(Needs defitions for shoutout, hat-tip, feed, and crosspost.)
Educate. Educate. Educate. It's part of our job, John, as I know you full well know.
But, let me pose this question: If one publishes a post on his/her blog about XYZ, does he or she "post" about XYZ, or does she "blog" about XYZ?
Mike
Laurence, good catch. I'll add those.
Mike, I think those terms are interchangeable in that example.
"I blogged about this."
"I posed about that."
But -- at least on the Chronicle's blogs -- people are always calling individual posts "blogs" and commenters "bloggers" and it gets confusing.
Point well taken, but what's most important is that columnists like John McClain are actively engaging the "the people formerly know as the audience" (to borrow from Jay Rosen) through blogs, which comprise posts, comments, etc. No matter what you call it, it's a great thing about the Chronicle and chron.com, and a great credit to the work of my colleagues Dwight Silverman and Joe Conway.
John McClain are actively engaging
Let's not go overboard.
Comments are a start to "engaging." Blogs enable that. And that's good. But comments in and of themselves aren't ACTIVELY "engaging."
McClain could learn from some of the other Chron.com bloggers, who read and link other bloggers and articles. It's still mostly one way from McClain, and some others.
That's not meant as criticism of what he or anyone else is doing at Chron.com. It's new media, and kudos to the people who have taken the leap. But getting the toes wet is not the same as swimming the English channel. That comes in time (one hopes). 
You're right. Most people don't understand these differences. But I'm not sure it's that important. I also don't want to preclude people because of hangups over terminology. In fact, sometimes when I'm talking to newbies about blogging, it's better not to even mention the word blog. Talk about what the technology enables (conversation, engagement, interaction, whatever) not the technology itself.
But if terminology is your game, Myspace complicates matters. When you want to put a new post on your Myspace blog the link you click reads: "Post New Blog." Since they reportedly have 100 million users, that could create confusion with a lot of people.
But, does it really matter what it's called?
Your modern technology frightens and confuses me.
Ladies and gentlemen of the jury ... I think Kuroc says it best.
Man, I miss Unfrozen Caveman Lawyer.
Seriously, I wasn't poking fun at McClain or criticizing the Chronicle. I was trying to educate people who comment on his blog (and others). Reading McClain this morning, I got confused trying to figure out who readers were talking about when they wrote stuff like "bloggers writing long blogs" ... I finally realized they meant readers writing comments.
It's not the first time I've seen confusion over the difference between a "blog" and a "post" -- including some here -- so I thought a few definitions might help.
Dean, I have a lot of respect for the journos at the Chron who have taken up blogging. I realize it's an add-on to their jobs and that not everyone is hep to the new technology. Like Kevin, I'd like to see more links to other articles that support or defend certain opinions or provide background information, but I realize that may take time.
John,
I'm glad you clarified with your last comment. Because the original post did seem a bit snarky.
Education is good, but those "in the know" shouldn't risk alienating the outsiders by appearing condescending.
Good post. And sorry, but I can’t do pithy right now. ;-p
A blog isn't always cut and dry or emotionless. If a blogger can't let loose on their own blog with some passion and with a ‘voice’, why bother?
A 'blog' is something run by a blogger, who can either post OR blog about a given topic.
'Comments' are either:
A response to the original blogger‘s post and be done, or,
The start of a two-way/group conversation in the thread.
A definition of other terms is needed though. Many Web 2.0 advocates jockey for position to claim ownership of the 'next big thing' when it comes to marketing terms:
Consumer Generated Media, Consumer Generated Content, User This, User That. etc.
Seems like they’ve empowered themselves to take over defining the new media space. But what this desire to invent Web 9.0 has to lead to is a mash-up of those terms which blurs the lines for the rest of the blogging world.
WOMMA: convene a panel of today's leading bloggers in ALL sectors, along with some ordinary Joes, and agree on terminology AND functionality standards across the board for ALL blogs.
Currently, there are none, nor recommendations for what bloggers should include to make the usability experience better for both user AND blogger.
Considering the first blogs appeared 10 years ago, it’s overdue. The W3 consortium has no problem convening on website standards, why not the blogosphere?
A working list might include:
- Email notification option when someone comments on your post. This really helps those not using RSS aggregators to read their content
- Html/font style attributes so people can actually use a bold font or italics to make a point when they post, not SCREAM in all caps.
- The ability to edit one's one comments if they find a typo, or even the ability to delete the post entirely if they so choose.
(Standard on Blogger, optional on TypePad, and especially IF the blogger using TypePad or WordPress even knows to enable those features - many don't.)
- Limitation/control on amount of ads on a blog. Many blogs run rich media banners or flood the page with ads, making it hard to navigate visually to the proper info.
(I'd also ask why if someone is having to take on SO many ads on their blog, aren’t they charging enough in their day job?)
Several prominent PR and WOMMA bloggers make the process of posting harder than it needs to be. Another thing they need to do is classify what a blog might include in order for it to be even considered a blog. Many blogs are nothing more than glorified opt-ed columns with NO way to comment on posts.
Many bloggers don’t respond to posts either. That kind of elitist attitude doesn't belong in this landscape, but is harder to mandate. Sorry, but if reader can’t be allowed to comment on something someone blogs? That's not a conversation, and that's not a blog.
As for Phil Hartman, what a waste of a talent.
Just wanted to say that I totally agree. I always tell people that if you're going to write something for the newspaper, you don't say you're going to write a newspaper, you say you're going to write an article in the newspaper. So the same for blogging - you're going to write a post on your blog, not write a blog.
I'm glad you clarified with your last comment. Because the original post did seem a bit snarky.
I realized that, too, after the fact ... I also realized that I left out the words "in the comments section" when I wrote "check out the numerous (and often incorrect) uses of the terms "bloggers" and "blogs" here in this Houston Chronicle sports blog."
As for Phil Hartman, what a waste of a talent.
I also got UCL's name wrong in my comment. It's apparently "Cirroc," not "Kuroc" as I remembered.
It's important to be accurate when discussing UCL.
Another thing to mention. Blogging is not synonymous with social media or Web 2.0. Blogging IS a social medium, but does not comprise the entire mode of communications.
Many people use the word blogging to mean social media, but should not be included when you are referring to programs like CoComment, YouTube, MySpace and others.
Don't you think its just semantic juggling over the meaning of "blogger"?
I can feel your frustration...and I like it! grin
What I have come to believe about people in general and business people in particular is that we all tend to use the same vocabulary but different dictionaries.
As you suggest, it would be nice if for at least some basic words we agreed on the definitions.
Thanks for stepping up and calling it the way it is (we all agree on the meaning of "it"...right?).
Oh, like you know soooo much about the "internets"! Those media people are edumacated already, really!
Commenting by HaloScan
