It seems Forbes has published an articled titled “Attack of the Blogs” wherein the author Daniel Lyons… well… bashes blogs. He actually makes some pretty good points on how blogs can be used for nasty purposes, but the tone of the article is such that I think any valid points will fall on deaf ears. (Forbes“Attack of the Blogs” 11/14/2005).
I got wind of this on slashdot, and I’ve been watching a few other blogs reactions to the article - none of them good as you’d expect. I mean, the article starts out in the following way:
Web logs are the prized platform of an online lynch mob spouting liberty but spewing lies, libel and invective. Their potent allies in this pursuit include Google and Yahoo.
Forbes
“Attack of the Blogs” 11/14/2005
That paragraph alone seems to group all weblogs in to a single group, and call them all a bunch of liars, and claim that blogs are controlled by Google and Yahoo… yeah…
My weblog is about 50% howto technical / programming / computer stuff and 50% personal I-(dis)like-so-and-so stuff. So I take this article a bit personally. I’d like to say a few short, well restrained words in response to this article - just in case Daniel Lyons is cruising the web and happens upon my weblog.
1. I have never lied on my weblog
2. If I’ve ever been in error, I’ve acknowledged, and made light of it
3. If I have a problem with a company, product, or service I will post it on my weblog because that puts it in front of millions of people. If I call the support desk, I get ignored. Rule number one - if you want
action hit them in the pocket book. Corporations made the rules of engagement, not bloggers.
4. Your magazine uses the same attacking technique you’re accusing bloggers of as shown by this article.
5. If I have a good experience with a company, product, or service I’ll post it on my weblog because that puts it in front of millions of people.
6. I don’t care about Yahoo, and I am still a bit miffed at Google. Neither influence me in the slightest, but thanks for askin’.