Great blog talent
June 2nd, 2010 at 11:00 am by David FarrarThere have been 32 entries in the Air New Zealand* Best Blog Awards.
Through the awards, I’ve discovered some great new blogs, and have also enjoyed reading the submitted entries. My RSS feed has just got larger.
I think the Judges will have a damn tough job of deciding a winner, as there are many great quality entries. Hopefully they may award some runner up prizes, and/or finalists.
While the Air New Zealand Blog Awards started as a humourous reaction against the Qantas Media Awards selection, the quality of the entries has shown that the many in the blogosphere have got in behind having blog awards.
Perhaps in future years, the Judges could create a number of category awards, as well as the overall Best Blog Award. Some possible categories are:
- Best Business Blog
- Best Economic Blog
- Best Legal Blog
- Best Political Blog (could also have right/left/centre)
- Best Photo Blog
- Best Tech Blog
- Best Personal Blog
- Best Humour Blog
Anyway well done to those who submitted entries, and well done to the NZ Bloggers Union for organising the awards. Good luck to all those who submitted.
* Air New Zealand is not the official sponsor of the awards. But they have been good enough not to sue for use of their name, as it is a wind up against Qantas.
Tags: Air New Zealand, Blogosphere
June 2nd, 2010 at 11:18 am
As the rain poured down last Saturday, and as Mrs Inventory slept, I had great fun going back through my 2009 archives. Getting a short-list of around 15 posts was a mission in itself; reducing that to four was challenging.
But more important for future blogging endeavours was the revelation that quantity does not equate to quality, and quite a few posts had been blogged merely to make up the numbers. For that reason alone it’s been a good exercise. I’ve checked out a few of the entrants today, and there is some terrific reading there.
Vote:June 2nd, 2010 at 11:23 am
Air NZ would be smart to stump up with some trophies and a overall prize
Vote:June 2nd, 2010 at 11:24 am
I would be ebarassed to recieve such mainstream recognition.
It is entirely counter to the concept of blogging.
Vote:June 2nd, 2010 at 11:38 am
“Mainstream recognition” when its awards by bloggers half taking the piss against official awards. Erm.
Personally quite like the idea, good to see Dimpost / Cactus and Whale all entered as well.
Also interesting that Tumeke didn’t enter the awards they set up (ignoring the wildcard option), guess they are trying to reduce the view of any bias.
Vote:June 2nd, 2010 at 11:39 am
Are these for people who nominated themself?
I seriously LOL’d when I read:
Phil U
http://whoar.co.nz/2009/commentwhoarthe-kids-up-north-have-still-got-rotten-teethbut-heyhelens-at-the-uneh/
Vote:http://whoar.co.nz/2009/commentwhoaravatara-review/
http://whoar.co.nz/2009/commentwhoarhow-the-new-media-is-just-pissing-all-over-the-old-mediain-their-coverage-of-the-unfolding-events-in-iranand-wont-someone-think-of-the-trees/
http://whoar.co.nz/2009/commentwhoartv-one-descends-to-mind-numbing-stupidityyou-betchaheylets-mini-audit-them/
June 2nd, 2010 at 11:41 am
Phil, when it has been pointed out to you that you average around 1 comment every 6 months, you are quick to point out that whoar is not a blog, it is a “news aggregtor”.
I trust you will be taking your nomination back?
Vote:June 2nd, 2010 at 11:44 am
shd we strike a special [precious’-award for muzza…?
i’m looking forward to reading the other entries..
..as ..(ahem!..)..i don’t get out..in a blog sense..that often…
(it’s all that news i wade thru..it’s time-consuming..)
..i had nine i thought up for it…
..and whereas maybe a savaging of national/act cd be expected from me…
..it is the look back at nine years of (non)-labour..(in lyric-form..and a total format-steal from/homage to… gil-scott-heron.).that i chose…
..but annual blog-awards are a no-brainer-idea…
and cd i suggest two more categories..?
best news blog…
and..a peoples/readers-choice…(voted-online..)..?
phil(whoar.co.nz)
Vote:June 2nd, 2010 at 11:48 am
nickb – I’m glad Philip Ure has entered. At least Keeping Stock won’t come last!
Vote:June 2nd, 2010 at 11:53 am
You just get a fucking job phool instead of seeking an award for being a parasitic unreformed drug addict.
Vote:June 2nd, 2010 at 11:58 am
“..instead of seeking an award for being a parasitic unreformed drug addict…”
are they doing ‘awards’ for that…?
(do they have a ‘retro’-category..)
phil(whoar.co.nz)
Vote:June 2nd, 2010 at 12:01 pm
Yes, you’re a prize loser.
Vote:June 2nd, 2010 at 12:32 pm
Since when was time wasting a talent..
What about… Best Knob Blog.
Vote:June 2nd, 2010 at 12:46 pm
Are they serious???
Vote:Has anyone actually been to phools blog?
I don’t read his posts so sure as hell not reading his blog.
June 2nd, 2010 at 12:54 pm
I should think so, given Tim’s ridiculous and unpleasant rant alleging bias in the Onyas judging because a handful of winners also sponsored other categories.
Although it’s ironic that I decided not to enter because they’d been such dicks towards Qantas finalist Ben Gracewood (Bomber’s blathering on the radio about it was just graceless) — and now I find he’s entered!
Vote:June 2nd, 2010 at 1:09 pm
God you are so precious Russell.
I think Tim and Bomber will rise above any pathetic partisanship and actually judge the submitted entries on their merits as blog posts.
At least with the Air New Zealand Awards we know who the judges are, we know the criteria and we know exactly who has entered. Would that the Qantas Awards showed the same level of openness.
It would be great if Air New Zealand sponsored officially a real blog awards like these, it would show up the Qantas Awards for the rigged, pro-MSM awards that they are.
Vote:June 2nd, 2010 at 1:47 pm
“…Has anyone actually been to phools blog?
I don’t read his posts so sure as hell not reading his blog…”
brilliant..!
phil9whoar.co.nz)
Vote:June 2nd, 2010 at 1:51 pm
I’m sure they will. But my point was that Tim recently indulged in a baseless and venomous rant alleging bias in another web awards. It was an extremely dickish thing to do.
Vote:June 2nd, 2010 at 3:06 pm
I think they do name all the judges, but they don’t say exactly who judged what. It’s a small country.
I judged some internet categories a couple of times under the previous awards management, but I still wouldn’t be inclined to brag about it.
I think “rigged” implies a degree of malice aforethought that isn’t there. But yes, it’s a bit difficult to match the stated criteria to two of the finalists. I was puzzled.
Vote:June 2nd, 2010 at 3:07 pm
These are a tragic joke designed to trap the vain – a fairly common characteristic of bloggers.
NZ Blogger’s Union appears to have a new definition for “self”, eg Kiwipolitico was not nominated by the active bloggers on that site, but is listed as self-nominated. Appears NZBU is trying to improve credibility of the “contest” by adding popular blogs without asking.
NZ Blogger’s Union apparently produce new rules as they go along – now judges can select blogs from Tumeke’s list. Any evidence there’s more than one potentially-sentient being in the union?. Can anyone call themselves a Union?.
Aside from the minor detail they apparently didn’t ask Air NZ whether they could misuse their IP to promote the self-serving contest, the publication of new rules after entries started has all the hallmarks of attempting to make a silk purse out of a sow’s ear.
Vote:June 2nd, 2010 at 5:14 pm
Seems to me counterproductive, I thought blogging was the fight of the common man / woman against the establishment. Oh how quick they conform when fame and fortune calls. Surely each blogger can stand on their own merits, the numbers don’t lie. A few more years and it will be something akin to the restaurant of the year award, how the hell anyone can judge blogs with an impartial attitude would be beyond me, it goes against human nature.
Vote:June 2nd, 2010 at 8:50 pm
Bruce
Once again we comment that the blog community are complaining about IP breaches? Hello, every time a blogger links to an MSM site do they ask the publisher? (sighs). We did it on purpose, unashamedly and have done so with disclaimers. A blind, one-legged baby-eating dingo could see that Air NZ have not and do not endorse or sponsor the awards. They’ve just been nice enough not to kick up a stink about it.
The Judges suggested they would like the wildcard category, it was not the idea of the creators of the award. The Union was open and honest about that as it was in disclosing who has entered and their links. Those who send 4 links in however are better placed because the Judges have an easier job judging them.
Murray
Never fear, I don’t think you ever have to worry about winning an award for anything. You don’t even whinge the best.
Others
Do you think Tim and Bomber organised it all and then named themselves as Judges. Hello? Anyone home?
We tried to create an all-inclusive awards where even Phil U is comfortable enough to enter. Sadly Russell wasn’t.
32 entries, a few after-thoughts sending in links and wide-spread blogging dialogue for the past few weeks says that we have succeeded.
Vote:June 2nd, 2010 at 9:29 pm
Wot the Union Boss said.
Vote:June 2nd, 2010 at 10:01 pm
Bruce Hamilton has already pointed out that kiwipolitico did not nominate itself for the award–someone else did without the consent of the KP blog administrators, and the posts that were entered are not necessarily those that we would have used as representative of our work. Our preference was to not enter, initially because of the nebulous rules about nominations and entry conditions (which changed more than once, including a last minute change that allowed judges to nominate their own choices (including their own blogs) from the Tumeke Top 20 of Dec 2009. Moreover, what was supposed to be a competition among blogs that covered political issues and current affairs has now expanded to include the likes of a prostitute’s blog and other tangental “current events” sites.
When KP expressed its misgivings about the process it was insulted and ridiculed by the NZBU spokesperson (you can see his response in the KP thread dedicated to the theme as well as on the NZBU web site). That also seem odd since we thought that our questions were legitimate. We do agree that the QMA blog category is a joke, so in principle support the idea of an alternative award competition along the lines DPF outlined above. We just had some issues with the process. To us that was a fair point of order.
Now we think there may be more to the awards than simply playing loose with the rules. Consider this (as quoted from the KP thread):
“Let me offer to you this scenario as another reason for my concerns:
(Suppose) A money- or celebrity-hungry blogger sees the failures of the QMA as an opportunity to establish a profitable alternative awards “brand.” He enlists similarly inclined bloggers on a (future) share-of profits basis and an internet entrepeneur, then ropes in a socialite “events manager” to serve as the deciding vote on a five man (no wimin) judging panel on blogs that cover social and political current events. The event’s organiser/celebrity is needed to secure sponsorship for an awards ceremony that in turn is designed to generate advertising revenues and sponsorship for the competition in years to come. If all goes well according to the business plan, the NZBU brand will replace the QMA as the definitive awards arbiter of blog importance/reach/impact. Since the future of media is with the “new” alternative rather than the fossilised “repeater” MSM, there is a generational follow-through that guarantees brand success and steady revenue streams. The genius in the plan is that there are very low start-up costs involved–a web page is virtually free, nominations are voluntary, and if no one enters there is no need for an awards ceremony venue. If there is a pool of nominees, then Mr. Simich can organise a room and media coverage for the awards ceremony. If his media friends show up and report on the event, future sponsorship is virtually guaranteed–who knows, perhaps by the alternative airline mentioned in the awards announcement?
In other words, it is not about holding a legitimate blogs awards competition. it is about making money off of it.
Which would explain the bullying response to the concerns mentioned here and elsewhere–NZBU need to pull in the numbers of self-nominees in order to convince potential sponsors that there are consumers of product at the end of the event.”
I should note that it probably would have been a better plan to enlist some real sponsorship first, to specify the rules exactly and stick with them, to specify and stick with the original scope of the award (or break the award into categories based on readership numbers, editorial content and subject matter), and to get a judging panel of established bloggers who would recuse their own work from the competition (or recuse themselves from judging their own work). As it stands, there is something dodgy about the process (unless one believes that making up the rules as one goes along is OK)
I realise that this may all seem precious and that, as the NZBU mouthpiece labeled me, I may appear to be a “humourless dithering unit of wonderment.” But I do think that if the idea of an alternative award competition is going to take root it has to be transparent and utterly honest. Otherwise it is just an alternative to the QMA, not a real, open competition.
Vote:June 2nd, 2010 at 10:06 pm
sheesh, so much fucking whining over some people being nominated for a simple award… suck it up folks
Vote:June 2nd, 2010 at 10:22 pm
It would appear you’re not the only one to have fielded unwarranted commentary.
Vote:June 2nd, 2010 at 10:24 pm
No, and if I had been, I would have withdrawn my entry on the basis of what I’ve learned tonight was said in an anonymous reply to one entrant. WTF.
Vote:June 2nd, 2010 at 10:32 pm
crikey mr buchannan..and you call me a conspiracy-theorist-nut for doubting that three planes can take down four skyscrapers..?
..first off..there is a need for this…
..the other one is a joke…
..this is the first one..i am sure rules etc. will get sorted over time..
..and yes..it..or some version of it…should be annual..
..i know that some dip into both camps…
..but really..it is us against the m.s.m…end of story…
..they want us to go away…
..(and i want them to stop chopping down so many trees each day…just to make rubbish…in many senses of the word..)
..so..an award-thing has its’ inbuilt limitations…of course..
..but as a profile-raising exercise for all bloggers/alternative points of view/written-democracy..
…i don’t see much wrong with it…
so i am somewhat surprised that you have yr knickers in such a knot…
commercially it should be set up as a not-for-profit…
..that wd remove any chances of contagion..
..(and um..!…while you are here…cd you tell me..in 100 words or less…just how three planes leveled four skyscrapers..?
..ta..!…)
phil(whoar.co.nz)
Vote:June 2nd, 2010 at 11:20 pm
See Murray – Paul G Buchanan is the best whinger on Kiwiblog. It even puts Phil U to shame.
Vote:June 2nd, 2010 at 11:22 pm
And Russell, you can run the politically correct, kind, nice blog awards next year for the NZBU.
Vote:June 2nd, 2010 at 11:29 pm
Wot the Union Boss said bro
Russell and Paul should know better than most how unions work, toe the line comrades, everyone else is.
Vote:June 2nd, 2010 at 11:40 pm
I know how about an award for the Best Lamb Chop Recipe Blog?
Vote:June 3rd, 2010 at 12:48 am
Graceless Russell? You are critiquing my performance after that snooze fest you call Media 7? You are critiquing my performances? That’s a little rich mate, I think the Qantas Blogging Awards are shit and expressed it’s shitness.
Vote:June 3rd, 2010 at 4:47 am
“(Suppose) A money- or celebrity-hungry blogger sees the failures of the QMA as an opportunity to establish a profitable alternative awards “brand.” He enlists similarly inclined bloggers on a (future) share-of profits basis and an internet entrepeneur, then ropes in a socialite “events manager” to serve as the deciding vote on a five man (no wimin) judging panel on blogs that cover social and political current events. The event’s organiser/celebrity is needed to secure sponsorship for an awards ceremony that in turn is designed to generate advertising revenues and sponsorship for the competition in years to come. If all goes well according to the business plan, the NZBU brand will replace the QMA as the definitive awards arbiter of blog importance/reach/impact. Since the future of media is with the “new” alternative rather than the fossilised “repeater” MSM, there is a generational follow-through that guarantees brand success and steady revenue streams. The genius in the plan is that there are very low start-up costs involved–a web page is virtually free, nominations are voluntary, and if no one enters there is no need for an awards ceremony venue. If there is a pool of nominees, then Mr. Simich can organise a room and media coverage for the awards ceremony. If his media friends show up and report on the event, future sponsorship is virtually guaranteed–who knows, perhaps by the alternative airline mentioned in the awards announcement?
In other words, it is not about holding a legitimate blogs awards competition. it is about making money off of it”
Just a wee note to say Paul that you are wasted in academia. We’ve just called Ringo and Paul, cut the deal, quit our jobs and are running away to join the band in Rio to celebrate with our $5 million profits. Give us a Hell yeah!!!!
Vote:June 3rd, 2010 at 6:58 am
Make money from blogging?
Insert Tui ad here!
Vote:June 3rd, 2010 at 7:54 am
What a bunch of lefty whinging b@stards.
I had a look through the nominees yesterday and there are some goodies in there, don’t know why Paul and Russell are getting so arsey if *gasp* there are some blogs outside of their gentile little neighbourhood of the blogosphere.
Vote:June 3rd, 2010 at 8:03 am
“philu (8633) Says:
June 2nd, 2010 at 10:32 pm ”
Sheesh; the library was open late again last night. Shouldn’t you be at home with your son at that hour of the night Phil? After all, that’s why we are paying you a DPB.
Or have you been telling porkies about not having internet access at home?
Vote:June 3rd, 2010 at 9:22 am
Wow, you seriously cool and hip bloggorati sure get your knickers in a twist about the dumbest things, don’t you?
Let me get this straight. Three MSM blogs that none of you give a shit about are short-listed for an award that all of you say is irrelevant, and you react as though the sky is falling. Suddenly, you care. Suddenly, you are shocked and disturbed. Suddenly, the mainstream media is relevant.
If it’s not, then why get so upset?
But that’s the thing. Most of you get upset at everything. You whinge and moan and complain, you bitch about msm despite the fact that you borrow and steal from it to prop up your own blogs, and you hold yourselves aloft as new and improved media despite relying on the old media you so hate. Kick away the crutch of old media, and most of you fall over. You call us repeaters, but you are the ones doing the repeating.
Look, some of you are great. Danyl, you’re awesome, one of the most talented writers around. Farrar, you are a must-read whether we agree or not. WhaleOil had his moments. Bomber, at least you are passionate. Russell, now and then you nail it. And I completely agree – the three Qantas blog finalists (and yes, I am one of those) do not represent the NZ blogosphere. But again, why do you care?
You bloggers are like the group of geeks that never get invited to parties, so you organize your own, play dungeons and dragons all night, then boast about how awesome it was. (Bomber, I know your history…) Outside of the blogosphere, most of you are barely relevant and not at all credible. You are like a secret society that is deluded about its own importance. Outside of the blogosphere community, few people read you or even know you exist.
So, go ahead, have your made-up award. I will applaud the winner, and I will no doubt log on and check them out. I will continue to laugh my head off when I read Farrar’s nutty commenters, I will continue to admire dimpost, and I will continue to worry about the Whale.
No doubt, you will all continue to whinge and moan and complain and bash and deride and mock. And most of you will no doubt start with me. Go nuts (most of you already are).
But please, find something more important to go crazy about. And get your heads out of your own arses.
Vote:June 3rd, 2010 at 9:42 am
another category could be ..
…’the most craven-apologist for whatever clark did/said..for nine long years’…
..who would win that one..?..hands down..!
phil(whoar.co.nz)
Vote:June 3rd, 2010 at 9:44 am
inv..
the new 24hr/drive-thru libraries..!
isn’t there one in your area yet..?
do you live in christchurch..?
phil(whoar.co.nz)
Vote:June 3rd, 2010 at 3:00 pm
Wow msm blogger, thanks for sharing that opinion with us, should we wash our computer monitors before or after reading the opinion you’ve gracelessly provided?. Your comment validates my perception, and you’re such hero for putting you own name to your opinions here.
Vote:June 3rd, 2010 at 4:25 pm
Good one Bruce. Because Bomber and Whaleoil and philu and Inventory2 and side show bob and Cactus Kate are all real names. That’s a really good point you make.
By the way, your comment just validates my perception too. You’re all too happy to criticise, but when the shoe is on the other foot, look out. Why so holier than thou?
(oh, and sort our your grammar, you’re doing English a disservice.)
Vote:June 3rd, 2010 at 4:52 pm
Look, perhaps I didn’t make my point all that well. I do admire what you all do. I admire anyone with enough balls to put their opinions on a page (electronic or paper, it doesn’t matter). And as a writer, I know that writing is not easy. You put yourself out there, only to be regularly cut down. That’s the way it is.
And I understand your frustrations with msm. I worked inside it for 19 years, and many of your frustrations are shared by those working within the beast. But msm has become such an easy whipping boy, and often you criticise and mock it for no other reason than “you can”.
The thing is, you beat up on msm day in and day out, and yet you grow fangs when anyone dares criticise the blogosphere. You’ve got to admit, there are some crazy things written on blogs every day, from the Left, from the Right, and from everywhere in between.
In regards to your made-up award, good on you for organising something. Clearly there are bloggers that deserve some recognition. But why not make it a celebration of the work that you do, rather than yet another way to have a crack at msm? Why the fascination with something that none of you actually like? That’s the part I really don’t understand.
Vote:June 3rd, 2010 at 7:09 pm
“..In regards to your made-up award,..”
quite the arrogant/condescending prick…aren’t you..?
what awards aren’t ‘made-up’…?
i cd dismantle your little bundle of false premises..
bit i can’t really be fucked..eh…?
(oh..!..hang on..!..)
save to say you work in/are defending a dinosaur-industry…
..with an environmental-footprint that is way beyond sustainable….
..your ‘news’-papers are just vehicles to sell advertising…(surely you have worked that out by now..?..no…?..)
and you provide an absolutely crap service…
..with a few exceptions…you are an analysis/intelligence-free zone…
..and you must really have yr heads up yr arses..eh..?
case in point:…the 2008 economic meltdown..
on whoar..i was linking to/featuring the louder and louder warnings..from august 2006…
where were you..?
i seem to remember just before that election..how all of you..radio/papers/tv…
..just ignored the approaching disaster…
..and just rote-repeated the ‘happy days are here again!’ bullshit…peddled by both clark and key..
..this of course…so as not to ‘scare the horses/ignorant-peasants..
i mean..did you not fucken know…?
and if you did..just how much of a failure was it on your part not to tell us ‘dumb-peasants’..eh..?
isn’t that what we fucken pay you to do…?
you..the mainstream-media..(seeing as you’ve taken on this spokesperson-role…eh..?
are the main reason most new zealanders are..in the main..so ill-informed as to the realities of their lives..the world..
you are just pimps..in the pay of the poison-peddlers…
..you have no fucken integrity..
and you should be hanging yr head at yr failures..
..not strutting around here like a chimpanzee with a fucken hard-on…eh..?
btw..bomber is bomber..i am phillip ure…cactus kate has a blog..is a lawyer..
..whaleoil is whaleoil..inv 2 has a blog..bloody-hands-bob dosen’t matter..
what is your name..?
stand beside/behind yr bullshit…
and y;know..i haven’t bought a newspaper in years…
..they are just piles of grot..that stain yr hands with ink…and are an instant rubbish-problem..
i mean..are you that thick you can’t see that can’t continue..?
and hey..!..you are welcome to continue to pump out your irrelevancies…
.and to think you are ‘special’…(snigger/snort..!..)
..you ain’t..!
..you are part of the/our problem..)
phil(whoar.co.nz)
Vote:June 3rd, 2010 at 8:23 pm
msm blogger wrote..
“(oh, and sort our your grammar, you’re doing English a disservice.)”
It’s so cute when Muphry’s Law is demonstrated…..
If you read my posts further up the thread, you’ll find I was condemning the airnz awards, with no comment about MSM. Your “anonymous” rant validated my provisional perceptions. I do not care about whether bloggers use given names, as I’m just a guest at their blog, but in most cases it’s easy to discover their names – if that information justified the effort.
Vote:June 3rd, 2010 at 9:13 pm
Cool, bitch fight. Just going out to get some popcorn.
Vote:June 3rd, 2010 at 9:27 pm
Jeeze why have I been wasting the time watching the sheep when the real action is here. I got the popcorn just give me sec to top up my scotch and I’m all go.
Vote:June 3rd, 2010 at 9:54 pm
In ganga veritas………………
“another category could be ..
…’the most craven-apologist for whatever clark did/said..for nine long years’…
..who would win that one..?..hands down..!
phil(whoar.co.nz)”
Well said sir, 5 years of gobshite and then you squeeze this one out.
I really hate it when Bomber forces me to agree with him and to have the stoner crack a funny on the same thread is too much.
Mr Buchanan, is this really the only thing you have to worry about at the moment? I find the extraordinary orgy of pedantry blended with weapons grade preciousness you are displaying very disappointing. You are a blogging treasure when you actually bother to blog but your journey into the depths of 90′s messageboard boring bickering over what is simply a dig at a corporate and a bit of fun is terrible.
Let it go man.
Russell Brown, you continue to live down to your corduroy wearing beardy man reputation. A+ for elitist onanism.
Vote:June 3rd, 2010 at 11:04 pm
Fucking A Bill, I almost spewed Choysa over my dinner when I found myself agreeing with Bomber and Phil.
What the fuck is going on?
Is Russell such a complete knobgripping fucktard that even his own ilk are turning on him?
Does Paul need to loosen the fuck up and find his Om?
(Both rhetorical questions acktch-uar-lee).
Vote:June 4th, 2010 at 3:18 am
Phil, seriously, are you mental? You do know what a sentence looks like, right? And a paragraph? You do know how fullstops work, right? For Christ’s sake, man, you just let yourself down in so many ways. And you expect people to take you seriously, to actually pay attention to what you are trying to say? You’re deluded. Seriously.
(Actually, I just skimmed your blog. Yep, you’re nutty as a fruitcake…)
The point of my comment is not to defend msm. It is what it is. Sometimes it is great, and most reasonable, intelligent people know that. A lot of the time it’s shit. My point is that a lot of the blogosphere devote themselves to critiquing it, while at the same time describing it as irrelevant. If you believe it is irrelevant, then forget about it, don’t bother with it, don’t waste your time with it. Get on with writing your own stuff, make your own contribution. Why the fascination with something you don’t believe in? You’re like an atheist who just can’t stop going to church.
Also, how can you make any credible criticisms about newspapers when you happily admit you haven’t bought one in years? Why are you so angry? Why can’t you make your point using complete sentences?
Oh, and Bruce, spelling “Murphy’s Law” wrong was freakin’ hilarious. Nice touch.
Vote:June 4th, 2010 at 8:20 am
@ msm blogger – classic analysis of Philip Ure! I have saved it for future reference, as it’s absolutey accurate!
Vote:June 4th, 2010 at 8:50 am
“..Phil, seriously, are you mental? You do know what a sentence looks like, right? And a paragraph? You do know how fullstops work, right?..”
a tad anal..?..are we…?
(‘never mind the quality..just feel the grammer’..eh..?..)
“..(Actually, I just skimmed your blog. Yep, you’re nutty as a fruitcake…”
wd u mind detailing that ad hominem..?
which of the actual posts/links are ‘nutty as a fruitcake’…?
“..If you believe it is irrelevant, then forget about it, don’t bother with it, don’t waste your time with it…”
no..no….the aim is to tear it down..and replace it with something half-decent..eh..?
something to replace the crash ‘burn/parish-pump drivel they focus on..use as a tool to flog their widgets…
“..Also, how can you make any credible criticisms about newspapers when you happily admit you haven’t bought one in years?..”
um..!..they are on-line..?..
didn’t you notice..?
“..Why can’t you make your point using complete sentences?..”
and back to the ‘anal’..eh..?
and i noticed you just avoided the/my benchmark-setting/main example of just how/crap/useless you are…(c.f…’08-meltdown’..)
..that’d be ‘cos you have ‘no answer’…eh..?
phil(whoar.co.nz)
Vote:June 4th, 2010 at 9:20 am
msm Blogger wrote…
“Oh, and Bruce, spelling “Murphy’s Law” wrong was freakin’ hilarious. Nice touch”,
having also previously written,
” the three Qantas blog finalists (and yes, I am one of those)”
So we have a finalist in a media award who has never heard of Muphry’s Law – which is well known in both the MSM and Blogosphere. I’ll give you a clue, even though it’s unfair to the clue, as they don’t like to be solitary.
You previoualy wrote “( oh, and sort our your grammar, you’re doing English a disservice.)”.
From the Wikipedia monograph on the law, ” Muphry’s law is an adage that states that “if you write anything criticizing editing or proofreading, there will be a fault of some kind in what you have written”. The name is a deliberate misspelling of “Murphy’s law”.”
Arrogant and ignorant, I can’t understand why you didn’t win.
Vote:June 4th, 2010 at 9:39 am
so..msm blogger is either ben gracewood…dita deboni..or..kerry williamson…
would who it is like to put their hand up..?
if only to avoid the other two recieving unwarranted derision…
..eh..?
phil(whoar.co.nz)
Vote:June 4th, 2010 at 10:03 am
OK, OK, good point Bruce. My mistake, and I apologise. I was unaware of the term Muphry’s Law. By the way, it’s a good one. I don’t agree that it’s a common phrase, but whatever. (See, I don’t hate you for finding an error or disagreeing with me, or even calling me names. That’s fine. It’s cool). (Oh, but I can’t not but congratulate you on using Wikipedia for your research. Good stuff).
But guys, once again, it’s attack, attack, attack. I see no reason why blogs and msm can’t exist alongside each other. Again, why the anger? Why the constant need to hate? Is it a self-esteem issue?
Surely if your blogs were brilliant, important, credible sources for news, then people would turn to them instead of newspapers? (and yes, I am well aware that in some cases that is already happening, although I suggest that is not yet the case in New Zealand).
Surely if you focused on quality, you wouldn’t need to “tear it down”? If you’re good enough, people will read you. Why not stand on your own, let people judge you on what you do, rather than what you say about other forms of old media?
Phil, I’m not going to argue with you about what msm did or didn’t do leading up to the financial crisis. Honestly, it’s not something I have spent a lot of time thinking about. I don’t know what your blog did or didn’t do, either. Again, I don’t really care.
(But seriously, Phil, I’m not being anal when I criticise your grammar. Asking a writer to use a fullstop correctly, or a capital letter, is not anal).
Who I am is not important. That’s just a red herring, but no doubt you will continue to focus on it and ignore any rational form of debate. And you’ll do it without full sentences, and then you’ll hit me over the head with one of your random exclamation marks.
..eh..?
Vote:June 4th, 2010 at 10:10 am
MSM said…
Danyl, you’re awesome, one of the most talented writers around.
Ha! I’ll tell you what an awesome blog is. It is Not PC .
WHY? Because the blogger himself is almost like a walking Google. If you ask him a question when you bump into him on the street about anything (economics, science , politics, art, architecture, history, philosophy, etc,…), the answer will just pop out instantly, without him using the internet or referring you to a link, since all the knowledge is stored in his head. You only have to just walk in to his home mini-library to witness the stacks & stacks of books there. Isn’t that awesome ? I bet you.
Vote:June 4th, 2010 at 10:19 am
i really couldn’t give a flying fuck who you are..noddy..
i just thought that as you were being such a tosser..in print…
..it wd be a courtesy to yr fellow-finallists..
..eh..?
“..Phil, I’m not going to argue with you about what msm did or didn’t do leading up to the financial crisis. Honestly, it’s not something I have spent a lot of time thinking about…”
and there you go..!..eh..?
your irrelevancy/ignorances distilled/defined..in yr own words..
..focus on the fluffy/inconsequential..d’ya…?..)
..eh..?
(and..psst..!..you are ‘anal’..eh..?
..’never mind the/any quality’..feel the grammer..!’..
..eh..?..)
phil(whoar.co.nz)
Vote:June 4th, 2010 at 10:26 am
Phool:
Three quick questions:
1. Do you still claim that your “blog” is ranked in the top 1% of global blogs according to Technorati data:
2. Do you still dispute what DPF and others say, namely, that when the Technorati data is correctly interpreted you’re actually in the bottom 1%?
3. When will you launch your “big commercial model news/opinion site”:
You dropped the bombshell on 30 July 2009, then followed up with a big announcement 5 days later, so where is the “big commercial model news/opinion site”?
Vote:June 4th, 2010 at 10:37 am
soon..nosty..soon..!
(you just keep holding yr breath there..eh..?)
you weird little stalker/lawyer-person..you..eh..?
phil(whoar.co.nz)
Vote:June 4th, 2010 at 10:38 am
Ha ha, oh Phil, you crack me up. I haven’t been called a noddy and a tosser in one sentence in a long time (at least I think it was one sentence, it’s so hard to tell with you). Well played.
I’m not a finance or business reporter. That wasn’t my job. People didn’t read my stories for information on subprime mortgages and delinquencies. Just like they don’t come to your blog for the All Blacks score. We all have our roles. I’m sure you know that, because, after all, you are a media expert, right? You’re transforming the news business, right?
The reason I say you are as nutty as a fruitcake is this:
(and..psst..!..you are ‘anal’..eh..?
..’never mind the/any quality’..feel the grammer..!’..
..eh..?..)
What the hell does that mean?
Vote:June 4th, 2010 at 10:45 am
“…What the hell does that mean?..”
heh..!..cd that be yr catch-phrase/motto./existential scream into the void…..?..
“..You’re transforming the news business, right?..”
having a nudge/crack at it…eh..?
(if not now..?..when..?..)
your ambitions..?
to get good at yr irrelevancies..?
..and keep an eagle eye out for grammar-violations..?
.carry on…!
phil(whoar.co.nz)
Vote:June 4th, 2010 at 10:50 am
Phool:
You talked up your blog ranking last year. Less charitable people than me have said you lied about it. You steadfastly refused to listen to DPF and others when they tried to educate you on blog rankings, and claimed to have some proprietary software (which you’ve never disclosed) that proves them wrong. You even made this astonishing claim:
The simple fact is this: there’s no point banging on about the quality of your blog (as you’ve been doing on this thread, and forever really) if no one reads it.
Anyway, why does it take a year to set up a “big commercial model news/opinion site”?
Vote:June 4th, 2010 at 10:55 am
Good luck to you, tortise.
Vote:June 4th, 2010 at 10:57 am
sheesh..!..a new multi-media news-empire wasn’t built in a day..eh…?
i’m just getting startied…
you strange little stalking lawyer-person…who keeps ‘fingering’ my old comments…
..can i suggest you get a hobby/life..?..of some sort…?
..something out in the fresh air..?..maybe..?
phil(whoar.co.nz)
Vote:June 4th, 2010 at 11:05 am
Phool:
You obviously need fresh air to stamp out those weed fumes, so I’d suggest you mow the lawns, but on second thoughts work isn’t really your thing is it?
Comedy gold!
P.S. You really haven’t heard of targeted Google searches, have you?
Vote:June 4th, 2010 at 11:36 am
msm blogger/qantas-blog-award-finallist…
seeing as there is so much you ‘haven’t thought about’..
..maybe you could ease your way into the real world/realities of our times..with this one..
http://whoar.co.nz/2010/the-world-teeters-on-the-brink-of-a-new-age-of-rage/
don’t be nervous..!..it wasn’t written by me…!
..and aside from my playing with the layout of the original..
..i think it falls within yr grammar-fencesrigors..eh..?
(btw..never ever read ‘ulysses’..the poetry of ee cummings..and so many many more ‘sinners’ against grammar…eh..?
..it’ll just do yr head in..eh..?..)
..it was written by simon schama..?..the historian..?..he did a telly-show..?
does ‘telly-show’ ring any bells for you..”
mmm..?
“..“…Far be it for me to make a dicey situation dicier but you can’t smell the sulphur in the air right now and not think we might be on the threshold of an age of rage.
The Spanish unions have postponed a general strike; the bloody barricades and the red shirts might have been in Bangkok not Berlin;…
… and, for the moment, the British coalition leaders sit side by side on the front bench like honeymooners canoodling on the porch; …
…but in Europe and America there is a distinct possibility of a long hot summer of social umbrage.
Historians will tell you there is often a time-lag between the onset of economic disaster … and the accumulation of social fury.
In act one, the shock of a crisis initially triggers fearful disorientation; the rush for political saviours;…
… instinctive responses of self-protection ..
… but not the organised mobilisation of outrage.
Whether in 1789 or now, an incoming regime riding the storm gets a fleeting moment to try to contain calamity.
If it is seen to be straining every muscle to put things right it can … for a while … generate provisional legitimacy.
Act two is trickier.
Objectively, economic conditions might be improving … but perceptions are everything …
… and a breathing space gives room for a dangerously alienated public to take stock of the brutal interruption of their rising expectations.
What happened to the march of income, the acquisition of property, the truism that the next generation will live better than the last?
The full impact of the overthrow of these assumptions sinks in … and engenders a sense of grievance that ‘Someone Else’ must have engineered the common misfortune.
The stock epithet the French revolution gave to the financiers who were blamed for disaster, was “rich egoists”.
Our own plutocrats may not be headed for the tumbrils but the fact that financial catastrophe …
… with its effect on the “real” economy came about through obscure transactions designed to do nothing except produce short-term profit aggravates a sense of social betrayal.
At this point, damage-control means pillorying the perpetrators: bringing them to book and extracting statements of contrition.
This is why the psychological impact of financial regulation is almost as critical as its institutional prophylactics.
Those who lobby against it risk jeopardising their own long-term interests.
Should governments fail to reassert the integrity of public stewardship, suspicions will emerge that, for all the talk of new beginnings …
… the perps and new regime are cut from common cloth.
Both risk being shredded by popular ire … or outbid by more dangerous tribunes of indignation.
At the very least, the survival of a crisis demands ensuring that the fiscal pain is equitably distributed…”
(now..i hope that didn’t make your head hurt…eh..?
..you’d better rush back now to whatever it is you do to keep yrslf busy/’paid’..eh..?..
as you said…”..Surely if your blogs were brilliant, important, credible sources for news..”
..they are…they are…
you just don’t know that yet…
..eh..?
phil(whoar.co.nz(
Vote:June 4th, 2010 at 11:55 am
Phool:
You’re an idiot.
You’re feeling smuck because you found the article on Information Clearing House, right?
Cue needle-jerk scratch! Did you miss this at the end:
So the original op-ed appeared in FT.com – that’s the Financial Times. And your beloved Simon Schama is a contributing editor to the Financial Times. It pays to read the news properly, doesn’t it?
What were you saying about old-media again?
Vote:June 4th, 2010 at 11:57 am
msm blogger wrote..
” But guys, once again, it’s attack, attack, attack. I see no reason why blogs and msm can’t exist alongside each other. Again, why the anger? Why the constant need to hate? Is it a self-esteem issue? ”
Pretentious, as well. You’re apparently trying to assemble an army of strawmen. If you review the thread before your first post, much of the discussion was about the shonky nature of the so-called “AirNZ” awards, and the fact they appear little better than the QMA. You decided to spray us with your anonymous perceptions about the thread commentators, and bloggers in general, rather than contribute to the debate.
Clue two, so clue one isn’t lonely anymore, not all commentators are active bloggers. I enjoy reading well-structured perceptions, even if they disagree with mine. Disagreement doesn’t mean that I should spray the whole community with verbal Paraquat, as you did.
Clue three, most regular bloggers and commentators contribute on the run – without recompense, hence style never overrides substance, provided the meaning is clear. Attempted anonymous point-scoring about grammar usually implies little substance.
I only went to Wikipedia to confirm there was a reasonable entry for Muphry’s Law available for you. Wikipedia is neither authoritative or definitive, but it’s easily accessible to most.
Vote:June 4th, 2010 at 12:08 pm
????..strange/weird-little-stalker-lawyer-person..
w.t.f.are you on about..?
..and yes..i go and ‘find’ stories…and direct people/readers to them..
’tis the definition of news-aggregation’..eh…?
it’s what i do…what http://whoar.co.nz/ is..eh..?
as i said..
wtf are you on about..?
phil(whoar.co.nz)
Vote:June 4th, 2010 at 12:50 pm
???? ..Lazy stay-at-home DPB bludger Phool..
Read this:
The story you directed people/readers to (your Technorati blog ranking suggests that you have very few, if any, people/readers) originally appeared in the Financial Times. Hello? Anyone home?
Blogs that create original content are to be applauded. Blogs that simply copy-and-paste from old-media sources (without value-added content), while claiming that old-media sources are past their use-by date, are hypocritical.
By the way, how do you “hope/expect to make a reasonable..to shit-load of money” from your “big commercial model news/opinion site” if you don’t believe in advertising?
Vote:June 4th, 2010 at 1:39 pm
oh..!..you want he op-ed/’original content’-component..?
..here ya go..!
http://whoar.co.nz/?s=comment%40whoar
that better…?
phil(whoar.co.nz)
Vote: