Hard-core Blog Wonk Post: On linking to other blogs

I had an interesting discussion with one of our bloggers Monday afternoon, on several topics but particularly on the issue of linking to other blogs.

Said blogger was reacting to my suggestion below that a good practice is to read other blogs that cover the same subject area and react to, and link to, their postings.

The blogger's point was, and it's a good one, that as members of the news media, we have to maintain a certain elevation above the fray (I'm paraphrasing, by the way, and likely not well) and that by using these blogs as a reference, we're in some way legitimizing them.

And again, there's merit to the point, and I'm sure many of you have thought the same thing.

With the benefit of a few hours to think it over, here's a few points I'd like to make about that concept:

• First off, we have to consider that blogs are different animals than columns or stories. People bring a different set of expectations to a blog party ... and that's not to suggest that they're wrong or that these expectations are in some way lesser than the person who cracks a paper first thing in the morning over coffee.

People reading blogs are, by nature, interested in "more." They want to know not just the facts, but also the buzz, the word on the street, so to speak.

Now, blogs can provide important things like context and background ... and y'all are in a unique position to provide those things, from a position of authority few other bloggers can match.

It would be a horrible practice, indeed, to just uncritically link to something bizarre and reckless, and that wasn't my point earlier. But I think linking to things that are bizarre and reckless, and pointing out exactly why they're bizarre and reckless ... I don't see what's wrong with that.

In that way, you're serving the reader's appetite for "more" while simultaneously serving the public good by shooting down shady stuff. (Or conceding that, conversely, some other blogger might have a good point and why.)

• The most important thing we have is credibility. We can lose credibility in many ways ... trusting shady sources is one way, but appearing aloof and, worse, disconnected is another way, too.

We can't treat blogs the same as we treat our print products. A well-crafted print column or story involves numerous sources, multiple confirmation of facts and even a little background ... all interwoven in a fine narrative.

The immediate nature of a good blog somewhat limits that painstaking approach.

Now, there's nothing wrong with a periodic think piece that's longer and more involved, but if that's all you post, your readership will dry up between installments. You may have a nice column archive, but it won't live the way a blog does.

And, as a worse consequence, if people get the impression that you're holding back or keeping stuff under your hat, they'll start tuning you out.

Thus, linking to, and acknowledging, the existence of other blogs doesn't cost us credibility by granting them any, it gains us credibility because people know we've got our eye on these miscreants.

• A finely-tuned blog does more than simply relay information, it becomes a form of community ... a community between yourself and readers and also between you and different bloggers.

It's a level of intimacy we don't enjoy in print.

And linking to other blogs helps foster that.

To close on a repeat of what I said elsewhere: We have to start thinking like bloggers, not like newspaperfolk who have been given blogs.

Of course, I'm open to discussion on this issue, an issue which is both critical and debatable.

The Blog Wonk is now officially off-duty.