Two random comments

1. Why doesn’t someone start a blog/website devoted SOLELY to rounding up non-sg press and media coverage of sg and then blast that roundup in to a daily feed that people (like me) could subscribe to? Yes, if you know what you’re doing Google and other search tools will do this for you, but I DON’T always know what I’m doing and even when I do I’m too lazy to build the searches and refine them etc. Martin Roth does a good job of collecting this kind of news and Daniel Mount has started getting in on the game (as far as I can tell, sgblognews just waits for others like Roth and Mount to find an interesting link and then posts an item without acknowledging they got to that link via someone else). For instance, here’s this McKameys story that Mount dug up. It’s the kind of story that’s boilerplate and not terribly well written but it is what it is. But usually there are one or two interesting factoids or turns of phrases buried in the story that makes it worthwhile. And in general it’s interesting to me to see how others see gospel music from the outside. Surely I’m not the only person who’d be interested in seeing this kind of thing rounded up in a simple clearinghouse format daily or weekly. Any takers?

2. Bloggers should avoid commenting on their own posts. Daniel Mount has the (to me) annoying tendency of micro-responding to comments frivolously. “Fantastic” or “thanks for posting” or words to these effect are often all that Mount has to say by way of a reply-comment to some reader’s comments. David Bruce Murray is more disciplined about it and only occasionally responds to commenters with another comment. And I guess if you’re going to do it, that’s the best way. But as a rule, I never post comments to my own comments sections or other bloggers’ sites. If I have something worth saying, I make a post out of it, which not only feeds my beast but also creates a conversation of sorts. Until I rule the world, I can’t force others to follow my lead (for instance, I’ve been wishing for years now that DBM would make blog posts of his own out of many of the comments and posts he leaves at other websites, even though I understand the reasons why he doesn’t). But we bloggers take up enough bandwidth as it is, and I humbly submit that we don’t need to get into the comments bidness too. If a comment is worth commenting on, then it ought to rise to the level of its own post or an update within the original post. If not, stay outta the comments.

Email this Post

Trackbacks & Pings

  1. » Southern Gospel Artists in the news on 30 Nov 2006 at 11:18 am

    […] At the request of Doug Harrison of Averyfineline, I will step up my efforts to find stories on Southern Gospel artists in local news sources. First on the plate is a Neosho Daily News story on a Gospel Sing featuring, among others, the Lesters and the Signature Quartet (a different group than Signature Sound). Also worthy of note is this Lancaster (SC) News story on Mercy’s Well. […]


  1. Daniel J. Mount wrote:

    I like interacting with my readers. :)

  2. judi wrote:

    I think you are following the time-honored editorial page directive of not commenting on letters to the editor, or getting into arguments with readers who express their opinions. This authorial restraint adds a journalistic flavor to your blog that some other blogs may lack. Extra points for you!

  3. NG wrote:

    Re finding non-SG media stories about Southern Gospel: Easiest way I have found is to go to Google’s New Section and search for “Southern Gospel Music.” Include the quotes when searching. You won’t get everything because not every media outline participates in Google News but you’ll find a fair bit.

  4. Scott wrote:

    I concur, Judi. My opinion is that all the commenting back and forth in the name of interaction is just a kind of people-pleasing, customer service type approach that has no place in a journalistic approach.

    I prefer my bloggers to be succinct and objective, as opposed to ingratiating.

  5. Chrystal wrote:

    My opinion (and keep in mind that this is just my opinion) is that the issue of interacting with readers is really subjective. Some bloggers choose to have a forum where they can interact with their readers. Some want to use their blog as a platform to start conversation. Both are excellent formats, and both have merit. To me, no single way is the right way. If someone chooses to interact, then that is their prerogative. If some don’t, then that is fine too.

    Whether readers wish for the blogger to interact with their readers seems subjective too. Some wish for it, some don’t.

  6. David Bruce Murray wrote:

    Regarding me responding to those who comment within my blog’s comment section, I think it’s fine to a point obviously, but I try not to make a habit of it.

    Come to think of it, once in a while, my local newspaper has a response from the editor underneath a “Letter To The Editor.” I guess none of his journalism professors ever told him it was anti-journalistic to do that. Oh well…I think he went to the University of NC at Chapel Hill, so what do you expect? :o)

    By the way, I started to leave an extended comment at AMGS regarding the EH&SS=Contemporary claim one guy was making, but then I remembered Doug’s suggestion and made it a blog entry instead. Happy now, Doug?

    I guess you can’t respond here, though, and my question doesn’t really rise to the importance that would demand a fresh post. :o)

  7. Geno wrote:

    I loved DBM’s comment and also agree with Judi and Scott. Mr. Mount on the other hand appears to be one of those bloggers who doesn’t like to be questioned. I noticed on his website a post concerning a comment by a reader on this site. It seems he thinks a person must be a conservative to be a Christian. He indicated the reader could get lost, which doesn’t sound very “love thy neighbor”ish to me. Oh well.

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.