Is there a rule that a blog needs to be horribly dry, scholarly, and free of gossip? I’m not accusing any blog of exhibiting these qualities. In fact, I enjoy almost all of the VA politics blogs. I have about 60 on my RSS feeder. They’re all unique in character. Some incorporate humor and some prefer wonkery. Some convey occasional anger. Some (including this one) occasionally go overboard. We’re only human, and none of us have editors.
My question: is a 50 comment free-for-all debate any less valuable (and insightful) than a detailed post containing thoughtful policy analysis? They are both examples of political participation that didn’t exist just a few years ago. The former involves dozens of citizens displaying passion for the local political process (my God, when was the last time so many people focused on state and local politics?). The latter involves a citizen journalist putting their serious opinion into the public square for debate. Who is to say which is more important or relevant?
Virginia Centrist has the debate going on here, and it’s one that strikes at the heart of what was discussed at the Sorenson Institute in 2005.