Jonathan Kranz said on April 24, 2005 at 08:20 AM

Indeed. While I’ve heard of these alleged giants of blogging, I haven’t been motivated to visit their sites or read their blogs—their content has no meaning for me.

Like many others, I cherry-pick the blogs relevant to me, creating my own motley crew of “reporters” to bring me the news (or opinions, ideas, rants, shouts in the dark).

The blog world is more like a patchwork quilt, suited to individual tastes, than a seamless garment, one size fits all.

Caroline Bujak said on April 25, 2005 at 03:01 PM

I completely agree. I visit blogs because I want to hear an individual voice, not a high profile blogger that works for a giant corporation.

To me, blogs are unpolitical in nature, not governed by a selected body of individuals. I am hoping they will continue stay that way.

HomeOfficeVoice said on April 26, 2005 at 12:04 AM

Agree 100% with previous comments. These names come up often and it’s all just built-up hype.

Many bloggers feel that they have to continally link to these “gurus” and the hype builds on itself.

Their blogs are nothing special. They are just blogs! Just like any other of the thousands out there.

In fact, I find very little to read in the best-known blogs and find the best stuff in the least well-known blogs - and isn’t that why we’re all blogging.

Aimee@DigitalGrit said on April 26, 2005 at 02:18 PM

Here, here!
I agree—these are very visible blogs, but they don’t necessarily get my “vote.”

If they blogosphere is, in fact, a universe, perhaps they could govern a “country,” but my land would be ruled by the Debbie Weils, Olivier Travers(es?), Amy Gahrans and Toby Bloombergs of the universe. These are the blogs that matter to me and what I do every day.

——-