This is my commentary about Prof. Danny Arao’s blog post: Huwag Kang Magblog Kung…
Prof. Danny Arao’s blogpost about bloggers who become “sell outs” in the blogosphere is indeed thought provoking. I have been blogging for a long time but it was only until now that I get to meet some other bloggers in “real life” through the the different blogger or media events organized by different marketing or pr agencies. It’s only now I realize that there are some perks by becoming a blogger. I must admit it was fun since I get to experience things I have not done before ( especially the food that I have not tasted before). In exchange of letting me experience those perks of course I should return the favor by writing about their product or event etc. That’s ‘social exchange theory’ in real life, but it’s not being forced. Even though they feed me with all the food they want, nothing can control me on what I will say. I will still write a bad review if I didn’t like the taste of the food or if the service is bad. I make sure that it’s being done constructively and not because I am being too personal about it.
Prof. Arao’s article poses a question towards bloggers self motivation in blogging. It is a fact that there are some bloggers who are just concerned about blog monetization and not about the content. Spamming their blogs with topics that are “marketable” or has “high value” leaves the objective of the whole blog itself. I am not saying that everything should be political or highly intellectual. There are lots of things to write about not just “high valued” topics. These “high valued” topics are then translated into monetary value and that’s how the ad networks work. I learned this from Karla, who is a geek in those kind of stuff, and explained to me on how to earn money by just blogging. It was only a few months ago when I started Google Adsense and I only have a few dollars. I appreciate the dollar amount but it’s not really the end goal.
Another thing also that he mentioned was to consider our audience, i.e. our readers. Prof. Arao mentioned that we have to be responsible on the things we write or what would be the consequence and outcome of this to the audience. Yes, the blogosphere is a public domain, however this is a different kind of domain wherein audiences can create their own identity, i.e. reality. We cannot say that the intention of the blogger would reflect in what he/she writes. In this scenario, the blogger can transform his/her identity without the readers knowing it. The identity of the blogger is not attached to the article he/she wrote. As for the readers, they have their own mind as to how they will interpret the things we write. I believe that agency ( the individual) is still important and that not all human beings are always pre-determined by market forces. It is a give and take relationship. Readers will say what they want to say, or they can also re-interpret what we say and make it into their own ( like what I am doing now 🙂 ).
In conclusion, I think that people have different motivations on why they blog and we should respect that. Blog monetization is not totally bad at all, being a ‘sell out’ is bad. I think that Prof. Arao’s post excludes people who really do blog monetization ( coming from the title of the blog post itself). I would like to say that they are also writers who contribute and create meaning to the blogosphere. It somewhat creates “exclusivity” among ” responsible” bloggers (as what he is imposing) vs the “irresponsible” bloggers. Does this mean that there is a distinction being made? What makes a blogger “responsible”? If there is such thing, what are the criteria on being “responsible”?
Now for you as my reader right now I pose these questions to you:
Why did you read this blog post?
(if you are a blogger) Why do you blog?
What do you think is a blogger?
You might want to read this related blog post about audiences 🙂