Guy Chapman aka JzG wrote:
On Tue, 28 Nov 2006 20:20:00 -0500, Jeff Raymond
<jeff.raymond(a)internationalhouseofbacon.com> wrote:
The only roadblock we have regarding blogs as
sources is that some are
more reputable than others, and filtering the wheat from the chaff is
important. However, we do that with magazines, books, and journals
already, so it can't be *that* difficult.
Um. There are many fewer unreliable magazines, due to the non-zero
bar to publication.
That's not entirely true, though. Magazines aren't considered
"reliable"
due to the said "non-zero bar" factor, but rather because of their
history. People are afraid of blogs, even though there are many blogs
that are just as reliable - even perhaps more reliable - than many
otherwise "trusted" magazines. With very little exception, we'd accept a
magazine source, with proper attribution, in a non-controverisial
instance, and let the reader make the decision regardless of their
knowledge of the source. There's absolutely no reason we couldn't do that
with blogs, too.
-Jeff
--
If you can read this, I'm not at home.