On second thought

First the bad news: sometimes I shoot from the hip in this website gig, and what I gain in coverage by this method I sometimes lose in accuracy or nuance. I’ve had occasion to ponder this truth for the past few days, since a reader wrote in to respond to a passing remark I made a bit ago about CP’s sg radio review and DBM’s musicscribe blog. The reader reminded me of a post CP had written a few months back about thinking (more) before you post. And though I’d vigorously dispute the accusation that I don’t think before I post - I always do - I also have to allow that some things I write are less well considered than others, which is true of my remark about DBM and CP risking “obsolescence” by either explicitly (DBM) or effectively (CP) narrowing their focus to matters beyond the realm of everyday events and news and the like. So the good news: what blogging takes away in time to contemplate as thoroughly as one might in other rhetorical settings, it gives back in the ability to redress mistakes. To wit, I was probably too hard on CP and DBM - especially CP, who has accumulated an impressively substantive body of specialist knowledge about sg radio in the comparatively short amount of time he’s been at it. I have no reason to think DBM’s recently unveiled utility driven model of blogging won’t yield similar results. Certainly his post on the logistics of music publication is nothing if not exhaustive. I stand by the larger point I tried and probably failed to make, namely that no matter how comprehensive and knowledgeable, to say nothing of helpful, a more specialized blog like CP’s or DBM’s may be, it all is for naught if readers feel alienated by the impression that the writer has overspecialized, that there’s nothing to read here if you’re not in sg radio or nothing to read there if you’re not a professional or avocational musician. But that said, DBM and CP are the good guys and what they do is both valuable and necessary (plus, as my reader pointed out, I do well enough stirring the pot without having to have a cohort), and if I suggested otherwise, I was in error. Apologies all around.

Email this Post

Post a Comment

Your email is never published nor shared. Required fields are marked * Please note: Comment moderation is enabled and may delay your comment. There is no need to resubmit your comment.

*

*