Policywonk's MN rep at 'Commentariat vs Bloggertariat: who's winning?'

[GeraldineMumsnet]

It's on Monday evening and the panel line-up is: David Aaronovitch (Times commentator), Martin Bright (New Deal of the Mind founder, and blogger), Iain Dale (political blogger and publisher), Mick Fealty (political blogger) and Anne Spackman (Times' comment editor).

Any points you'd like PW to make on your behalf?

So no egg and spoon race then?

Lupus - very happy to hang around on a Wankers' Corner, swinging my handbag. Just don't expect anything intellechoooal from me ...........

I think OBM and Policywonk should go. They are both excellent in very different areasn - Mumsnet would look so freaking rounded.

that's very swede of you swedes. It is true that I am rather rounder, in several areas, than PW. But sadly, on the matter of blogs v commentators, I only have one thing to say on the matter and I accidentally said it just now.

Also I think PW's going orf her own bat as it were, and MN have sensibly grabbed her swishy coat-tails and are clinging on for the ride.

Also, I worked with David Aaronovich once and I'd worry that I would look humiliatingly crawly-bumlicky sitting in the front row trying to catch his eye..

Hi Lenin -- where do you go on holiday that has cricket? Clearly not in Bristol as apparently the game is still on, according to DP

Policy, in clear English, please, what is the purpose of this panel?

I don't think Iain Dale is v bright. He sent me a surveymonkey survey v recently that was so clearly geared towards him getting advertising on his blog it was cringeworthy.

am loving teh insertion of MSM now

'cos I only learnt that word when someone told you that the world would end because you were asking questions of a man (or something)

And can I just applaud the deliciousness of this sentence from 100x:

'...opinions which are rarely expressed in an usual or thoughtful or even dare I say it, well-written'

I think blogs should come with reviews, or star ratings in case you don't have time to read the reviews. Although I can't imagine the depth of self-loathing that might come from having a career writing blog reviews. It would be a bit like having a career phoning those numbers on the back of white vans that say "How's my driving? call 0873 565456"

Lupus that is indeed a beautifully crafted sentence. 100x should get props [vomits] for being elegantly comprehensible, even while clearly under sedation.

Swedes, I imagine that the person who answers that telephone shouts 'fark off you farking cant' and slams down the handset, day in, day out.

In hotel?

Oh no PolicyWonk, we didn't mean for you to feel pressganged! The nice lady who's organising this particular shindig told me not to worry when said I thought I couldn't come because they already had a MN person there - i.e. you. (Think they think of you as a MN bod cos we sent you along to the last jobby that they did). So we thought you'd been invited as a MN rep. Hate to think of you feeling exploited in any way - please shout if you'd rather go as a non-aligned PolicyWonk - it's not a problem.

I do think the broader subject is quite interesting from a Mumsnet standpoint, as it sort of mirrors the tension between solo "professional" experts vs the collective lay (i.e. non-charging) experts that was imho the real animus of the Gina Ford v MN case. As Onebat points out, the internet offers so much collective wisdom for free, it's hard to charge for it these days.

But I suppose the valuable thing for most people is a trusted filter. After all we now have access to so much information and opinion and there simply isn't the time to sift through it ourselves. So in a way trusted filters are becoming more valuable, whether they're commentators, bloggers or both.

Bloggers have been instrumental in getting the story out of Iran.

Thinking about these things in zero-sum terms never helps. Like Onebat said, its a flase dichotmomy.

The chaff will sink (most of it) and the good stuff float to the surface.

I'm saying that as someone with a blog but no time to post on it.

Oh dear, sorry, yes 'in a thoughtful or interesting way'. Apols.

Actually this sums up my problem, and I'd like to know if the panel discuss this. When I'm on MN offering an 'opinion' it's not usually one that I've thought about long and hard, or one that I even seek to express in a well-crafted, succinct or beautiful way. I give amateur opinion - and if I was writing in another format, I would endeavour to be all the things above.

The form is quite demotic, and it's instant and often the opinions of the lay community are 'in development'. In the same way I think the Guardian blogs are like this - as are the 'comments' which follow the blogs.

Which leads us to the weight and importance of opinion. Like the MN chats, anyone can sit down and say 'Oh I think that's rubbish, it's not true.' It's their opinion, but that doesn't necessarily mean it's one I have to take seriously.

I find it worrying if 'opinion' quite quickly becomes 'fact'. It makes me suspicious. I think I still take 'professional' opinions more seriously - especially if I 'know' the person writing, I like to know my sources, or to believe that there has been some professional rigour, some fact checking, applied to that process.

I worry that with the internet, we are all just going to drown in a sea of opinion, and because it is democratic, one person's opinion is just as valid as another persons and that there will then be a corrosion of any professional ethic or standards of 'truth' -especially if news people, try to keep up with freedom of the blogging community and any old professional standards are thrown out the window, in a bid to be engaging and newsworthy, and because they want to invite other people's 'opinion'. Soon there will no respect for properly gathered news.

This is a worry to me. I'd like to hear what people think about it please PW.

A familiar cry in this house, usually directed at Nick Robinson, is - 'I don't care about what you think, tell me the NEWS'

I guess it's a general trend, rather than something particularly to do with blogs, but a bit of a worry, I think.

God totally - we have just stopped watching the news becasue it's all opinion not fact.

PW, if they get onto Iran/Afghanistan can you ask them if anyone knows the fate of those 200 women who marched against familial rape in Kabul please??

Oh and I think it's a worry because if all we are left with is a cacophony of opinion - in itself 'soft' - then this leads to cynicism, disaffection and dislocation. Which isn't good in a population, and also leads to conspiracy theories and paranoia.

Great posts ahundredtimes and monkeytrousers.

I would question, though, if our 'news' can ever be presented as 'fact' - the same story is so often presented with a totally different slant, depending on the (political?) perspective of the writer/broadcaster.

The thing I like about blogs as opposed to commentary is that you do get the variety of opinion - it helps to give me as a reader different perspectives on the same issue.

Sometimes I think I know my view on something, but when faced with a congtrasting opinion it can make me re-think/re-consider - which is a good thing, as I'm then forced to take a deeper view, rather than continuing to think/speak in a more shallow way.