I think that in the blogosphere, the idea is to have the most controversial stuff up.
Sentiment: NEGATIVE
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.
I think a lot of journal articles should really be blogs.
One danger, when you're writing lots of quick, opinionated blog items about the latest developments, is that you never get around to stating fully, in one place, what you think about a particular topic.
I've always been controversial because I offer new ideas. For me to be controversial, I think this is positive.
If journalism is good, it is controversial, by its nature.
The danger of the blogosphere is reading only those you agree with. While there are right-wing blogs that are entertaining freak shows, it's hard to find substantial journalism there.
The blogosphere might be very useful as propaganda or as therapy. But it's not journalism.
The influence of blogging is overall a very positive force in the media.
I think it hurts blogs when they have to turn off their comments.
The constellation of opinion called the blogosphere consists, like the stars themselves, partly of gases. This is what makes blogs addictive - that is, both pleasurable and destructive: They're so easy to consume and so endlessly available.
No opposing quotes found.