echo chambers

Peter Merholz is back on the blogging scene, which I'm happy about...I like his writing. He returns with a bit of a lament about the "echo chamber," "meme replication" effect in blogs.

I've got mixed feelings on that. If the replication and repetition is primarily in the form of what are beginning to be known as "link and comment" blogs, as opposed to thoughtful commentary and building upon ideas, I agree that it can be tiresome. But most of the blogs that I read regularly go well beyond link-and-comment. If they link to an "idea du jour," the do so because they have something to add, a new direction to explore. As a result, it's not so much an echo effect as it is an opportunity to watch an idea emerge, grow, diverge, expand, be refuted, etc.

This enjoyment of the triangulation of views is something I've talked about before. The interlinking of ideas and content on weblogs, particularly given the linear time-based nature of the form, provides a fascinating window into the evolution of an idea. Ideas have always evolved through discussion and debate. And while e-mail and mailing lists provide some of that context for speedy computer-mediated discussion and debate, they are less permeable, and more ephemeral, then weblogs.

Weblogs facilitate this process of evolving concepts in several ways. First, by making the process of linking to--and becoming aware of links from--other sites so seamless. (From trackback to technorati, some of the most interesting new technologies facilitate exactly this aspect of blogging.) Second, by opening up these cross-blog discussions to people you might not have thought to "invite" through comments, search engines, blogrolls, and the like. Third, by providing more permanent archives of content, allowing links and trackbacks to span over time in a way that mailing lists don't do effectively. (Yes, I know many mailing lists have archives. But honestly, how many people do you think really read them regularly? And when have you ever seen somebody point back to an archived mailing list as part of a current discussion? Not often, I suspect.)

In my next post (I've been saving this stuff up for a couple of days, with no time to sit down and write), I'm going to link to a bunch of stuff that other people have been saying recently. But I suspect that the way in which I organize and comment on them will add value for some of my readers. It's not just a "me, too" process.

As to the semantic noise becoming "deafening" as you read through multiple takes on a topic...I think that's something that as a reader, I have a lot of control over. It's a self-limiting process. When I've had enough, I stop reading. When I've processed that, I go back. There are times, even on the blogs I read the most, that I find myself skimming over content because I'm not convinced there's much more that I need to add to my understanding. But that's true in almost every information-gathering context, I think. I tell my grad students that learning to skim their readings is the most important skill for them to master. I tell my undergrads that they need to learn how to extract just what they need from a technical reference, rather than reading it cover to cover. I tune out in faculty meetings when I'm oversaturated on a given debate. I don't see weblogs as all that different...