon the internet now. Stop the flow of money going around the world and see how long that idea lasts.

[itzamirakul]

9. They are already shutting down all of the

cell phone satellites in Iraq to make it more difficult for the rebels to communicate with each other.

On AAR's Morning Sedition today, Anthony Lepay of the Guerrilla Network News www.gnn.tv (I think I spelled guerrilla correctly) said that the government is capable of shutting down satellite signals wherever they choose. Wouldn't that also hold true for the internet?

Edited to correct link

[DoYouEverWonder]

10. No the internet

doesn't rely on satellites.

[DulceDecorum]

11. That won't help them

in Iraq.
Remember those wargames where the guy playing Saddam won?
He deliberately avoided using high tech communications.

Be thankful we are only facing Saddam Hussein and not the retired U.S. Marine general who played the dictator in last summer's $235 million war game.
As commander of the "red" or enemy team in the July exercises dubbed "Millennium Challenge," Gen. Paul Van Riper employed motorcycle messengers and coded calls from minarets to elude electronic eavesdropping and direct a surprise suicide attack. Swarms of pleasure boats and private planes crashed into the "blue," or friendly warships in a large-scale version of Al Qaeda's bombing of the destroyer Cole.
The result of this virtual attack was that a significant part of the U.S. fleet was sunk before the Mother of All War Games really began. The higher-ups could hardly just tell everybody to go home, so the 16 ships were "refloated."
The Mother of All War Games resumed, and the higher-ups sought to dissuade Van Riper from continuing to employ unorthodox tactics.
http://www.nydailynews.com/03-30-2003/news/wn_report/story/71277p-66210c.html

And guess who is getting their asses kicked right about now?

Incidentally, how much did they spend on that warGAME and how much are they sending to help out with the tsunami?

[calimary]

13. Excellent point. And besides, did we hear any of this on the networks?

Radio OR TV? Any coverage at all? Or did we have to read it on the internet?

I rest my case.

PS - I, too, don't bother with much on TV, as far as information brokerage, other than Olbermann.

[Catchawave]

6. It's the only reliable news source for me.....

...other than Keith Olbermann and Jon Stewart :)

[Stinky The Clown]

12. I hope the SCLM are paying attention - their demise is before them

The "Internets" have replaced them for a very desirable demographic. They must be asking why. Surely they know about it. On MSNBC, for example, every one of their top hosts now have a (so called) blog.

Hopefully, they'll see the strength in left leaning blogs and try to reach that audience with more balanced news.

But, maybe, I'm just a silly old man who dreams too much.

[muriel_volestrangler]

14. And yet, most online users haven't heard of them

"Only 38% of online Americans have heard about blogs". A reminder that not everyone does the same kind of surfing that we do.

[hackwriter]

15. My local paper had a different spin

Yesterday my local had a front page article entitled "Blogs are everywhere, but few read them." The article had a different spin from this headline, but the overall tone was to pooh-pooh the importance of blogs, and to repeat the "Journalists have STANDARDS, bloggers don't" meme.

I of course wrote a letter to the editor stating that if journalists would do their f***ing jobs, instead of regurgitating the Republican talking points of the day, there'd be no need for us.

Somehow I think this one isn't getting published.

[goforit]

16. With the network &cable propaganda news..........who would of thunk it??

ROFLMAO!!!!


So much for TV anymore!!!

[Q3JR4]

18. Duh. Where else you going to get actual news from? n/t.