« Andrew Lilico: We don't need more regulation of party funding, we need less | Main | Louise Bagshawe: Exhuming bad news »

Comments

James Cleverly

It's a free market. No one is forcing anyone to read the blogs you listed, they do so because they are good. The last thing we need is blogging protectionism.

Also it is worth bearing in mind the fact that things like Google alerts and RSS feeds change the way people consume media. I have set up a number of alerts covering issues that I am interested in (yes including my own name) and the news comes to me.

Peter Franklin

Certainly wasn't advocating blooging protectionism or regulation, James

The idea of an OfBlog is too horrible to contemplate

hamish

What about the Indy's new OpenHouse? Shows the left beginning to get its act together, with the likes of Steve Richards, Johann Hari and John Rentoul posting.

cityunslicker

Media blogs are eating their own lunch. By generating new content online they hasten the fall of their dead tree cashcow.

Pure online bloggers have built from the bottom up and have a lower cost/reward model.

Thus economically there is no reason to think that the traditional MSM will win in the end; they may just be fighting a war they can't win.

Paleo Man

Peter Franklin has a very narrow, rather English perspective. It is heaterning that no one seems to bother with the left-wing Platform 10!

I read several top US-based bloggers and comentators, e.g. Andrew Sullivan, Lew Rockwell, Patrick Buchanan, Taki and his co-writers like Paul Gottfried (on Takimag). The American Spectator, American Conservative and Chronicles magazines have excellent, frequently updated content too.

Paleo Man

I forgot to add that true British Conservatives should read the Civitas, Social Affairs Unit and Adam Smith Institute blogs. They are the real alternative to boring, PC tosh that you find in the MSM. Why did Franklin not mention them?

Tony Makara

What surprises me is that there are not more fake sites being set up to throw a spanner into political debate. We saw Andrew Neil today happy to quote from a deleted blog, and that set me to wondering how damaging it could be if fake blogs were set up attributing false quotes, ideals and activities to certain politicans. What would be the law in regards to such activity?

Serf

As a exblogger, I have to say that most of us just don't have enough time.

John F

The most interesting thing about blogs is that they show peoples reactions to stories.
Take the donorgate scandals, before the scandal broke most blogs, eg Sky, BBc etc had blog figures never more than 20.
After donorgate most blogs ( including press blogs)were in 3 figure territory and all negative reaction to Brown and Nulab.
The reaction to many of the articles written in the blogs post Browns Bottling event have been overwhelmingly negative and, in some cases hostile.
My feeling is that the public opinion, especially in England, has developed into anger and contempt for Brown and his gang.
I think we can be sure that, with this governments now nationally and internationally renowned reputation for incompetence, sleaze and lack of integrity, there will be nore revelations in future ,, resulting in more hostile and negative blogging and a Tory win at the next General Election

englandism.com

And also. All hail the rise and rise of single-issue politics and the influence that the interweb has empowered for the great unwashed.

The purpose of Englandism was originally to flog T-shirts on the back of a World Cup long long ago and to blatantly provoke outrage by playing to the theme of English xenophobia and arrogance. What was unexpected was that I would end up being emailed by assorted Johnny foreigners wanting me to contribute to various newspapers and radio shows from the ‘English’ perspective.

Some of the great and the good in British politics have exchanged mail with me and I have seen posts that I have made used and adapted by the mainstream media and politicians and images that I have created are all over the net: If a student wants an image of Gordon Brown, for example, via Google image they will get my interpretation.

This is not viewed with conceit but more with bewilderment.

DavisFan

My wife prints out the Social Affairs Unit pages for me every night so that I can read its clear-sighted and intelligent commentary without needing to go near COMPUTERS.

It is a shame that their weblog is not available as a newsletter so that I can read it unaided.

Their no-questions-asked, anti-beancounter stuff is exactly what we need to cut through the namby pamby "that's illegal"/"that doesn't add up"/"that's incoherent rambling" brigade which has seized our Party Leadership.

Let me tell you, I have never, and will never, use a computer.

Paleo Man

"Let me tell you, I have never, and will never, use a computer."

So who writes DavisFan's posts? His wife?

jaq

Yeah I read Am Con and Takimag too. I also read Slate when time permits and Reuters I find good for news. For blogs I particularly like Boris Johnsons. Most blogs are just an on-line letters to the editor but Boris and his excellent moderator promote discussion, of an issue on his blog in response to posts Boris has written, and he provides a discussion forum where he can see what people themselves choose to discuss. Boris has got to win points for that.

Verify your Comment

Previewing your Comment

This is only a preview. Your comment has not yet been posted.

Working...
Your comment could not be posted. Error type:
Your comment has been posted. Post another comment

The letters and numbers you entered did not match the image. Please try again.

As a final step before posting your comment, enter the letters and numbers you see in the image below. This prevents automated programs from posting comments.

Having trouble reading this image? View an alternate.

Working...

Post a comment

  • Tracker 2
  • Extreme Tracker