Skip

November 9, 2000
8:27 PM   Subscribe

The New Yorker dedicates ten columns to Meg, Jason, Ev, Pyra, Blogger, MetaFilter, and weblogs, and nobody blogs it. (Yeah, I saw M, J and E mention it, but it's as if you modest Maggies didn't want us to see it.) Probably the most appropriate journalist take on personal weblogs so far, too bad it's not online. High profile, with photo-- c'mon, this deserves bloggage!

Page 102, Nov. 13th, Cartoon Issue.
posted by dan_of_brainlog (31 comments total)

 
I would blog it, but I don't get the New Yorker, and being the respectable mag that they are, they don't appear to have an online edition at all.
posted by zempf at 8:32 PM on November 9, 2000


I didn't blog it, because there was no URL I could post showing the article.

The MetaFilter mention was nice though.
posted by mathowie at 9:17 PM on November 9, 2000


Ditto with the Speak magazine mention of Pyra, Ev, Kottke et al. I didn’t really like that article, though.
posted by capt.crackpipe at 9:32 PM on November 9, 2000


I read the article just a few hours ago. I finally got the answer to that damn story about the little girl on the bike...
posted by Jeremy at 9:40 PM on November 9, 2000


none of the conde' nast publications put their content online...not even back issues...

it's really annoying...
posted by centrs at 10:00 PM on November 9, 2000


For the sake of completeness, also mentioned in the article were Rebecca's Pocket, the Beebo Ratings, Fairvue Central, Romenesko's MediaNews, Arts & Letters Daily, Pitas, EditThisPage.Com, pb, FOJM, Powazek, and last (and also probably least), The Pyra Shrine.
posted by jjg at 10:00 PM on November 9, 2000


Don't forget The Trip. I can't believe they didn't list the amazing flight tracker URL.

Oh, and the fairvue mention was taken totally out of context. I'll bet a million dollars Nikolai was being sarcastic when he said "Kottke linked to me, my life is now complete." We all know that, but to someone reading about blogs for the first time, it sounds pathetic.
posted by mathowie at 10:24 PM on November 9, 2000


Hmmm...I can't speak for the Nik, but I know when Jason linked to me, I was thrilled and wrote his name all over my Algebra notebook, surrounded by stars and smiley faces.

Let's face it, kids: to anyone reading about our antics whose only Internet experience is Amazon or Hotmail, the whole shooting match probably pretty sounds pathetic. The personal website and its potential are the most misunderstood geek thing since band camp.
posted by bradlands at 11:00 PM on November 9, 2000


This one time, at SXSW, I stuck my Blogger enabled Palm VII up my USB port...
posted by CrazyUncleJoe at 11:05 PM on November 9, 2000


Jason did blog this news on the 8th. Since many MeFi readers also read Kottke.org, I did not feel that this needed to be posted here. I just went and picked up the magazine on my way home.
posted by tamim at 11:11 PM on November 9, 2000


Well, Jason's mention was appropriately modest, Meg's even more so. And I'm outside the margin of MeFi readers that doesn't frequent their sites. I wouldn't have known of the article if my father (my father) didn't mention it to me...

I trust you MetaFolks to keep me in the loop, and you let me down! You gotta tell me about these things, people!
posted by dan_of_brainlog at 11:54 PM on November 9, 2000


(s/doesn't frequent/frequents/, you know what I meant)
posted by dan_of_brainlog at 11:55 PM on November 9, 2000


Can someone scan a copy?
As well as it not being online - I can't even buy it this side of the Atlantic!
posted by tomcosgrave at 1:54 AM on November 10, 2000


They still publish the New Yorker? Gee! Ya learn something every day. =)
posted by ZachsMind at 3:11 AM on November 10, 2000


Um, Tom: I just bought a copy in WH Smith, so I'm sure one of Dublin's big newsagents or bookshops will have one.

(what's even scarier is that I used to trade essay titles with a New Yorker staff writer. only connect.)
posted by holgate at 3:53 AM on November 10, 2000


My vote's for a transcribed copy.

Or get a group of people to take blocks of text, transcribe it and post it as "quotes from the article" in a nice copyright-avoiding mess. :-)
posted by cCranium at 5:20 AM on November 10, 2000


Seemed to me it was just the popular kids getting more bandwidth, leaving us dweebs in the dust. Again.
posted by idiolect at 6:14 AM on November 10, 2000


I concur, idiolect.At least Pitas got a mention for once.
posted by Mr. skullhead at 6:35 AM on November 10, 2000


Well, umm... no kidding. An article that (supposedly) deals with Blogger talking to some of the employees of Pyra? Craziness!

there is no cabal
posted by cCranium at 10:38 AM on November 10, 2000


I bet those Pyra Bastards are behind the whole Florida Election mess, too! When will the evil popular crowd finally relinquish it's stranglehold on society?

DORKITY NOW!
posted by CrazyUncleJoe at 11:07 AM on November 10, 2000


[brad] The personal website and its potential are the most misunderstood geek thing since band camp.

One time, on Metafilter...
posted by daveadams at 11:33 AM on November 10, 2000


I was just being sarcastic when I mentioned that my life was complete (it was the first time Jason had linked to Fairvue's home page ever, and I thought it would never happen).

But I'm not disappointed that the quote was taken out of context. I'm disappointed that my hits haven't skyrocketed since the article was published.

(The Brad put a "the" in front of my name. My life is now complete.)
posted by Nikolai at 12:13 PM on November 10, 2000


Whoops. Where on earth did this come from? Is Condé Nast finally going online? Their operation seems a little amateurish, though.
posted by dhartung at 1:01 PM on November 10, 2000


I read the article and it left me a little speechless about the level to which it detailed Meg's pursuit of Kottke. I'd be kind of embarrassed if I were them.

But it was also cool to read about a "culture" I know and love, and to learn a bit about the business end of Pyra/Blogger.

If there is a cool kids/geek dichotomy in Blogger, I think we create it by all linking to and talking about the same blogs. So we don't get to turn around and complain about it.

One last thing about the New Yorker article ... I thought my reaction in a nutshell was that it just kind of made me cringe, as Ev said on the front of Blogger the other day. But then I got into an AIM discussion of it with another blogger and really enjoyed hashing it all out.

So ... I think the popular kids are our version of "All My Children," and that's OK.
posted by jillmatrix at 5:55 PM on November 10, 2000


> Meg's pursuit of Kottke

Ha ha. Yes, it did come out sounding a little heavy on the pursuit side. Some of the things I said were jokes, but they don't sound that way in the article. And yes, I was a little embarrassed about it. I had no idea the story would focus so much on me, or Jason, or that so many of the things I said would end up in it.

But after thinking about it quite a bit, I've decided I don't mind. Someone I know said the article provides a, "human example of why Blogger is a very cool application." I've got an inbox full of email from people who are now discovering blogs, including someone who set up his own yesterday and has been posting his thoughts on the election. So I've stopped cringing, and started thinking this is pretty cool. More people are discovering blogs, and discovering the web as a means for personal expression. And that makes me happy.

As for this popular kids stuff, Rebecca called Pyra saying she was writing an article about weblogs. Since we make Blogger, she wanted to interview us. Being a good journalist and knowing her audience, Rebecca found the best angle to explain weblogs to her readers. That's all.
posted by megnut at 6:27 PM on November 10, 2000


"How can I make an obscure computer application accessible to everyday readers? I know! Sex!"

Oops. I see Jason is blushing again.
posted by dhartung at 11:23 PM on November 10, 2000


Joe Clark reads between the lines of the New Yorker article.
posted by xiffix at 6:23 PM on November 12, 2000


Aw Christ.

I realize no one cares any more, but does this article really have to turn into a "they get all the attention" thing again?

I mean, really. This post (this one, I refer to me here) is coming from a guy who gets 3 hits a week on his site; one from his desk at home, one from his desk at work, and one from joe-random MeFi user who wants to know WTF is up with this inane bastard.

It isn't about a clique, for crying out loud. We're interested in what meg and the other pyra folk do because they created a tool that we use, and they've opened themselves up to us.

We read Matt's home site because of MeFi, we're interested in what he does. The fact that he's a pyrate too is a mere perk, cuts down a website we'd have to check otherwise.

We read Derek because of Fray, we read Zeldman because of Dr. Web, we read all the so-called "A-list bloggers" because they do more than just blog. Blogs for the most part don't interest us unless it's someone we know. I read my friend's blogs because they're my friends, and they read mine because I give them lots of money.

If you want to be added to the a-list, get off your whiney-horse and fucking do something to make people interested in who you are.

4 years ago, I considered the A-list to be Zeldman, Powazek, Ben Brown, Maura and Drue. That's since expanded to include all them Pyra folk we talked about earlier, and a few others, because they're doing interesting stuff.

Blogs are great, blogs are Good Things, I fight for blogs as a legitimate form of self-expression, but if you want to stick out from the crowd, talking about shapes in the clouds isn't going to do it, no matter how cool it makes you think you sound.
posted by cCranium at 12:01 PM on November 13, 2000


Gee, I see I should've put a smiley somewhere in my post. Didn't mean to start a cool kids/geeks thing at all. It was just that I thought the funniest line in the article was Meg's quote: "I was especially struck by the number of people who thought it was a big prank pulled by the 'popular' kids to make fun of the uncool kids," seeing as to how in the real world most of us are probably not cool at all.

Hey, if anyone wants to read about my toddler's play dates and erupting molars, that's great. But I'll be reading Zeldman and Kottke.
posted by idiolect at 1:41 PM on November 13, 2000


idiolect, I wasn't responding to your post, actually. I was able to quite clearly make out the bump in your cheek from your tongue.

It's a response to a couple of posts I've seen today on personal blogs both while wading through the Blogger recently updated list, and ones I read regularily.

I apologise for not being clear earlier.

Also, I was especially grumpy when I posted that, for reasons completely unrelated to blogging, it's a little angrier than I really intended it to be, I apologise to everyone for that as well.
posted by cCranium at 2:10 PM on November 13, 2000


Having been in the news business for [mumble, mumble] years, I know stories never really come out the way the subjects think they might.

[Famous last words: They'd never be interested in that.] ;o)
posted by jillmatrix at 5:37 PM on November 13, 2000


« Older It seems the SDMI team would rather declare...   |   AAAAGH! Newer »


This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments



Post