<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Blogging less?</title>
	<atom:link href="http://walt.lishost.org/2008/07/blogging-less/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://walt.lishost.org/2008/07/blogging-less/</link>
	<description>The library voice of the radical middle.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 10 Feb 2012 22:48:16 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: John</title>
		<link>http://walt.lishost.org/2008/07/blogging-less/comment-page-1/#comment-33376</link>
		<dc:creator>John</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 28 Jul 2008 17:14:31 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://walt.lishost.org/?p=827#comment-33376</guid>
		<description>I hear you, Walt. It gets busy at both ends. I&#039;d like to say that I&#039;ll consider doing an independent study on the subject for one of my five remaining MLIS courses, but it is unlikely to be so. I&#039;m still trying to keep up with the tide of activity that came from the last one.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I hear you, Walt. It gets busy at both ends. I&#8217;d like to say that I&#8217;ll consider doing an independent study on the subject for one of my five remaining MLIS courses, but it is unlikely to be so. I&#8217;m still trying to keep up with the tide of activity that came from the last one.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Steve Lawson</title>
		<link>http://walt.lishost.org/2008/07/blogging-less/comment-page-1/#comment-33374</link>
		<dc:creator>Steve Lawson</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 28 Jul 2008 16:56:45 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://walt.lishost.org/?p=827#comment-33374</guid>
		<description>And there&#039;s the problem of this being a moving target. Most of the people I&#039;m most interested in keeping up with have largely abandoned Twitter for FriendFeed. If you are only on Twitter, you are missing the real back channel for everything on FriendFeed. Seems insane that Twitter has a backchannel, but that&#039;s what things are like down the rabbit hole.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>And there&#8217;s the problem of this being a moving target. Most of the people I&#8217;m most interested in keeping up with have largely abandoned Twitter for FriendFeed. If you are only on Twitter, you are missing the real back channel for everything on FriendFeed. Seems insane that Twitter has a backchannel, but that&#8217;s what things are like down the rabbit hole.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: walt</title>
		<link>http://walt.lishost.org/2008/07/blogging-less/comment-page-1/#comment-33373</link>
		<dc:creator>walt</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 28 Jul 2008 16:12:57 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://walt.lishost.org/?p=827#comment-33373</guid>
		<description>John: I think it is an interesting possible study. I&#039;m just not sure it&#039;s one I&#039;d be qualified or energetic enough to carry out. For one thing, I might need to sign up with Twitter again...

I already have the sense that it&#039;s a little odd for one semi-retired individual to be carrying out the kind of study that might typically be done with a grant or by a library school--and I think &quot;the effect of Twitter on the depth of reading/writing in the library blogosphere&quot; might be such a study. I might be able to contribute a bunch of background data, on the other hand... 

(One real virtue of institutional/grant-funded studies: $ up front. The feedback and results from the research I did on library blogs, as opposed to liblogs, has not--shall we say--enormously encouraged me to carry out deeper or lateral research in that area. &quot;Run! Run away!&quot; is more like it. But that&#039;s another post!)</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>John: I think it is an interesting possible study. I&#8217;m just not sure it&#8217;s one I&#8217;d be qualified or energetic enough to carry out. For one thing, I might need to sign up with Twitter again&#8230;</p>
<p>I already have the sense that it&#8217;s a little odd for one semi-retired individual to be carrying out the kind of study that might typically be done with a grant or by a library school&#8211;and I think &#8220;the effect of Twitter on the depth of reading/writing in the library blogosphere&#8221; might be such a study. I might be able to contribute a bunch of background data, on the other hand&#8230; </p>
<p>(One real virtue of institutional/grant-funded studies: $ up front. The feedback and results from the research I did on library blogs, as opposed to liblogs, has not&#8211;shall we say&#8211;enormously encouraged me to carry out deeper or lateral research in that area. &#8220;Run! Run away!&#8221; is more like it. But that&#8217;s another post!)</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: John</title>
		<link>http://walt.lishost.org/2008/07/blogging-less/comment-page-1/#comment-33372</link>
		<dc:creator>John</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 28 Jul 2008 15:31:55 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://walt.lishost.org/?p=827#comment-33372</guid>
		<description>Walt: One of the great things about Twitter is that &quot;tiny little spur-of-the-moment things&quot; are going to it. I said so in my blog post on which you commented. What I said there was &quot;By moving a lot of this dynamic information to Twitter, the blogosphere gets cleaned up&quot;. A great thing!

And, as you say, your results do not show &quot;that the community is engaging less deeply or reading less.&quot; Not yet. My point is that the type of numbers you are collecting are the beginning of what could be a very interesting media study, the effect of Twitter on the depth of reading/writing in the library blogosphere. Other lib-bloggers are noticing changes in these patterns, but there are no numbers yet.

I do not lament the change. If people are shifting to Twitter for their conversations, there must be something to it, even if it is not my preference. More power to them.

You may or may not decide to look at the Twitter element, and the patterns in reading/writing in the library blogosphere. Entirely up to you of course. Just wishful thinking because it interests me.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Walt: One of the great things about Twitter is that &#8220;tiny little spur-of-the-moment things&#8221; are going to it. I said so in my blog post on which you commented. What I said there was &#8220;By moving a lot of this dynamic information to Twitter, the blogosphere gets cleaned up&#8221;. A great thing!</p>
<p>And, as you say, your results do not show &#8220;that the community is engaging less deeply or reading less.&#8221; Not yet. My point is that the type of numbers you are collecting are the beginning of what could be a very interesting media study, the effect of Twitter on the depth of reading/writing in the library blogosphere. Other lib-bloggers are noticing changes in these patterns, but there are no numbers yet.</p>
<p>I do not lament the change. If people are shifting to Twitter for their conversations, there must be something to it, even if it is not my preference. More power to them.</p>
<p>You may or may not decide to look at the Twitter element, and the patterns in reading/writing in the library blogosphere. Entirely up to you of course. Just wishful thinking because it interests me.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: walt</title>
		<link>http://walt.lishost.org/2008/07/blogging-less/comment-page-1/#comment-33371</link>
		<dc:creator>walt</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 28 Jul 2008 14:44:08 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://walt.lishost.org/?p=827#comment-33371</guid>
		<description>Mark: Thanks. 

John: I have to admit that I see no reason to lament tiny little spur-of-the-moment things going to Twitter rather than blogs--and I&#039;ll certainly be looking at average post length as one of several correlations, once I&#039;ve gone through the rest of the sampling.

In fact, I see no reason to lament at all. Even these possibly-biased, single-factor results don&#039;t suggest that the community is &quot;engaging less deeply&quot; or &quot;reading less.&quot; The general increase in comments per post (if that holds up) suggests the opposite, if anything--that fewer posts are getting lost in the shuffle, that people are responding when appropriate. 

But then, I&#039;ve never been much for lamenting. Which is probably a good thing!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Mark: Thanks. </p>
<p>John: I have to admit that I see no reason to lament tiny little spur-of-the-moment things going to Twitter rather than blogs&#8211;and I&#8217;ll certainly be looking at average post length as one of several correlations, once I&#8217;ve gone through the rest of the sampling.</p>
<p>In fact, I see no reason to lament at all. Even these possibly-biased, single-factor results don&#8217;t suggest that the community is &#8220;engaging less deeply&#8221; or &#8220;reading less.&#8221; The general increase in comments per post (if that holds up) suggests the opposite, if anything&#8211;that fewer posts are getting lost in the shuffle, that people are responding when appropriate. </p>
<p>But then, I&#8217;ve never been much for lamenting. Which is probably a good thing!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: John</title>
		<link>http://walt.lishost.org/2008/07/blogging-less/comment-page-1/#comment-33370</link>
		<dc:creator>John</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 28 Jul 2008 12:35:27 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://walt.lishost.org/?p=827#comment-33370</guid>
		<description>This is an interesting study. I think Twitter has something to do with it. Other factors may be involved, but to the extent that it is related to Twitter, I see your study as a media study, not unlike those that examine the effect of digital media on reading/writing. I think Twitter serves some good purposes, but as recently mentioned at Tame the Web, &quot;Weâ€™ve lamented this before, this &#039;fact&#039; that the whole community is blogging less since Twitter, engaging less deeply, it seems. Reading less&quot; (July 16, 2008, Twitter: Love it or Hate It?). I&#039;ll be following your updates.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>This is an interesting study. I think Twitter has something to do with it. Other factors may be involved, but to the extent that it is related to Twitter, I see your study as a media study, not unlike those that examine the effect of digital media on reading/writing. I think Twitter serves some good purposes, but as recently mentioned at Tame the Web, &#8220;Weâ€™ve lamented this before, this &#8216;fact&#8217; that the whole community is blogging less since Twitter, engaging less deeply, it seems. Reading less&#8221; (July 16, 2008, Twitter: Love it or Hate It?). I&#8217;ll be following your updates.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Mark</title>
		<link>http://walt.lishost.org/2008/07/blogging-less/comment-page-1/#comment-33367</link>
		<dc:creator>Mark</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 28 Jul 2008 01:49:52 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://walt.lishost.org/?p=827#comment-33367</guid>
		<description>I am *so* glad I didn&#039;t have anything in my mouth when I read this:

&quot;Admittedly, weâ€™re dealing with tiny obscure little companies here. Presumably you feel safe ....&quot;

Absolute pure genius snark, Walt.  I love it.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I am *so* glad I didn&#8217;t have anything in my mouth when I read this:</p>
<p>&#8220;Admittedly, weâ€™re dealing with tiny obscure little companies here. Presumably you feel safe &#8230;.&#8221;</p>
<p>Absolute pure genius snark, Walt.  I love it.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

