A comment came in yesterday from someone calling themselves “Curious”:
Just curious as to why you think a blogger like yourself would warrant a return phone call about an issue you are writing about. I know your followers will scream hell yeah but seriously…in the overall scheme of things, what makes your blog of any significance? Just seems to me that somewhere along the line you decided to self annoint yourself.
I was, at first, a little defensive. Then I decided that it’s a fair question and one that should be addressed directly.
Actually, he/she asks two questions and adds a comment.
“Why you think a blogger like yourself would warrant a return phone call about an issue you are writing about?”
Several answers to this. First, reporters are taught that the best way to avoid problems with pesky things like libel, or even just being unnecessarily unfair to someone you’re writing about, is to provide that person a chance to explain themselves and their actions. Whether they choose to respond is up to them. In this case, in my view, the ethics commission looked bad because the staff and members collectively looked the other way for years while what appeared to be prohibited political activity went on. So a call to the commission to find out how they viewed it certainly seemed appropriate.
Even when I wrote for the Star-Bulletin, with the newspaper’s clout behind me, those I called for comment often didn’t feel I “warranted” a call back. That’s a choice they make. I would expect that they may have regretted it later.
“…in the overall scheme of things, what makes your blog of any significance?”
I don’t want to give the impression that I have an inflated view of this blog’s significance. That said, however, I think it addresses a particular audience of people who are concerned about and are looking for news about a range of public issues, from ethics to campaign finance to access to information. They get the dogs, cats, and sunrise photos as a bonus!
Before I was a reporter, I was a public interest lobbyist, a political staffer, and then a newsletter publisher. At its high point, my monthly Hawaii Monitor newsletter reached a circulation of about 1,000 people. But those 1,000 people were self-selected because of their interest in Hawaii’s politics, and included other reporters, politicians, and citizen activists. The newsletter managed to have real, measurable impacts, and later led to my job at the Star-Bulletin.
Now, without the hassles of printing a newsletter, I reach 1,000 to 1,500 readers daily. True, it’s a niche audience. But I think it’s an important niche. Whether they, in turn, are of any significance is something I’ll leave to others. My impression, from feedback I receive along the way, is that they certainly are.
And a lost point here–this blog, and other blogs reporting on public issues, are gaining in significance for a simple reason: The mainstream news media is melting down. There is already far less local government news than there was two decades ago, and it’s getting worse. In a few weeks, there will be many fewer working reporters as Honolulu’s two daily newspapers shrink down to one. Blogs can’t replace newspapers, but the sad truth is that the bits of news we’re able to provide won’t be available elsewhere. And that’s what makes it significant.
Then came the comment: “Just seems to me that somewhere along the line you decided to self anoint yourself.”
Guilty as charged!
Isn’t that what any writer does? You write. And you hope that the result is meaningful enough to entice readers.
Although in this context, I take the “self-anointed” comment as less than friendly. But we’ve got a lot of examples of public officials who were anointed by the powerful and who have faithfully done their bidding while being promoted into one position of authority after another.
Whatever authority I have was earned the hard way, through my own performance over time, continually questioning authority.
I still relish in Howard Graves’ line about me: “A nagging toothache in the centers of power.”
Actually, anyone who wants to make a public difference has to be self-anointed because there’s no accrediting agency for such things.
And, hey, I’ve been called a lot worse!
Maybe a run of “Self-Anointed” t-shirts is in order!
Discover more from i L i n d
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
You do ‘Self Anointed’ T-shirts I want one over here onna Mainland.
This is the first site I read each morning, for the education, the inspiration, and the smiles! I’ll vote for the feline friday t-shirt also.
I’ve become a loyal follower over the past few years and I especially enjoy your views on local poly-ticks, in addition to the many other local issues you cover. Please keep up the great work. You are appreciated.
It looks like a consensus forming, Ian, that you should consider the t-shirt biz.
Wow! I should be a “host” on Civil Beat! My comments prompted a lot of responses or is it conversation? I think Ian posted my comments (we all know he doesn’t have to) cuz he knows I wasn’t being disrespectful to what he does, I was just raising the question. I get what Ian does and why he does it. Most of the time it is done well. Is he objective? Well…. no. But so what? It’s his blog. I get that too. If I may try one more time at “who you think you are” deal, I was really trying to say that if you had a newspaper or a radio or a TV show and had 1,000 people reading watching or listening….you would not make many govt offficials radar. Not trying to dis Ian…but I like how some of you jump on my comments as being sassy and you comment back with your own sass….just sayin.
I do appreciate the contribution “Curious” has made.
But I think he underestimates the significance of an audience of 1,000 to 1,500.
Look at it this way.
How many active campaigners backed any of our major candidates?
I doubt many could count 1,500 campaign workers.
Okay. Readers aren’t campaign workers.
But numbers aren’t everything. Demographics count.
And I suspect that the demographics of the 1,000+ people who stop by this site daily make them desirable opinion leaders.
Anyway, don’t diss “Curious”, they’ve been a reasonable part of this discussion.
The majority of elected officials and their staffs read this blog. Mr. Smith contacting Ian on behalf of the citys managing director earlier this year is proof of that.
It is apparent that “Curious” is a classic troll.
I think this insect was brought into this site because a link was made to Ilind.com in the Advertiser daily comment posts.
I believe the lesson in this is that it is ok and maybe preferable to have a small internet footprint. If this site is only frequented by intellectuals, gatekeepers, professionals, concerned citizens, ect. … we will have much less noise.
As far as handling the trolls, their message speaks for itself. And that is the brilliance of how participants in this site has handled this one.
Mahalo Mr. Lind for your dedication and hard work.
I’m approving this comment but quickly saying that I disagree.
There are trolls out there.
I’ve had a few of them.
I don’t think “Curious” falls in that category.
And “Curious” has done a service by sparking an interesting discussion.
So don’t be so hard on those we don’t necessarily agree with.
Some of my best friends like to argue quite strenuously with positions I’ve taken.
A glass of wine, a good argument, a cat on the table, life is good.
-Ian
I love it… Ian I’d like to remind you that on the Big Island… Department of PUBLIC Works Public Information Officer, Noelani Whittington, actually sent out a memo attempting to basically blacklist myself as well as two others on the Big Island from getting information from them… despite it being public knowledge she actually named me in a memo stating no one was to talk to us!
http://damontucker.com/2009/03/17/public-works-public-information-officer-noelani-whittington-2009-lava-tube-award-winner/
This was at the very beginning of my blog… and I was already perceived as a threat for some reason.
Bloggers have every right to any public information the same as any journalist if it is government related information.
“self annoint yourself.”
Awkward phraseology brought to you by the Department of Redundancy Department.
Funny, the indignant tone is in keeping with many comments from a few high up city officials recently. If you aren’t in their hierarchy, you must be self-anointed and delusional.
“who do you think you are”?
Any of us, Ian too, could justifiably answer, “a citizen”. Funny that those in charge at the city would think that negligible.
The kingdom the mayor thinks he’s founded is not that just yet. Really, why just run (or not) for Governor when you can be the King.
Thanks Ian for the wonderful work you do. What your reader may not understand is that yours is the one local resource that pretty much all local journalists read. The arrogance that underlies the question is familiar to all.
ps loved your thoughtful and reasoned response as well.
No joking:
Print t-shirts, Ian.
Being more of a dog lover, I would prefer a “Kaaawa Dogs” shirt, but I’d buy a Feline Friday to show support for this blog.
My views are generally to the right of yours, but quality content knows no ideological boundaries. Too many other blogs are “all will, no skill.” True believers of various political stripes, but lacking in disciplined reporting… or even thinking.
Anyway, I’d seriously buy a shirt. Keep the money, give the money to charity, whatever. I’d buy a shirt.
What “Curious” claims to get but obviously doesn’t is the Web and blogosphere are entirely democratic–there are 10+ million “self-appointed” bloggers who have essentially zero audience, a few hundred thousands with handfuls of readers and then a very few which are influential because influential people choose to read them. Derivative content , repeating PR and propaganda, etc. does not attract an audience, and certainly not an influential one.
So here’s the deal, Curious–it’s not the blogger who “appoints” himself/herself as making a difference–it’s the readers who recognize quality and unique content that’s not just repackaged shibai or blah-blah “opinion.”
I am a ‘self-appointed blogger’ with a monthly visit count around 200,000, plus hundreds of thousands more via republishing on Seeking Alpha, Daily Finance, Business Insider, etc. Whatever influence I have is created by my readers and those who choose to reprint my work.
As for the shirts, I would definitely purchase a “Self-anointed” shirt. I would also like to suggest a limited edition “Hawaii Monitor” shirt that would be bundled with the unpublished book.
Put me down for a “self-anointed” tee! (And another Cat Calendar.)