Mumsnet Talk

I don't understand the question.

Is there a website? I can't find much other than when and where on Google - who's organising it? Or am I missing something obvious?

<refers thread title to Pedants' Corner for examination>

<backs slowly out of door>

Swedes, I've thought long and hard about the grammatical issues. At first sight it does look like the MN Rep belongs to PW and I did have visions of PW with a bespectacled assistant in tow, but actually it's fine . I think.

But has anyone ever heard of the words Commentariat or Bloggertariat before they saw this thread? Has someone made them up just for the event?

Actually, it's the Ministry of Commentariat and Bloggertariat

I read it as Policywonk is MNRep ... iyswim.

Had to read that title several times (not castng aspersions on Geraldine, I'm fairly dim) but I think I understand now.

There is a panel, they are to discuss commentators Vs bloggers. Policywonk will be there as MN representative - presumably to fight the for the bloggers corner.

Ok - cant think of any Qs right now, but would like to say good luck to PW. She's a fantastic rep for MN, have read all the politicky stuff she's done the past few months and she's really quite brilliant.

And pretty

Hassled - Yes, I thought Policywonk possessed a MN rep. I hadn't imagined the specs - what I imagined was blur due to hyper-efficiency. Someone with a diary and a Mac, to tell Policy what media interviews she had that day and the fact that her eldest needs a packed lunch on Thursday.

<demands assistant MN rep for policywonk>

Oh yes, v. pretty too.

And a gifted trombonist to boot <what are the odds?>

GerladineMumsnet - I don't understand the distinction. Most professional commentators blog now don't they? And Tweet? So the boundaries have become blurred.

Iain Dale is a professional commentator and a blogger and he Tweets like it's gong out of fashion.

Good point Swedes- perhaps Plonk should say that?

Hmm. Yes. It's one of those 'wither media' things which miss the crux, which is that papers are going to have to find another business model or perrrrish!

It's a false dichotomy wrapped inside a canard and served on a bed of hubris, as I once dreamt I said.

BoF, I now can't stop thinking of Pol as PlinketyPlonk. (Sorry Pol)

Jolly impressive to be in that roster, though.

Are we allowed to say we think it's important that there are still professional commentators? I think they are important.

Lots of blogs are just ill-informed opinion, opinions which are rarely expressed in an usual or thoughtful or even dare I say it, well-written.

Though I do like the Huffington Post, and I suppose that's a blog. Swedes is right, it has all got a bit blurry.

I might need a definition of what a represents the commentariat and the bloggertariat please. Then I might struggle to have an opinion.

My final question is: winning at what?

I think the ill-informed opinions daily become less important. Only the decent ones will survive, I think.

I suppose the big question is whether papers are going to start charging for online content as Murdoch indicated he was planning to do (and where he goes, they will all go) and the impact that this will have on the blargosphere.

DP, following the derivation of 'blog, has started saying 'are you on 'sNet again'? in his comedy Northern accent.

(Note: DP is a comedy Northerner - not saying Northern accents are intrinsically amusing )

I'm a bit confused at the distinction between blooger and commentator.

Seems to me that traditional meeja have hijacked thw whole blogging thing, so now their commentators are also bloggers, but I dont see what's changed except that they are now included in the online content.

I could well be missing the point, but I tend to think of a blogger as either; someone with a personal interest in a certain subject; someone with a professional interest, but is blogging in order to convey things they cant say in their professional capacity, or a fantasist.

Then I think of a commentator as, well, as someone doing a job I spose.

I always think of bloggers as being anonymous and commentators as wanting to be anything but! (I know thats not a real rule - but it should be)

Everything gets hijacked and diluted. Not sure that 'blogger' really means much at all now.

Maybe they're going to have an egg and spoon race?

<lowers tone and intellectual calibre of the thread very satisfactorily on a Friday night>

or they've mis-spelled 'whining"? Luckily PW will be there to slap legs.

sorry to hijack but...

Bat! (I never know if it's that or supposed to be Wombat...)

And all my other favourite people! Are we having a Wankers' Night in tonight, or do y'all have a life? I'm busy trying not to be offensive and out of my intellectual league on an UQD takes on Religion thread. And may need help, ecumenical or philosophical, or just in brow soothing. Ruty? Olympe has deregged because of it...

Loop! No, how awful re ruty! I will go and look, but I'm crap on those threads, for the reasons you mention.

<develops crush on Fenella>

Well then, I should explain that I was going to go along to this panel in a personal-ish capacity (in general spirit of meeting complete strangers, swapping cards and then not phoning them), but Justine thought you lot might be interested and asked me to do it on here as well. I SAID that you are all utterly unimpressed by bloggers-talking-about-blogging - in fact someone on one of the G20 threads said it was the final stage of futility . But I am scared of Justine and tend to do what she says.

OBM, it would be impressive if I were on the panel, but I will be in the cheap seats. But I will definitely try to work in 'It's a false dichotomy wrapped inside a canard and served on a bed of hubris.' Actually you should be doing this, shouldn't you? It's more your area really.

I agree with Fenella's account of the distinction between bloggers and commentators - at least, I think that's the opposition that this discussion is based on.

I'm not going to be fighting any corner, I don't think. I'm not sure that blogging has many advantages over traditional media. It allows micro-specialisation, played out at great length - which can be a good thing, depending on how interested you are. And of course, in terms of news-gathering it's more immediate than traditional media - but that's partly because traditional journos have to do boring stuff like fact-checking and getting pieces past editors.

So if anything I prefer the MSM - I certainly spend more time reading it (well, the Guardian) than I do blogs. (I think the MN talkboard, and other talkboards, are something else altogether, and I find it a lot more satisfying than the average blog.) In fact that could be the MN 'angle' I guess, if we have to have one - why talkboards are better than blogs.