It's hard for me to imagine why a church that has younger members wouldn't have a blog component.
Sentiment: NEGATIVE
When you look at things like Flickr and Youtube, they are specialised blogging systems, so why hasn't blogging encompassed that ease of functionality?
I'm not sure blogs are necessarily the best place to get a pulse on anything. People want to blog for a variety of reasons, and that may or may not be representative.
You know, some of the good part of blog theory was that blogs would be like diaries that the world could read. They would be spontaneous, whatever pops into your mind, as a diary would be.
A blog is neither a diary nor a journal. Many people think of blogging in relation to those two things, confessional or practical. It is neither but includes elements of both.
It's not easy for an entrepreneur to find the time to blog. But for those who do it, it is a great tool to communicate with the various stakeholders in their business and build a reputation for thought leadership.
I think a lot of journal articles should really be blogs.
In a way, publishing in 2005 was similar to publishing in 1950. Nobody kept blogs; that was still optional. I didn't even have a website then.
Blogging got the concept of personal publishing, but it didn't really take advantage of the network.
Blogs are for anoraks who couldn't get published any other way.
I think the word 'blog' is an ugly word. I just don't know why people can't use the word 'journal.'