Oooh, Ace, I love it when you write about all this. It's so, so. . . irrelevant.

Good luck with all this, pal.

Cheers,
Dave at Independent Ridge

Well, it's not irrelevant to me.

and OSM is a bona-fide story -- it's been covered by the MSM, to some degree at least -- and further, it's not as if I'm single-minded on it. I've put up about eleven other posts today.

Yeah man, you surprised me by getting your ass out of bed and posting so early this morning. I was proud of you. I just figured that you are pregnant and the nesting instinct kicked in. You were just getting the blog in tip-top shape.

Anyway, I've enjoyed your posts today and am looking forward to more.

As far as the OSM, I don't have any animousity towards it. It will be what it will be and I can choose how to regard it then.

So, do you have to actually have a blog to give a shit about this? I see this crap everywhere. I finally broke down and took a look at the site. Big Fucking Deal.

I think the animosity is pretty limited. At least it was at first. Most either don't care or are confused about what the Big Deal is. Then the thin-skinned-ness comes into play, and people start getting nasty to those who aren't bowing down in awe. That doesn't seem to be the best way to reduce the animosity. And the more people keep talking about this, the more the people who don't care begin to feel a little "aggressive apathy."

Too many fragile egos on the damn internet.

Good points, Ace. I haven't even been following OSM that closely, but one thing that irks me about some bloggers is when they start showing themselves to be as thin-skinned as Mary Mapes. If you're gonna make your bread by slamming everyone else, you should be able to take it when you're in the hot seat. And you're absolutely right about how the pettiness will play under the spotlight. It's not just that MSM thinks bloggers are childish, it also thinks a lot of us are wanna-be journalists who just couldn't get into the MSM party, so they'll gladly report it if something like this self-destructs.

I've put up about eleven other posts today.

Here, have some unguent for that tender spot. Better?

I look on the whole OSM thing as a very "inside baseball" thing. Too inside baseball for me -- I wish them well, but beyond that, I don't have much of an opinion pro or con. I'll continue to lurk here and drop my comment-turds because I like hanging out here, not because of (or due to *lack* of) OSM affiliation. I hope OSM brings you the big bucks; I hope you spend that cash on wildly extravagant indulgences (maybe you can upgrade from Valu-Rite to Smirnoff or -- by God! -- to Absolut).

Everyone who participates in blogging feels some sense of ownership in the whole endeavor. Bloggers, commenters, lurkers...it has taken all the main articles and hitcounts and thrown elbows and fierce arguments and guys who dropped out and guys who stayed in and tip jars and serendipity and silent reading to make it work. And now a few of the most popular are saying, "okey doke! Now we're going to take the ball and go play a different game!" But nobody really knows what the game is or whether it will keep all the things we liked about it in the first place. And this belongs to all of us, dammit!

I once watched somebody spin a business off a Usenet group. In the end, it worked out pretty well (though it's still a work in progress), but there were a lot of ouchy feelings. Everybody wants to see bloggers work out a way to make some money; that's more likely to up the quality and quantity on offer than anything. But nobody's sure what the deal is about OSM, and there's something a bit...cheeky about that.

Monty,

It is inside baseball. But I find it hard to believe you think every item linked on this site to be worth reading.

I don't see the difference between this story that doesn't interest you and a dozen other stories I put up that don't interest you, except the idea that I just shouldn't be writing about blogging.

Well, I don't do it too often. With all due respect, though, it's interesting to bloggers. Who are, in fact, one-quarter of the audience anyway.

Crazy blog-money and all.

I don't get the animosity towards OSM. The confusion about what it is, what it hopes to be, and how the hell it plans to get there -- I get that. I share that.... But the actual animosity?... [T]here's a difference between disappointment and contempt.

Yeah, and the fact that most of the critics lapse too easily from the former to the latter suggests that ulterior motives are at least partly responsible. What those motives might be will vary from person to person, but there's no other explanation I can think of. John Hawkins had a solid post the other day that really did critique OSM on the merits without getting nasty; compare and contrast it with most of the other naysayers out there and note the dramatic difference in tone.

As for OSM's supposed thin-skinnedness, I count a grand total of two posts by Charles and Roger responding to their critics. One was on Wednesday, when Charles had the audacity to quote Althouse's semen bit. The other was today, when Roger said he regretted how personal some of the attacks have become. Bear in mind, Dennis the Peasant has been mocking them on an hourly basis for months now -- and yet, as I say, they've responded exactly twice. In fact, Roger's so "thin-skinned" that he's allowing people to link to Dennis's posts in his own comments section.

I'll repeat a point I made in someone else's comments the other day: we do want OSM to succeed, don't we? If it does, it'll raise blogging's profile across the spectrum and likely attract more (and bigger) advertisers. So what's with the critics thinly-veiled, and often not-veiled-at-all, schadenfreude?

Monty's been the topic Nazi for ages. Remember the pre-Alito thing?

Btw, Monty, Ace isn't actually connected to OSM -- except for the free drinks he got at their event.

But I find it hard to believe you think every item linked on this site to be worth reading.

Well, no (although I usually skim them all, because the comment threads are often the meat of the meal). Still, I've always felt that it's your site, and clearly you may write about what you wish. I'm certainly not saying you shouldn't write about OSM or blogging or meta-blogging or infighting amongst bloggers; do what you feel. homie. It's your site!

The point I was making (to the extent I had one to make) is that the whole OSM thing neither adds to nor subtracts from the AoSHQ site from my perspective. If you find it of value, that's really all that matters. If other people don't like it, tell 'em to go take a flying fuck at a rolling doughnut.

Not yet. I'm awaiting a new offer. I'm like Terrell Owens, yo. Always renegotiating, always talkin' smack about everyone else on the team.

I guess I understand the annoyance, as I know I get annoyed whenever the media wants to talk endlessly about themselves for the billionth time.

But, again, this is a pretty big deal in bloggerland (maybe, sorta, kinda, potentially).

I set the record straight a bit yesterday, but let me do it again here:

Nothing has changed, except that I now get my money from OSM rather than Blogads. In exchange for a FIXED payment and not having to worry about pricing for ads, etc., they can take my stuff and feature it on their portal.

They don't edit my site, tell me what to write, etc. And we are not being paid for how much of our stuff shows up on the front page. So we are not pandering to anyone.

I simply don't get some of the criticism. Dan Riehl self-righteousness retaining his "independence."

Uh, okay. Me too, Dan. Only now I've got my independence and some crazy blog cash.

I don't think all the arguments and back-biting are that much of a mystery. It's pretty simple.

Blogs have been, until recently, a fairly individualist enterprise. One blog against the world, especially those filthy large-scale media companies. One blogger really can take down a giant, as we saw in the Rather case. There was something equalizing about blogs. We all have our opinions, and we all stand or fall based on how well those opinions are articulated.

I think many people see OSM as the "corporatization" of the blogosphere. Rather than being a loose confederation of like-minded pundits, OSM becomes its own media company - and remember, kids, media companies are viewed with great suspicion in the blogosphere by default.

The OSM saw money to be made, so they've struck out on the path of organized media, with editorial oversight and everything. This is anathema to your average blogger.

Not only that, but there is quite a bit of ego in the blogosphere, and OSM really does come with a patina of sniffling cliquishness, intended or not. "We're going to invite certain people to the cool kids' table." Those invitations are fairly arbitrary. As Ace and others have already pointed out, some of the invitees don't particularly have the traffic or general interest to justify it if we're working in an economic sense. It seems to be driven by certain people's likes and dislikes, increasing the perception this is just a bunch of junior high social bullshit.

All this fighting on both sides, the insults, the thin skins, etc. etc. simply reinforces the idea.

Adults are nothing more than aging adolescents. If we didn't know it before, the Internet has certainly delineated that well.

OSM should've seen this coming. That they didn't means they really haven't thought through what the blogosphere actually is. They merely centered on what it could do for them personally. Wrong way to go about it, really.

Still, it's sort of fun to watch, in the customary train wreck sense.

OSM has no oversight over your blog, except, I guess, if you became raunchy enough, they'd drop you.

The most tangible aspect of the thing is the ad-selling-consortium thing, as Jeff says. it's scarcely any different from blogads, except they'd prefer you to run their ads exclusively. But you don't have to. I don't plan to.

I have no idea what the fuss is all about, but I did notice back in the day, when large companies carved off a few players, put some money in their hands, and told them to go make a go of it in dot.com world, the ones who stayed behind (especially the ones who got an offer to go, but were unwilling to take the career risk), criticized the shit out of those who left.

Even worse, if they failed, there was outright glee. If I had a nickel for every time somebody said "I told you it would never work", well, you get the point.

Maybe it's just envy.

I should state, I hope OSM does well. I know a few people involved, and you always want to see people you like succeed at something.

I have nothing personally against them. I'm not one of those purists who demand people starve for the sake of their art. Some folks want money. That's capitalism for you. More power to them.

I'm just saying, given the character of the blogosphere, the backlash against OSM isn't exactly a surprise.

I actually find it very interesting. Perhaps because I like to know how things work, blogs included. I honestly don't get the sniping. If it doesn't affect you, except through some stretch of logic, then leave it alone.

I find it interesting, because it's never really been tried before and I'm curious to see if it works. The griping is sour grapes BS by people who probably signed the papers from PJ, sent them back and never heard from them again.

I was one of those people, but I don't blame them for not contacting me. My blog has about a dozen readers and 10 of those are family. The truth is they are not going to generate revenue from blogs with low traffic, and haven't yet figured out a way to give those blogs the 'it isn't you, it's me' speech.

I blog because it keeps me from yelling at the television and annoying my wife. There's no money in it, but I enjoy it.

But I find it hard to believe you think every item linked on this site to be worth reading.

Well *I* do.

[big dreamy sigh]

Ace, you've articulated my own feelings. I too don't understand OSM fully, but I do know that it's an idea that is, in fact, making it up as it goes along...so why not sit back and see what happens? Why the need to get sour, wish it ill and register scorn upon the organization, and by extension all the bloggers who participate? I don't understand it. Whatever happened to "hey, I wish you well..."

And I think you are correct that OSM can't afford to be think-skinned about it.

I think it's human nature to heap scorn if there's jealousy involved. Sure, I envy Ace his extravagant lifestyle fueled by crazy blog-money, but I don't hate him for it.

Much.

Seriously, though, I want to see OSM succeed because it would annoy the NY Times, and that's reason enough for me.

I blog because it keeps me from yelling at the television and annoying my wife. There's no money in it, but I enjoy it.

Will you be offended if I say I thought that was cute?

Well, weird personal stuff aside, presumably some critics think that it'll work out poorly and give blogging in general a bad name. I doubt this will really matter any, though.

I hope it works out well for you all, but frankly, I don't see what's wrong with things as they already are. Not getting paid enough? Well, there's a reason for that. It's supply and demand. It's the fact that there are thousands of writers who will gladly crank out decent content for free just for the thrill of being heard, and the fact that most readers simply won't break out the wallet just because there's a flashy graphic on the side of the site selling something we don't need or want.

The whole blog phenomenon has been simply amazing. Thanks to technology and cooperation, citizens are taking control of truth back from the media companies. But just because something wonderful and powerful is happening does not guarantee that you guys are gonna be able to make lots of money off of it. I'm not saying you can't. I'm just saying I'm somewhat skeptical. But, seriously, best wishes. The more blog money Ace has, the drunker he gets, the more depraved this site will get, and the more I'll enjoy it.

This reminds me a lot of all the Linux hype a few years back. Linux itself continues to conquer (I'm writing this post from a Linux system), but most of those over-valued Linux companies bit the dust, since their business models were based mainly on hope and hype.

Allah:
we do want OSM to succeed, don't we?

Well, I don't know. Do we? I'm not so sure that the long term effects of consolidating online content is necessarily beneficial. So, no, I don't think you should assume that we all want it to succeed. And there's nothing inherently wrong or nasty about that.

I'm playing the devil's advocate here, but the truth is, I genuinely don't have an opinion one way or the other. I just don't know.

I'm just posting so I can:

1) Be in a thread with Ace, Jeff G., Allah and the Anchoress.

2) Insert my usual Beatles reference: Companies that "make it up as they go along" have a pretty shaky life. Apple Corp. anyone?

3) Wish all the OSM-ers well in this endeavor.

sandy - What's the essential difference between OSM's consolidating blog content and what Instapundit does? Linky love still happens, except now it's done by a group of bloggers instead of one guy.

I don't see what all the hullabaloo is about. It looks to me that OSM has two "wings". The first is acting as the Drew Rosenhaus of the blogosphere - making deals with advertisers on the behalf of bloggers and handing them the paying green. The second is as big blog consolidator.

On the second part, it's not as if they're becoming the One True Blog or anything. They're a portal. That's it.

And as for editing blog content...well, they've accepted Ace, Goldstein, and Wonkette fully knowing their content. I can't imagine what sort of pox-ridden filth would get the OSM heave-ho.

(And no, I'm not an OSM member. I'm considering asking into the club in a couple months, but they dodn't come ask me to join, mostly, I imagine, because I'm a low-traffic nobody. That's as it should be).

I don't think you should assume that we all want it to succeed. And there's nothing inherently wrong or nasty about that.

Agreed. My beef with the critics has to do with their tone, not with their opinion about whether it's beneficial for blogs generally if OSM succeeds.

Re: the latter, though, there's more to OSM than condolidating online content. Really, they're not consolidating it all that much; no one's been asked to give up their blog and post exclusively on the OSM homepage. Whatever small precedent this sets for consolidation is, I think, more than balanced by the exposure OSM will bring to blogs generally -- if it's successful, that is. If GM or IBM or some other behemoth finds that they're getting a nice bang for the buck through OSM, it seems only logical that they're going to want to advertise on other blogs too. Which in turn will bring them to BlogAds, which in turn will mean more money for Ace and Althouse and Jarvis and the rest of the gang.

I'm no businessman, but it looks to me like OSM's success would mean that the whole pie gets bigger. Good news.

And as for editing blog content...well, they've accepted Ace, Goldstein, and Wonkette fully knowing their content. I can't imagine what sort of pox-ridden filth would get the OSM heave-ho.

What they do now is really not the issue. It's what they do later when they're making good money and that supply is suddenly threatened. They will pull content if that happens, unless there's a serious ideological objection to doing so. I'm not saying this is a bad thing. If Ace starts posting nothing but porn, they should give him the boot. But some control of content is going to happen, and it's utopian to assume it won't. Is this a problem? Maybe not. After all, bloggers who run ads self-censor to some extent already. It's human nature.

Hey Ace? Sit back and have a beer. I'm only yanking your chain.

Hell, if I could make the same amount of money blogging as I do at my day job, I wouldn't be doing my day job.

Then again, I don't think many people can make that much money blogging, period. I hope the market can support more paid bloggers-- because paid bloggers mean more blogging, usually-- but I've got a bad feeling about this.

Besides, one of the advantages to the blogosphere is that it *IS* largely amateur, and that most bloggers have day jobs and lives outside of the blogosphere. That doesn't mean I want to read about how cute their fucking cat is, but people buried inside their computers are frankly not all that interesting. Part of the appeal of blogging is that I get to read perspectives from people different than me. Sure, we may all be saying the same things, but we say them slightly differently, and in those differences lies the incremental learning of the "hive mind."

If everybody does this for a living, we end up with a thousand Instapundits sucking each others dicks about blogging and blogads and OSM and other inside baseball. I know you're not that guy, Ace-- but I'm just cautioning you not to BECOME that guy.

Remember-- all glory (and perhaps crazy-blog-money) is fleeting. Do this for the fun of it, pal. Keep it about the music.
Cheers,
Dave at Garfield Ridge

So, has Jeffie had a knickers in a twist (Thou Shalt Not Say The "B" Word), hypersalivating, redfaced, steam coming out of his ears hissyfit about this? Not that he's thin-skinned or anything. Just checking.

My favorite is when Jeff G. guest-blogs at other people's sites and then gets in arguments with the commenters there. Or when he makes blog posts out of his various pissing contests. Yeah, the guy is smart and funny, but thick-skinned he ain't.

Next up: Jeff G. calling me a coward for posting anonymously.

The only problem I have with you posting anonymously is that I like to be able to scream out a name when I fantasize about beating someone across the face with my cock.

I'll just go with "take it. Take it all,
you sniveling baby pussy!"

As for "doc," well, c'mon. How can I take seriously anybody who calls himself "doc."

Wow, that one really stung

No, if you want something that really stings, Jeff's cock is it.

This one time, we were in Vegas, and ended up having to share a hotel room...let's just say that JeffG adds a whole new dimension to sleepwalking.

Look at "doc" swat away my barb with McQueen-like disaffection.

I bet you cut a BADASS figure in some boot cut Levi's, "doc."

So what you're saying is....people make MONEY off blogs? Yeah right.

OSM is relevant. Goldstein bitchfests are not. i don't read him anymore and don't enjoy it when he comes here to flame. nothing personal. just the facts.

Actually, I didn't come here to flame. Just kind of reading along when I came to "doc" and you trying to draw me in to some silly spat -- in your case so you could follow up with how you don't read me anymore blah blah blah.

But the thing is, you're nameless. So who the fuck cares?

...but you don't come here to flame, it just comes across that way.

Jimmie:
What's the essential difference between OSM's consolidating blog content and what Instapundit does?

I don't know. I don't see a very big difference.

Don't get me wrong. I wasn't trying to argue against OSM. I was just thinking out loud. I really do wish them the best, especially Ace. (But yes, they're being thin-skinned.)

Well, if AOS going with OSM means half the raunch and none of the flavor of the fully embraced aoslifestlye because of advertising strictures that’s when it starts becoming relevant to me. I can go get my news anywhere. I keep coming back here because Ace/company and cast of commenters whip it out and hose it down on a daily basis. I'm thrilled these poor SOB's can try to make a buck on what they so obviously love doing because, I know most of them struggle for years. Regardless of what happens to OSM the entity this is capitalism plain and simple the nature of which will flesh the business out. Last I’d heard capitalism was a primary economy of this country or have we been moved to Myanmar while I was napping?


P.S If I could find a way to make a buck off this gig I’d be right on it.

What the fuck is OSM?