Blog Wars
Blog Wars Part 1: As Joe reported, LAist's Tony Pierce gets hired by the LATimes. In a lot of ways LAist is a good blog and its one I read daily. The story is also picked up on blogging.la and the comments start to fly by the pro and anti Pierce forces. Nothing we're not used to here. Then in comments on his own post, blogging.la's David Markland questions the impact of LAist's local coverage on their ratings as opposed to their prolific gossip and pop culture. Despite that, Markland gives props to the blog and Pierce.Following which, Pierce posts an overly defensive, ballistic screed accusing Markland of lying and being jealous.
I'm not sure I got that from David's comment. However Tony's histrionics now make me question the wisdom of the Times' pick. But whatever. I've always preferred Markland's writing anyway, nothing personal to Tony. Even when I called Markland an idiot.
Blog Wars Part 2: Angelic Blog posted a list of all the current development projects Downtown. Westchester Parents blog posts an article urging a moratorium on new construction until the water crisis can be solved and links to Angelic's list. Then, Angelic refers to Westchester as BANANAs. Westchester accuses Angelic of getting testy. Finally in comments on Westchester, Angelic's rico denies being testy and tells Westchester that if the BANANA shoe fits, wear it.
Labels: blogging.la, david markland, laist, los angeles politics, tony pierce
Posted by Mayor Sam @ 12/04/2007 12:34:00 AM
6 Comments:
LAist reeks of unwashed hipsters.
"BLOG WART" = "WWG"
In both LAist and bloggingla, tony comes off just as his detractors say he's been all along: unprofessional and mean and he admits it, too.
He comes onto the blog to berate and argue with everyone who disagrees with him, deletes posts that sound innocuous, but maybe just didn't rave about how brilliant he is and the best and most smartest blog in the universe.
So this is the mentor of the hip new gen of bloggers? This where a certain dogg gets his role model? At least Tony doesn't seem to attack other people out of the bluea and seems atuned to libeling people.
Wonder if anyone at the LA Times ever read him before hiring him -- lucky he won't be writing at all, just doing administration. Will he be deleting everyone's posts?
Ah, the crit now is that Tony is opinionated and a little self-involved. That is more typically the tipoff of successful blogging than problem blogging. You can say the same about Kos, Atrios, Nikki Finke, you get the idea.
Writers don't pass a bar or get granted a CPA---especially when they're young, they have to esteem themselves, and the best ones do, healthily.
If Tony + Times don't blow the Times online readership into the tropopause, you can blame Times, not Tony.
"Ah, the crit now is that Tony is opinionated and a little self-involved."
No, the crit now and has been that Tony is abusive and all for reader interaction when they're sucking his dick. There's a big different between have a big ego an being arrogant.
If Tony's going to be in charge of "reader interactivity" we're only going to be seeing more of the same from the Times. It is very scary to think he could be moderating comments there. I hope the Times will address this issue, because any time a comment is reportedly deleted or ignored over more complimentary ones, I will believe its because of Tony.
"If Tony + Times don't blow the Times online readership into the tropopause, you can blame Times, not Tony."
I'm sure Tony will to. But if it does do better, Tony will take all the credit in the world.
I give him ninety days before they can him. Others agree.
http://www.windsofchange.net/archives/blog_news.php
i will not be moderating comments on the LAT
and anyone who thinks about it for more than a second can figure out that the LAT is a very different beast than LAist, thus different behaviors/strategies must be put in place to ensure success over there.
as for deleting comments on LAist - im sure i had a far more lenient track record there than in most blogs in the Technorati 1000, so if yours was deleted it was probably overdue and deserving. which isnt to say that i was perfect in my choices, but i stand behind everything i did in the comments.
however one thing that always brings a smile to my face is when people call me belligerent to my readers. the concept that they can be abusive (and anonymous) but i cant give it back is so laughable that im laughing now.
the blogosphere is as even a playing field as there ever was. as jim rome says, "have a take that does not suck". but negative anonymous commenters hate it when you dare to reply to their accusations.
and bla seems to hate it when you call them out for flat out lying, which is what they did when they accused us of getting a significant amount of hits from gossip and non-LA stories.
its been several days now and they still havent been able to back up that allegation, which should be proof that my defense was accurate.
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home