Recalibrating the Asterisk

The dust from last November and this year’s marriage victories is settling, and the place of blogs in the discussion is undeniable. I’ve been wondering, though, what I bring to the table through this blog. Is there anything at Asterisk that readers can’t (and don’t) get elsewhere or am I just talking because I have to post something?

As I was struggling to put my thoughts together for this post, another blogger (Chris Geidner, who you should be reading) pointed out something that I’ve noticed: There’s a lot of repetition coming from the LGBT blogs. Today’s win on the Matthew Shepard Act was reported by no less than five important blogs within a few minutes of the vote. As Geidner pointed out, this duplication of efforts seems like a waste of resources.

I’m thankful that I don’t have to worry about mentioning every news bulletin because of blogs like Joe.My.God and Towleroad (Sorry, Queerty, no pr0n at work). I’m relieved that I don’t have to take on the hate mongers every day now that Jeremy at Good-As-You, Alvin at Holy Bullies and Headless Monsters, and the gang at Box Turtle Bulletin have agreed to take on that part of the battle. And I’m grateful that other bloggers like Thomas Waters and David Mailloux talk about their individual efforts, giving me the urge to keep going.

So I’m recalibrating. Instead of trying to grab every news item, I’ll be more selective in my posting. You may see a little less of me in your RSS reader (you do have a subscription, right? RIGHT?), but hopefully it’ll mean more when I’m there.

We don’t want to lose the energy that our community found last November, but my hope is that we’ll all find ways to be better coordinated. I’m hopeful that Asterisk will become a more substantive space in the coming weeks and months. I hope you’ll stick around and join in the conversation!

Advertisements

9 thoughts on “Recalibrating the Asterisk

  1. I've reached the same conclusion that there are too many blogs reporting all the same news. I used to be subscribed to so many of them, my RSS feeds would be clogged with the same stories over and over. I said Enough!I pared away many of the big-name gay news blogs from my RSS feed and kept a just few good ones, like Joe.My.God, Law Dork, Gay Marriage Watch, Spewing Truth, and of course Asterisk. But I'm even starting to get away from JMG because all Joe does is link to news stories much like Drudge Report does and JMG's comment sections are filled with trolls and queens making sane discussion virtually impossible. I'd rather spend my time reading some thoughtful and informed commentary and analysis.I agree with your recalibration Matt, and yes, I am a subscriber!

  2. I don't newsblog as much as I used too. It's gotten to be too much.These days I prefer doing commentary about the A-list blog(gers) and how so far off the wall they've become.

  3. You know, you may think that you're simply being redundant in posting what others have. But what you should at least take into consideration is that not everyone reads or subscribes to the same sites/blogs as you. What you post here on Asterisk may be the only thing some people read about on the subject. I know this is the only blog I read on the subject anyway. It's similar to why I post my Christian Apologetics blogs, Matt. Just because the information is out there doesn't mean people are necessarily finding it. I post in hopes of someone stumbling upon my blog and it being their first encounter with my type of blog. I post so that people I know can be informed.

  4. Commenting decisions can be frustrating. If you're popular and have a light-touch approach, as JMG does, you're opening yourself up to trolls. On the other hand, if you limit commenting by requiring commenters to register (for example), a lot of potential commenters (like me) won't comment. It's one of the reasons I don't comment at Pam's House Blend. Another possibility that I've seen is total moderation where all comments have to be approved. I'm not a big fan of that one either.Still, we should all have such problems.Thanks for the comment!

  5. Don't get me wrong; when there's big news, I'll be talking about it. I just don't intend to get into the micro-level discussion on every issue. For example, the Matthew Shepard Act jumped a major hurdle this week, as I mentioned (briefly) above. What I haven't talked about is the back-and-forth that's been going on in the Senate for the last week or so, or the poison pill amendments that will hopefully be yoinked back out during the mark up process.Unless there's news that I have a moderately unique take on, I probably won't mention it again in any detail until it gets closer to the President's desk.

  6. Commenting decisions can be frustrating. If you're popular and have a light-touch approach, as JMG does, you're opening yourself up to trolls. On the other hand, if you limit commenting by requiring commenters to register (for example), a lot of potential commenters (like me) won't comment. It's one of the reasons I don't comment at Pam's House Blend. Another possibility that I've seen is total moderation where all comments have to be approved. I'm not a big fan of that one either.Still, we should all have such problems.Thanks for the comment!

  7. Don't get me wrong; when there's big news, I'll be talking about it. I just don't intend to get into the micro-level discussion on every issue. For example, the Matthew Shepard Act jumped a major hurdle this week, as I mentioned (briefly) above. What I haven't talked about is the back-and-forth that's been going on in the Senate for the last week or so, or the poison pill amendments that will hopefully be yoinked back out during the mark up process.Unless there's news that I have a moderately unique take on, I probably won't mention it again in any detail until it gets closer to the President's desk.

Comments are closed.