Conversation on Blogs: It's Mostly a Myth

February 11, 2010

The idea that the blog world is a big conversation gets a lot of discussion. It sounds utopian–that millions of blogs are abuzz with a collective dialogue that makes us all smarter and better and happier. But by and large, that’s not true.

The reality is that there’s very little conversation happening on blogs. What passes for conversation usually falls into one of two categories that look like conversation but aren’t really. These categories can be labeled as 1) Affirmation and Conciliation and 2) Pedantry and Venom.

In both cases, what that writing and talking is really about is inflating the ego.

Affirmation and Conciliation: I’m Okay, You’re Okay

Affirmation and conciliation are two sides of the same coin–people who want everyone to like them. As a default, this means complimenting everyone and anyone under the sun. When a disagreement arises, smooth it over somehow. Give everyone a way to weasel back off of their position to something more general so that “really we’re saying the same thing after all” despite that not being the case.

Pedantry and Venom: I’m Better Than You

At the opposite end of the spectrum are those whose traipse though the blogosphere aiming to exert the superiority of their mental muscle. If it’s someone they generally like and agree with, they aim to prove their worth by picking nits.

Typos will be pointed out. Flawed arguments get exposed. Biases get quipped at. Instead of this being a means to an end, it is the end in and of itself for those people. They are chasing the nerd equivalent of blood-lust, a high that comes from looking down on others.

If one of these bullies should really dislike the person, though, it becomes venomous, especially when there’s a virtual crowd gathered around to function as a complicit cheering section. This is where the internet trolls dwell.

These patterns apply equally to both comments and blogs.

What Real Conversation Looks Like: Ideas, not Egos

There are some people who are genuinely interested in discussing ideas for the purpose of learning and growing. They’ll ask a sincere question and actually read the answers. Then, they might even think about the answers and respond to them honestly, focused on the ideas involved, not the egos.

If the stars line up, multiple people will take this approach at the same time. The idea will be discussed until reaches a conclusion. Everyone will actually be somewhat wiser for the time it took.

This whole thing requires sincerity, analytical thinking, and patience, so it should surprise no one if it’s not common on the web. But I do think it could easily be more common if we consciously aimed not to engage in banter that’s purely ego-driven.